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 .
Status
The amendment filed 10/17/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3-8 are pending. In the amendment filed 10/17/2025, claim 1 was amended, claim 2 was canceled, and claims 7-9 were newly added.
Claim Interpretation
The term “individual guide area” is interpreted consistent with [0082-0084] of the instant specification as filed, as inclusive of set values corresponding to the position of the processing part and corresponding to flow rates of gases discharged from the individual processing parts. This term is not interpreted as being directed to an actual or measured open area of the pipe at each processing part.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 includes a formula but appears to use “A” for both the guide area (line 2-3) and the guide area of the single guide pipe (line 4-5). The claim further does not define “An”. For purpose of examination on the merits, the claim is being interpreted inclusive of line 4-5 should indicate the guide are of a single guide pipe is “An” because this will provide a definition for variable An and avoid having two definitions for term “A”. The applied interpretation is consistent with the instant specification. Applicant is kindly requested to amend claim 7 to correct line 5 to read “An, and”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawashima (prev. presented US 2021/0265178), in view of Ogata (prev. presented US 2011/0308626) and US Patent Application Publication 2017/0028450 of Goda et al., hereinafter Goda (previously cited not relied upon in office action mailed 06/17/2025).
Regarding claim 1, Sawashima teaches a substrate processing apparatus (abstract, Fig 4), comprising: a first tower (tower of 21A Fig 6) including a plurality of first processing parts (21A Fig 4, 6) which are aligned in a vertical direction (Fig 6) and each of which processes a substrate [0057]; a plurality of first individual exhaust pipes through which respective gases discharged from the plurality of first processing parts flow (line having 73 and 61,62 Fig 12); a first collecting exhaust pipe (41A, 41B, 81A Fig 12) including a vertical exhaust pipe (41A or 41B Fig 12) connected to the plurality of first individual exhaust pipes (Fig 12, 41A or 41B are connected to the line having 73 and 61,62 Fig 12) and a horizontal exhaust pipe (81A Fig 12) connected to a downstream end of the vertical exhaust pipe (Fig 12), the horizontal exhaust pipe extending along a horizontal direction (Fig 12), respective lengths of flow passages from the first processing parts to the horizontal exhaust pipe via the plurality of the first individual exhaust pipes being different from each other (Fig 12, note the distance from the individual exhaust pipes of the lowest of 21A or 21B is longer than the distance from the individual exhaust pipes of a higher chamber 21A or 21B); a first switcher switching between connection and disconnection between each of the first individual exhaust pipes and the first collecting exhaust pipe (61, 62 Fig 12, [0113-0115]; a first outside gas introducer (81Af and 87 Fig 12 [0124-0125]) including a flow passage introducing outside gas from outside to the first horizontal exhaust pipe [0124-0125] (see 81Af and 87 introducing air to horizontal pipe 81A Fig 12), the flow passage having a variable guide area (87 Fig 12, [0128]); and a controller (97 Fig 4) [0137] controlling the guide area of the first outside gas introducer [0155], [0137-0138]. Sawashima fails to teach the control of the guide area is based on individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of first processing parts and switching states of the first switcher, the individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of first processing parts being set to smaller value as each of the lengths of the flow passages is longer because Sawashima teaches control using pressure detection. In the same field of endeavor of a processing apparatus with controlled shared exhaust lines for a plurality of processing stations (abstract, Fig 2, 4), Ogata teaches control of the guide area (area control via V11-13, which control additional air inlet flow [0059-0060]) is based on individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of first processing parts and switching states of the first switcher ([0063] note the teaching of adjustments based on how many are open and each open line is an individual guide area with a flow rate), the individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of first processing parts being set according to positions at which the plurality of first processing parts are disposed ([0065-0066] teaches the flow rates of each line are a function of how far the pipe is from the vacuum line). Ogata [0066] teaches the pressure loss is smaller and the exhaust amount larger when the chamber is closer to the main exhaust line which suggest that the pressure loss is larger and the exhaust amount smaller when the chamber is farther and therefore a smaller exhaust amount results in a smaller value for the guide area of that chamber. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the controller of Sawashima to include the control taught by Ogata of control of the guide area is based on individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of first processing parts and switching states of the first switcher, the individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of first processing parts being set to a smaller value as each of the lengths of the flow passage is longer (i.e. the chamber is farther from the exhaust line) because the control configuration of Ogata is a functional alternative for the same purpose of controlling outside air inlet into a common exhaust line to adjust for changes as different chambers are open or closed to the exhaust. Additionally, in the event applicant can demonstrate horizontal vs vertical flow results in different pressure changes or otherwise demonstrate the applied relationship suggested by Ogata does not apply, it is further noted that in the same field of endeavor of exhausting gas in liquid processing apparatuses (abstract), Goda teaches the controller to control the opening degree (opening degree information 19b) of outside gas introducers (Fig 5 is the controller) is configured to include the positional relationship of the opening/closing valve (200) for a chamber relative to the air introducer (151) [0172-0173]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller of the combination to include the positional relationship information as part of the controller for controlling the guide area of the outside gas introducer because Goda teaches a controller for controlling the opening degree of the outside gas introducer includes positional information of each chamber that is open or closed. Regarding the relationship of the value being smaller or larger as the flow passage is longer, Goda is silent as to the specifically applied information but this represents an obvious to try choice because the options are larger value as the flow length increases or smaller value as the flow length increases. Further the controller is configured to include the values and the specific values represent user input data and not an alteration of the controller.
Regarding claim 3, the combination remains as applied to claim 1 above. Sawashima teaches the first outside gas introducer includes: a single guide pipe (81Af Fig 12) disposed in the first collecting exhaust pipe (81A); and a movable part (87 Fig 12 [0128]) adjusting the guide area of the single guide pipe and controlled by the controller [0155], [0137-0138].
