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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments directed to the newly amended claims filed 4/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the “inclined” nature of the shelf board are unpersuasive. Claim 1 is a method claim directed to steps of receiving, calculating, moving, and identifying. The amendments introduces a static structural limitation, a shelf board with and “inclined” top surface, without reciting any corresponding functional step that utilizes this geometry.
Under BRI, the term “inclined” is not defined by degree, direction, or purpose. Absent of recited threshold or functional result, the limitation is so broad that it fails to distinguish the claimed method over the prior art. Any finite warping, manufacturing taper, or incident al non-parallelism in the transport device of Kim or Chang would satisfy this limitation.
Furthermore, the physical geometry of the rack does not “manipulate” or alter the executable steps of the method. The process o calculating a rout or identifying a carrier remains identical regardless of the shelf’s surface angle. Consequently, this structural detail is a non-functional descriptive element that does not provide a patentable distinction over the combined teaching of the cited art.
Regarding the side panels and shelf board arrangement, the arguments directed to the amendments are not persuasive, for the same reasoning as addressed with regards to claim 1. Claim 8 is directed to a method, the addition of stationary structural components to the transport device does not inherently modify or "manipulate" the claimed process of transporting wafers.
Providing a rack with side panels to hold a shelf is a ubiquitous mechanical design. Furthermore, the placement of a "light source" and "light sensor" on opposing panels is a well-known, routine arrangement for presence detection in automated material handling. Chang explicitly teaches the use of light-based sensors on a transport vehicle for safety and identification of wafers and/or cassettes.
Under BRI, these structural components are treated as non-functional descriptive material because the method steps, receiving, calculating, and moving, are performed identically regardless of the specific geometry of the rack or the mounting location of the sensors. Consequently, the amendment fails to provide a patentable distinction over the combined teachings of Kim and Chang.
Regarding the arguments to the amendment to claim 21, regarding the “level” relationship between the plurality of shelf boards and stock floors are similarly unpersuasive. The requirement that shelves be "respectively level" with stocker floors describes a static physical configuration of the hardware, not a manipulative step of the process. The process of calculating a route and moving a device remains identical regardless of the vertical alignment of the surfaces.
It would have been obvious to a POSITA to align the transfer surfaces of a transport vehicle with the receiving surfaces of a storage stocker. Such alignment is a functional necessity for the automated transfer of semiconductor wafers as taught by **Kim**. Furthermore, providing multiple shelves to increase throughput is a routine design choice in the art of automated material handling.
Under BRI, these structural components are treated as non-functional descriptive material because they do not modify the claimed method steps. As the method is performed the same way in the prior art, this structural amendment fails to provide a patentable distinction over the combined teachings of Kim and Chang.
Prior Art of Record
The applicant's attention is directed to additional pertinent prior art cited in the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited, which, however, may not be currently applied as a basis for the following rejections. While these references were considered during the examination of this application and are deemed relevant to the claimed subject matter, they are not presently being applied as a basis for rejection in this Office action. The pertinence of these documents, however, may be revisited, and they may be applied in subsequent Office actions, particularly in light of any amendments or further clarification of the claimed invention.
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) 1-9, 11, 14 and 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 6,516,238) in view of Chang et al. (US 2004/0118980).
Claim 1: Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method comprising: receiving, by a control module of a wafer transport system, an indication of wafer transporting (Kim et al. discloses a control system that receives a "cassette transportation request" from processing equipment to initiate the movement of a wafer carrier. See Abstract & Col. 2 lines 4-30.)
calculating, by the control module (e.g. computer controlled – Col. 2 lines 46+), a route for transporting a first wafer carrier according to the indication (Kim et al. discloses the generation of a transportation instruction that includes a specific path for the vehicle to follow. Generating is synonymous with calculating.);
moving, by a control unit of a wafer transport device (AVG/Cassette/etc..) of the wafer transport system, the wafer transport device to a first stocker storing the first wafer carrier along the route (Kim et al. discloses an automated guided vehicle (AGV) moving along a programmed route to reach a storage stocker. See Kim et al. Abstract and Col. 2 lines 31-65);
wherein the wafer transport device comprises a rack, wherein the rack comprises a first shelf board and a second shelf board above the first shelf board, wherein the first shelf board has a bottom surface and a top surface inclined with respect to the bottom surface ([i.e. AVG/Cassette/etc. will have racks. AVG- rack/shelfs for cassettes; Cassettes – racks/shelfs for wafers] The structural recitation of an “inclined” surface is a non-functional structural description that fails to distinguish the method because the claimed steps are performed identically regardless of the shelf’s surface angle, and such a broad, undefined geometry is further suggested by incidental manufacturing variations or routine design in the cited art.);
performing, by the control unit, a safety monitoring process during a movement of the wafer transport device (While Kim et al. describes movement, Kim et al. may not explicitly detail a dedicated "safety monitoring process" during transit. However, Chang et al. teaches a safety system for overhead transport [Abstract] that performs constant monitoring during movement to detect human presence or obstacles [Chang ¶1-13]. Note: See below for rational for combination/modification.);
stopping, by the control unit, the wafer transport device in front of the first stocker (Kim et al. is silent on the act of “stopping” however it is inferred as the vehicle (AGV) must stop at its destination (in front of the stocker and/or equipment) to facilitate the transfer of the wafer cassette.).
