Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/145,885

SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 23, 2022
Examiner
HONG, SEAHEE
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Tokyo Electron Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
525 granted / 768 resolved
-1.6% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
794
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
38.1%
-1.9% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 768 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-4, 9-11, 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schaller et al (US 10,854,491 B2). Regarding claim 1¸ Schaller et al (‘491) discloses a substrate processing method (abstract) performed in a substrate processing apparatus (fig1) including a processing container 30 (col.3 line3), a shower plate 36 (col.3 lines30-31) forming a ceiling wall (fig1) of the processing container 30 and configured to discharge gases used for a substrate processing (col.3 lines28-31), a stage 108 (col.3 line28) arranged under the shower plate 36 inside the processing container 30 so as to face the shower plate 36 (fig1) and configured to mount a substrate thereon (col.3 lines27-28), and a drive mechanism 131,132,133 (fig3A, col.5 lines19-20, 54-65) configured to move the stage 108, the substrate processing method comprising: a substrate processing process performing the substrate processing on the substrate in a state in which the stage 108 is tilted by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that a central axis 201 (fig2, col.4 lines55-56) of the stage 108, which passes through a center of a mounting surface 108A (col.3 line27) mounted with the substrate and extends in a direction perpendicular to the mounting surface 108A (figs1-2), forms a first angle (col.2 lines14-17, “a first orientation") other than 0º (col.2 lines14-17, “not coplanar”, col.8 lines38-41) with respect to a predetermined reference axis 101 (figs1-2, col.3 line10) of the shower plate 36, which extends in a vertical direction (fig1), while changing a position of the stage 108 by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 rotates (fig2, movement A) around the reference axis 101 while maintaining the first angle with respect to the reference axis 101 (col.5 lines1-3, fig2, “A”). Regarding claim 2¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein during the substrate processing process, the stage 108 is tilted by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 forms the first angle with respect to the refences axis 101 in a state in which a center of an upper surface of the substrate mounted on the mounting surface 108A is located at an intersection of the reference axis 101 and the central axis 201, and the position of the stage 108 is changed by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 rotates around the reference axis 101 while maintaining the first angle with respect to the reference axis 101 (col.5 lines1-3, fig2). Regarding claim 3¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 2, wherein the reference axis 101 is a vertical axis that passes through a center of the shower plate 36 (fig1). Regarding claim 4¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 3, wherein during the substrate processing process, the position of the stage 108 is changed by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 rotates around the reference axis 101 plural times. Regarding claim 9¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein during the substrate processing process, the stage 108 is tilted by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 forms the first angle with respect to the reference axis 101 in a state in which a center of an upper surface of the mounting surface 108A is located at an intersection of the reference axis 101 and the central axis 201, and the position of the stage 108 is changed by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 rotates around the reference axis 101 while maintaining the first angle with respect to the reference axis 101 (col.5 lines1-3, fig2). Regarding claim 10¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein the reference axis 101 is a vertical axis that passes through a center of the shower plate 36 (fig1). Regarding claim 11¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein during the substrate processing process, the position of the stage 108 is changed by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 rotates around the reference axis 101 plural times Regarding claim 14¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein the drive mechanism 131,132,133 is configured to rotate the stage 108 by rotating a support member 90 (col.5 line2) that supports the stage 108 (figs1-2) as a rotating axis (a central axis along the support member 90), and wherein in the substrate processing process, the substrate is processed by rotating the stage 108. Regarding claim 15¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein in the substrate processing process, the substrate is processed in a state in which a support member 90 (col.5 line2) that supports the stage 108 (figs1-2) is stopped without being rotated about a rotation axis (a central axis along the support member 90). Regarding claim 16¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein the drive mechanism 131,132,133 is configured such that actuators 320 (col.5 line33, fig3A) function as a parallel link mechanism (fig3A) to move the stage 108 in three orthogonal directions of three axes and in rotation direction around the three axes. Regarding claim 17¸ Schaller et al (‘491) discloses a substrate processing apparatus (fig1), comprising: a processing container 30 (col.3 line3); a shower plate 36 (col.3 lines30-31) forming a ceiling wall (fig1) of the processing container 30 and configured to discharge gases used for a substrate processing (col.3 lines28-31); a stage 108 (col.3 line28) arranged under the shower plate 36 inside the processing container 30 so as to face the shower plate 36 (fig1) and configured to mount a substrate thereon (col.3 lines27-28); a drive mechanism 131,132,133 (fig3A, col.5 lines19-20, 54-65) configured to move the stage 108; and a controller 199 (col.4 lines10-21) configured