Regarding claim 4, the combination remains as applied to claim 3 above. Sawashima teaches a storage in which individual area data is prestored [0138], wherein the controller controls the movable part, based on the switching states [0137-0138], [0155]. Regarding the data that is stored indicating the individual guide areas corresponding the plurality of first processing parts and the control based also on individual area data, this is obvious in view of the combination as applied to claim 1 because the combination includes Ogata teaching the flow of different chambers to the exhaust line (individual guide area) is used as the data to control the opening degree (see [0063] of Ogata).
Regarding claim 6, Sawashima teaches a second tower (show as stack of 21C Fig 6) including a plurality of second processing parts (21C Fig 4, 6) which are aligned in the vertical direction (see Fig 6 and 8 for alignment of the stack of 21C) each of which processes a substrate [0057], the second tower and the first tower being aligned in a horizontal direction (Fig 4 and 6, note they are aligned in that each has the same bottom and top level, also note that they are aligned along a horizontal but diagonally extending line of Fig 4); a plurality of second individual exhaust pipes through which respective gases discharged from the plurality of second processing parts flow (shown in Fig 8 as connection to switching mechanism 51 [0106] including line 53 shown in Fig 4 and reference to 41C, 42C, 43C in Fig 13); a second collecting exhaust pipe (81B Fig 13 [0123]); a second switcher switching between connection and disconnection between each of the second individual exhaust pipes and the second collecting exhaust pipe (switcher 51 is on all the chambers as shown in Fig 8); and a second outside gas introducer (81Bf Fig 13) including a flow passage introducing outside gas from outside to the second collecting exhaust pipe [0124], the flow passage having a variable guide area (via 87 Fig 13 and [0124], [0128]). Sawashima teaches the controller also controls this line and set of chambers in the same manner [0137-0138], [0155]. Therefore in the combination as applied to claim 1 this includes the controller controls the guide area of the second outside gas introducer, based on individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of second processing parts and switching states of the second switcher, and the individual guide areas corresponding to the plurality of second processing parts being different from one another.
Regarding claim 7, the combination remains as applied to claim 4 above. Ogata as applied above teaches the controller controls the guide area, based on a sum of the individual guide area(s) corresponding to first processing part(s) disconnected from the first collecting exhaust pipe from among the plurality of first processing parts ([0063-0064], note that referencing by which chambers are open is the same concept as the sum of which chamber exhaust lines are closed because the lines are either open or closed, also note that the air applied is to replace air flow that is not provided when the chamber is closed, therefore the opening is a function of the sum of the lost flow from closed chambers).
Regarding claim 8, Sawashima teaches the pressure adjustment mechanism (87) which introduces outside gas [0128] includes an automatic damper (note that damper and dumper are art recognized alternative terms for the same structure) including a motor to drive the damper [0128]. Sawashima fails to explicitly teach the movable part is moved between fully closed and fully opened to adjust the guide area. Ogata teaches the adjustable structure is a butterfly valve for which the opening degree (which is inclusive of fully closed) is controlled by a motor [0059]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sawashima to include moving between fully open and fully closed because this allows for full control of the exhaust line air introduction and allows for the outside air to be shut off from being introduced which may be useful when all systems are being exhausted or when there is a problem with the outside air (e.g. a fire in the facility or other unwanted gas in the outside air).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawashima in view of Ogata and Goda as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishide (prev. presented US 2021/0210364).
Regarding claim 5, Sawashima in view of Ogata and Goda remains as applied to claim 1 above. Sawashima fails to teach the first outside gas introducer includes: a plurality of guide pipes having the individual guide areas corresponding the plurality of first processing parts; and a plurality of on-off valves switching between opening and closing the plurality of guide pipes, wherein the controller controls the plurality of on-off valves based on the switching states. In the same field of endeavor of a processing apparatus with controlled shared exhaust lines for a plurality of processing stations (abstract, Fig 3, 5), Nishide teaches a plurality of guide pipes (72a Fig 5, note there is one for each chamber as shown in fig 2-3) having the individual guide areas corresponding the plurality of first processing parts (Fig 5, shown as same opening area and taught as replacement flow [0049]) and a plurality of on-off valves (73a for each 72a) switching between opening and closing the plurality of guide pipes [0049], wherein the controller controls the plurality of on-off valves based on the switching states [0049-0052]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Sawashima to include this arrangement of separate guide pipes for each chamber because this represents a simple substitution of one known element (single gas introduction pipe of Sawashima) for another (multiple gas introduction pipes of Nishide) to obtain predictable results (ability to introduce outside gas to correct for when exhaust from the chamber is not turned on).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/17/2025, hereinafter reply, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (reply p6-7) that Ogata does not teach a vertical arrangement of chambers. This is not persuasive because Sawashima teaches the vertical arrangement. The cited portion of Ogata (reply p8) recognizes the effects of the length of the exhaust line on pressure effects. Further, additional reference Goda has been applied to render obvious the inclusion of positional data on the control of the outside gas introduction opening position and therefore renders obvious the controller configured to include ethe guide area is dependent upon the positional relationship of the chamber. For these reasons the arguments are not persuasive as to the allowability of the instant claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5,482,068 refers to structure 84 as a dumper and as a damper (see col 6, ln 25-40, and 50-55) and refers to a butterfly dumper (col 6, ln 45-50). US 2009/0214759 refers to structure 71 as a dumper and a damper (see [0043] and [0045]). US 2015/0314338 demonstrates vertical exhaust lines (Fig 4).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARGARET D KLUNK whose telephone number is (571)270-5513. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30-5:30.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/MARGARET KLUNK/Examiner, Art Unit 1716 /KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716