Kim et al. is silent upon identifying, by an identification device of the wafer transport device, the first wafer carrier loaded on a rack of the wafer transport device after stopping. However, Chang et al. discloses the known capability of further providing an tag (e.g. RFID or barcode) directly on the transport vehicle used to identify and verify the carrier during the handling process by tag readers mounted on guard rails. Chang et al. discloses AGVs/OHTs are “normally labeled” for identification during transport and handling and are “read automatically by a tag reader”. See Chang et al. ¶[0004].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the transportation method of Kim et al. to include the safety monitoring and the on-vehicle identification device taught by Chang et al.. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (POSITA) would have been motivated to include these features to improve the operational safety and data integrity of the system.
Specifically, integrating the safety monitoring of the Chang et al. reference ensures the automated movement in the Kim et al. reference does not cause collisions, and utilizing the on-vehicle tag reader of the Chang reference allows the system to perform a verification and identification of the AGV/OHT transporting cassettes of wafers. This combination prevents the delivery of the wrong material to a stocker/equipment, which is a known and critical in semiconductor fabrication. The result is a predictable combination of known elements to achieve a more reliable automated transport system and manufacturing processes.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Kim et al. with the safety monitoring and the on-vehicle identification device of Chang et al., since applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.-, 82 USPQ2d 1385).
Claim 2. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 1, further comprising: after identifying the first wafer carrier loaded on the rack of the wafer transport device, moving the wafer transport device to a second stocker along the route (Kim et al. Fig. 12 -Step S1208-1210)
PNG
media_image1.png
512
494
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 3. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 2, further comprising: after moving the wafer transport device to the second stocker, performing a scan process, by the identification device, to confirm if the first wafer carrier is absent (Chang et al. discloses identification devices (overhead sensors 46/62, light curtains 48/92) explicitly used to detect the presence or absence of obstructions during wafer handling (¶11, 32). A person skilled in the art would recognize that using such a sensor to verify that an area is clear (i.e., confirming absence after a move) is a standard, inherent safety and inventory verification step (¶32-33). The system flow fig. 6 shows a signal changing state once an obstruction is removed, confirming this functionality (Chang et al fig. 6 & ¶32-33).).
Claim 4. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 2, further comprising: displaying a signal on a display panel of the rack of the wafer transport device corresponding to the first wafer carrier when the wafer transport device s stopped in front of the second stocker (Kim et al. Col. 4 line 60 – Col. 5 line28 – Kim et al. teaches display for displaying AGV position, status, information, etc.. throughout the transferring operations.).
Claim 5. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 1, further comprising: displaying a signal on a display panel of the rack of the wafer transport device corresponding to the first wafer carrier when the wafer transport device s stopped in front of the first stocker (Kim et al. Col. 4 line 60 – Col. 5 line28 – Kim et al. teaches display for displaying AGV position, status, information, etc.. throughout the transferring operations.).
Claim 6. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 1, further comprising: adjusting, by the control unit, a speed of the wafer transport device according to an environment along the route (While the cited prior art may not explicitly state that the control unit adjusts the speed of the wafer transport device, it is well-understood by those of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) of semiconductor logistics (including AGV, OHT, and FOUP transfer) that speed modulation is a fundamental and implicit functional requirement of any automated transport controller. ).
Claim 7. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. teach a method of claim 1, wherein the route is calculated based on an urgent degree of the first wafer carrier (Kim et al. – This further language as best understood merely recites a functional result or an intended use of the calculation, and does not provide a novel structural or specific algorithmic distinction over the prior art, which already teaches methods of calculating a route.