to perform the substrate processing on the substrate in a state in which the stage 108 is tilted by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that a central axis 201 (fig2, col.4 lines55-56) of the stage 108, which passes through a center of a mounting surface 108A (col.3 line27) mounted with the substrate and extends in a direction perpendicular to the mounting surface 108A (figs1-2), forms a first angle (col.2 lines14-17, “a first orientation") other than 0º (col.2 lines14-17, “not coplanar”, col.8 lines38-41) with respect to a predetermined reference axis 101 (figs1-2, col.3 line10) of the shower plate 36, which extends in a vertical direction (fig1), while changing a position of the stage 108 by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis 201 rotates (fig2, movement A) around the reference axis 101 while maintaining the first angle with respect to the reference axis 101 (col.5 lines1-3, fig2, “A”). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 5-8, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaller et al (US 10,854,491 B2) in view of Reddy et al (US 2021/0375662 A1). Regarding claim 5¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 4, however, does not explicitly disclose that the first angle is set to an angle in a range of -0.1º to +0.1º. It is noted that the stage of Schaller et al can be tilted at any angle by using the drive mechanism. Reddy et al (‘662) teaches that a stage 210 (fig2) is tilted to form a first angle between 1-3º (para[0036], fig2). However, Reddy et al also teaches that the first angle can be oriented substantially normal (substantially 0º) to a ray extending between a nozzle dispense position and a rotational axis (para[0036], fig2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first angle set to an angle in a range of -0.1º to +0.1º since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disposed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (also see MPEP 2144.05 I.). Regarding claim 6¸ the combination of Schaller et al and Reddy et al teaches the substrate processing method of Claim 5. Schaller et al discloses that the position of the stage 108 is changed by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis rotates around the reference axis. However, Schaller et al does not explicitly disclose a rotation speed. Reddy et al teaches a use of a rotation speed of π[rad/sec] (para[0037], “less than 30 RPM”) or less (para[0037], “less than 30 RPM”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schaller et al to use a rotation speed of π[rad/sec] or less, as taught by Reddy et al, as such range of a rotation speed is ideal for processing a top of a substrate with a fluid (para[0022]). Regarding claim 7¸ combination of Schaller et al and Reddy et al teaches the substrate processing method of Claim 6. Schaller et al further discloses wherein the drive mechanism 131,132,133 is configured to rotate the stage 108 by rotating a support member 90 (col.5 line2) that supports the stage 108 (figs1-2) as a rotating axis (a central axis along the support member 90), and wherein in the substrate processing process, the substrate is processed by rotating the stage 108. Regarding claim 8¸ combination of Schaller et al and Reddy et al teaches the substrate processing method of Claim 7. Schaller et al further discloses wherein the drive mechanism 131,132,133 is configured such that actuators 320 (col.5 line33, fig3A) function as a parallel link mechanism (fig3A) to move the stage 108 in three orthogonal directions of three axes and in rotation direction around the three axes. Regarding claim 12¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 4, however, does not explicitly disclose that the first angle is set to an angle in a range of -0.1º to +0.1º. It is noted that the stage of Schaller et al can be tilted at any angle by using the drive mechanism. Reddy et al (‘662) teaches that a stage 210 (fig2) is tilted to form a first angle between 1-3º (para[0036], fig2). However, Reddy et al also teaches that the first angle can be oriented substantially normal (substantially 0º) to a ray extending between a nozzle dispense position and a rotational axis (para[0036], fig2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first angle set to an angle in a range of -0.1º to +0.1º since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disposed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (also see MPEP 2144.05 I.). Regarding claim 13¸ Schaller et al discloses the substrate processing method of Claim 1, wherein during the substrate processing process, the position of the stage 108 is changed by the drive mechanism 131,132,133 so that the central axis rotates around the reference axis. However, Schaller et al does not explicitly disclose a rotation speed. Reddy et al teaches a use of a rotation speed of π[rad/sec] (para[0037], “less than 30 RPM”) or less (para[0037], “less than 30 RPM”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schaller et al to use a rotation speed of π[rad/sec] or less, as taught by Reddy et al, as such range of a rotation speed is ideal for processing a top of a substrate with a fluid (para[0022]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wu et al (US 2003/0044529 A1), Agafonov et al (US 2015/0337442 A1), Chu et al (US 2021/0118700 A1), Fukunaga et al (US 2022/0080551 A1), and Kodama et al (US 2022/0277962 A1) teach similar substrate processing methods and/or substrate processing apparatuses. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 23, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600013
Miter Clamp Tool Assembly and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594411
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR JOINING METAL SLEEVE ONTO A TUBE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589980
Hand Tool with Slip Resistant Tip
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589623
MANEUVERABLE ERGONOMIC TRAILER STANDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581908
SUBSTRATE HOLDER AND METHOD FOR FIXING AND BONDING A SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+29.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 768 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month