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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicants' amendment of the claims, filed on 01/16/2026, in response to the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-9 from the final office action, mailed on 11/17/2025, by amending claims 1, 6 and canceling claim 2, is acknowledged and will be addressed below.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) For the purpose of better clarification and consistency at later portion of the Claim 1, the “the transmitted light being emitted from the light source” and “the reflected light being emitted from the light source” of Claim 1 would have a better form if amended to be:
The “the transmitted light being a light emitted from the light source” and “the reflected light being a light emitted from the light source”.
(2) The “an intensity when the light emitted from the light source is reflected only by the substrate and received by the light receiving unit” of Claim 5 would have a better clarification based on the applicants’ disclosure, if amended to be:
“an intensity when the light emitted from the light source is reflected only by the substrate before the film formation process and received by the light receiving unit”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim interpretation
(1) 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
-a. The “positional information acquisition unit” and “control unit” having plural subset units in claim 1, because of the term “unit”, as a substitute for “means”, that is a generic placeholder coupled with functional language (“positional information acquisition”, “controls a film formation condition”) without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2 and 4-9 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
(1) The “i) when the spectral characteristic of the thin film obtained by the film formation process falls within the allowable range of the desired spectral characteristic, the film formation condition setting unit does not adjust the film formation condition for each layer; ii) when the spectral characteristic of the thin film obtained by the film formation process falls outside the allowable range of the desired spectral characteristic, determine whether the film thickness difference exceeds a predetermined value, is the predetermined value or is less than the predetermined value, when the film thickness difference of at least one layer exceeds the predetermined value, adjusts the film formation condition for the layer on a subsequent substrate so that the film thickness of the layer on the subsequent substrate becomes the target film thickness; and iii) when the spectral characteristic of the thin film obtained by the film formation process falls outside the allowable range of the desired spectral characteristic, determine whether the film thickness difference exceeds a predetermined value, is the predetermined value or is less than the predetermined value, when the film thickness difference of at least one layer is the predetermined value or less, the film formation condition setting unit does not adjust the film formation condition for each layer” of Claim 1 is not clear.
First, based on the applicants’ Fig. 6,
Condition (i) appears to corresponds to the step S5, and conditions (ii) and (iii) appears to corresponds to the step S6, however, the claim is constructed such that they are all separate steps. Further, the condition appears to have plural continuous sentences, which makes the claim indefinite.
Second, there is insufficient antecedent basis for:
The “adjusts the film formation condition for the layer on a subsequent substrate”,
The “so that the film thickness of the layer on the subsequent substrate becomes the target film thickness”,
The “when the film thickness difference of at least one layer is the predetermined value or less, the film formation condition setting unit does not adjust the film formation condition for each layer”.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined as:
i) when the spectral characteristic of the thin film obtained by the film formation process falls within the allowable range of the desired spectral characteristic, the film formation condition setting unit does not adjust the film formation condition for each layer;
ii) when the spectral characteristic of the thin film obtained by the film formation process falls outside the allowable range of the desired spectral characteristic, determine whether the film thickness difference exceeds a predetermined value, then
ii)-1: when the film thickness difference of at least one layer is more than the predetermined value, adjusts the film formation condition for the at least one layer to be formed on a subsequent substrate so that the film thickness of each layer to be formed on the subsequent substrate becomes the target film thickness; and
ii)-2: when the film thickness difference of the at least one layer is equal to or less than the predetermined value, the film formation condition setting unit does not adjust the film formation condition for each layer”.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 01/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not convincing in light of the new ground of rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm PT.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718