Claim 8. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. teach a method comprising: receiving, by a control module of a wafer transport system, a first indication corresponding to a first wafer carrier and a second indication corresponding to a second wafer carrier, wherein the first wafer carrier is stored in a stocker and the second wafer carrier is placed in a wafer transport device of the wafer transport system (Kim et al. discloses a control system that receives a "cassette transportation request" from processing equipment to initiate the movement of a wafer carrier. See Abstract & Col. 2 lines 4-45 and second AGV Col. 8 lines 32-35. The system as disclosed in Kim transfers cassettes of wafers from stockers to various EQs. At any given time it is understood a first wafer carrier may be in a stocker while a second wafer carrier is placed in a transport device of the transport system. );
wherein the wafer transport device comprises a rack, wherein the rack comprises a first side panel, a second side panel, a shelf board extending from an inner sidewall of the first side panel to an inner sidewall of the second side panel and supporting the second wafer carrier, a light source disposed on the inner sidewall of the first side panel, and a light sensor disposed on the inner sidewall of the second side panel (The addition of stationary side panels and sensors provides not patentable distinction in a method claim as it fails to recite a manipulative step utilizing these components, which otherwise represent a routine mechanical arrangement for onboard monitoring as taught by Chang.);
calculating, by the control module, a route of the wafer transport device according to the first indication and the second indication; moving, by a control unit of the wafer transport device, the wafer transport device to the stocker along the route (Kim et al. discloses an automated guided vehicle (AGV) moving along a programmed route to reach a storage stocker. See Kim et al. Abstract and Col. 2 lines 31-65);
performing, by a first identification device of the wafer transport device, a first scan process to confirm if the first wafer carrier is loaded on the wafer transport device; and performing, by a second identification device of the wafer transport device, a second scan process to confirm if the second wafer carrier is unloaded from the wafer transport device (Chang et al discloses identification devices (overhead sensors 46/62, light curtains 48/92) explicitly used to detect the presence or absence of obstructions during wafer handling (¶11, 32). A person skilled in the art would recognize that using such a sensor to verify that an area is clear (i.e., confirming absence after a move) is a standard, inherent safety and inventory verification step (¶32-33). The system flow fig. 6 shows a signal changing state once an obstruction is removed, confirming this functionality (Chang et al fig. 6 & ¶32-33). Note: See regarding claims 1 & 2)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the transportation method of Kim et al. to include the safety/loaded/unloaded monitoring and the on-vehicle identification device taught by Chang et al.. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (POSITA) would have been motivated to include these features to improve the operational safety and data integrity of the system.
Specifically, integrating the safety monitoring of the Chang et al. reference ensures the automated movement in the Kim et al. reference does not cause collisions, and utilizing the on-vehicle tag reader of the Chang reference allows the system to perform a verification and identification of the AGV/OHT. This combination prevents the delivery of the wrong material to a stocker, which is a known and critical failure mode in semiconductor fabrication. The result is a predictable combination of known elements to achieve a more reliable automated transport system.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Kim et al. with the safety monitoring and the on-vehicle identification device of Chang et al., since applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.-, 82 USPQ2d 1385).
Claim 9. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 8, further comprising: after performing the first scan process and the second scan process (Chang et al discloses identification devices (overhead sensors 46/62, light curtains 48/92) explicitly used to detect the presence or absence of obstructions during wafer handling (¶11, 32)), moving, by the control unit, the wafer transport device to another stocker (Chang et al. ¶5-12 – plurality of scans are repeated performed between and during transport between stockers and equipment and at loading and unloading.)
Claim 11. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 8, further comprising: detecting, by a sensor of the wafer transport device, objects around a perimeter of the wafer transport device when moving the wafer transport device to the stocker (Chang et al discloses identification devices (overhead sensors 46/62, light curtains 48/92) explicitly used to detect the presence or absence of obstructions during wafer handling (¶11, 32)),
Claim 14. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 8, further comprising: assigning, by the control module, an accommodation position in the wafer transport device for the first wafer carrier according to a level of the stocker for storing the first wafer carrier (This limitation that the control module must assign an accommodation position based on a "level of the stocker" describes a predictable outcome of combining known automation principles, described throughout Kim et al., with a conventional stocker design, disclosed in both Kim and Chang, making it an obvious design choice for a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA). Automated Material Handling Systems (AMHS) routinely use control logic to manage specific physical storage locations, or "levels," within multi-shelf stockers. Incorporating this basic inventory management functionality is a standard application of MPEP § 2143(A) principles, which deal with combining prior art elements to yield predictable results, and is an obvious substitution under MPEP § 2143(C).).
Claim 21. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method comprising: moving a wafer transport device to a first position in front of a first stocker, wherein the wafer transport device comprises a plurality of shelf boards at different heights and board configured to support a wafer carrier, and the first stocker comprises a plurality of first floors at different heights, wherein the plurality of shelf boards are respectively level with the plurality of first floors (I.e. standard structure of a AGV for holding multiple cassettes. Standard structure for cassettes holding multiple wafers as understood in both Kim and Chang.), wherein when the wafer transport device is at the first position in front of the first stocker, a first one of the shelf board of the wafer transport device is substantially level with the first floor of the first stocker (The implied method step of moving the wafer transport device so that its shelf is substantially level with the stocker floor is an understood and conventional operational necessity. Kim et al. describes an automated transport system where Automatic Guide Vehicles (AGVs) are known to load and unload wafer cassettes from equipment and stockers. This requires a physical alignment that a POSITA would understand as a basic engineering requirement for material transfer, thus in the cited prior art event tough it may not be explicitly stated.);
after moving the wafer transport device in front of the first stocker, moving the wafer carrier supported by the first floor of the first stocker to a second position over the first one of the shelf board of the wafer transport device (Kim et al. – understood process of loading and unloading described in Kim et al. Col. 1-2.);
transporting the wafer carrier, by using the wafer transport device, to a third position in front of a second stocker, wherein the second stocker comprises a plurality of second floors at different heights (No clear manipulative distinction. Transport devices for transporting multiple devices (i..e. cassettes/wafers/ect. Have multiple floors or shelfs for holding the devices being transferred. The particular structure is not understood to provide any further manipulation of the method as recited.), and when the wafer transport device is at the third position in front of the second stocker, the first on of the shelf board of the wafer transport device is substantially level with the first one of the second floor of the second stocker; and transferring the wafer carrier from the first one of shelf board of the wafer transport device to a fourth position over the first one of the second floor of the second stocker (The entire recited sequence describes the conventional and recognized process of unloading a wafer carrier from a transport vehicle to a second stocker. This process is taught and understood by a POSITA from the Kim et al. document, which describes automatic guide vehicles (AGVs) transporting semiconductor wafers between stockers as standard prior art in Columns 1-2. The required physical alignment and subsequent transfer action are basic engineering requirements, representing predictable results of combining known elements as described in MPEP § 2143(A).).
Claim 22. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 21, further comprising: during moving the wafer carrier to the second position over the shelf board of the wafer transport device, emitting a light beam from an optical detector of the wafer transport device to detect a movement of the wafer carrier (Chang et al discloses identification devices (overhead sensors 46/62, light curtains 48/92) explicitly used to detect the presence or absence of obstructions during wafer handling (¶11, 32)),
Claim 23. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 21, further comprising: during transporting the wafer carrier, emitting a light beam from an optical detector of the wafer transport device to detect a movement of the wafer carrier (Chang et al discloses identification devices (overhead sensors 46/62, light curtains 48/92) explicitly used to detect the presence or absence of obstructions during wafer handling (¶11, 32)),
Claim 24. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 21, wherein an angle is defined between a top surface of the shelf board and an inner surface of a rear panel assembly of the wafer transport device, and the angle is in a range from about 83 degrees to about 85 degrees (As recited, this structural limitation if not under stood to provide a manipulative distinction in the process. To carry patentable weight, the recited structural limitation must manipulatively distinguish the claimed method from the prior art by fundamentally altering the execution of the procedural steps rather than merely serving as the environment or object of a known process.)
Claim 25. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 21, further comprising: displaying a signal on a display panel of the wafer transport device prior to moving the wafer carrier to the second position over the shelf board of the wafer transport device (Kim et al. Col. 4 line 60 – Col. 5 line28 – Kim et al. teaches display for displaying AGV position, status, information, etc.. throughout the transferring operations.).
Claim 26. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 21, adjusting a speed of the wafer transport device according to an environment of a route from the first stocker to the second stocker during transporting the wafer carrier (While the cited prior art may not explicitly state that the control unit adjusts the speed of the wafer transport device, it is well-understood by those of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) of semiconductor logistics (including AGV, OHT, and FOUP transfer) that speed modulation is a fundamental and implicit functional requirement of any automated transport controller. ).
Claim(s)12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 6,516,238) in view of Chang et al. (US 2004/0118980) in view of Nettles (WO 2006055143 A2)
Claim 12. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 8, further comprising: recalculating, by the control module, the route of the wafer transport device when a fire alarm is received by the control module (Kim et al. teaches methods for calculating routes, while Chang et al. discloses systems for detecting obstructions and preventing collisions. Although Kim and Chang do not explicitly mention fire alarms, the inclusion of such safety mechanisms (like fire alarms and emergency off systems) in conventional transport systems is well-established in the prior art, as demonstrated by Wehrung et al. (¶s 13, 177). Wehrung further teaches that control systems use status information from various error conditions to "formulate strategy" (¶s 14-16), a process analogous to the route calculation and obstruction avoidance methods described in the other references. Therefore, for a POSITA, the application of this known "formulating strategy" to include rerouting a new path upon receiving a fire alarm or detecting an obstruction would be an obvious and logical combination of the existing knowledge to prevent damage and injury.)
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 6,516,238) in view of Chang et al. (US 2004/0118980) in view of Gorman (US 20200324974 A1)
Claim 13. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. disclose a method of claim 8, further comprising: displaying information of the first wafer carrier on a touch panel of the wafer transport device prior to moving the wafer transport device to the stocker (The specific use of a touch panel interface does not render the process non-obvious. As touch panels are merely a well-known combination of a display and a user input device, they represent an "obvious design choice" or the "simple substitution of one known element for another" under guidance of MPEP § 2143(B) and (C). Gorman (¶91) confirms the known use of touch panels in analogous automated transport systems. Thus, modernizing the equipment of Kim et al. with a touch panel as taught by Gorman would be a predictable improvement well within the technical grasp of a POSITA.)
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 6,516,238) in view of Chang et al. (US 2004/0118980) in view of Chao (US 20020143427 A1)
Claim 27. Kim et al. in view of Chang et al. teaches a method of claim 8, further comprising: emitting a light beam from the light source disposed on the inner sidewall of the first side panel to the light sensor disposed on the inner sidewall of the second side panel during moving the wafer transport device to the stocker along the route, wherein the light source and the light sensor are also moved during moving the wafer transport device.
Chang teaches a safety and monitoring system for a transport vehicle that utilizes light-based sensors to perform constant monitoring during movement. While Kim does not explicitly detail the operation of a through-beam sensor on its AGV/OHT rack, it was well-known by a PHOSITA to utilize onboard optical sensors to monitor the presence of stability of device (i.e. agv in stocker, cassette in agv, wafer in cassette, etc..) during transit. It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of the invention to incorporate the light emitting sensors of Chang onto the transport device of Kim. The POSITA would be motivated to do so to ensure that the wafer carrier remains properly seated on the shelf during movement, thereby preventing equipment damage, wafer contamination, or injury. The step of “emitting a light beam” is the functional operation of the light based monitory system taught by Chang, and the fact that the sensors “move during the moving of the wafer transport device” is the necessary physical consequence of mounting said sensors on a mobile AGV/OHT.
Additionally, under BRI, the wafer transport device and its rack broadly encompass both the AGV and the cassette itself Both structures unitize top, bottom, and side panels to enclose and protect objects which they are to house and transport. Therefore, the addition of these panels merely descries the conventional environment of a transport device and odes not provide any manipulative distinction in the claimed method.
For further support, See Chao illustrates the physical integration of monitoring sensors into the transport vehicle’s structural frame. Specifically, Chao (paragraphs [0018]-[0023] and Figures 4-7) discloses an overhead transport vehicle utilizing sensor mechanisms that are inherently part of the vehicle’s housing to monitor the loading/unloading path and the presence of obstructions. A POSITA would recognize that to facilitate the "moving of the light source and light sensor" in tandem with the vehicle, as recited in Claim 27, one must necessarily provide a supporting structure, such as the recited "top panel" and "bottom panel," to house and align said sensors. Providing a defined top and bottom frame to a rack to facilitate the mounting of the light-based safety systems taught by both Chao and Chang is a routine and predictable mechanical assembly. Consequently, the addition of these panels is merely a functional necessity for the operation of the onboard sensors and does not provide a patentable distinction in the context of the claimed method.
When there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill in the art has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. KSR Int'l Co v. Teleflex Inc.
Conclusion
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 JARRETT J STARK whose telephone number is (571)272-6005. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4 M-F.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at 571-272-2339. 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.
JARRETT J. STARK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2822
5/5/2026
/JARRETT J STARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights