DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 Amendment
Applicants’ submission, filed on 03/09/2026, addressing rejection of claims 1-20 from the non-final office action (12/12/2025), by amending claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, and 14-20, and cancelling claims 3 and 13 is entered and will be addressed below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the claim and/or Specification:
“a light detector“,
“a light receiving unit 150” (middle of P28),
“the transfer frame 210” (middle of P12),
“a radiating unit 210” (bottom of P16).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “210” has been used to designate both “the transfer frame” and “a radiating unit”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The examiner notices that the support pad 1220 is not shown in Fig. 5 but shown in Figs. 6-8.
Claim Interpretation
The “treatment status” of claims 5, 9,and 17, this is examined inclusive detect anomalies (P2, last paragraph) and a wide variety parameters from deposition or etching, and other treatments.
The “an aligner for aligning a notch of the substrate” of claims 1, 9, and 17, the substrate is not part of the apparatus. An apparatus that is capable of aligning a notch of the substrate is considered read into the claim.
The “wherein the first space is a space into which an untreated substrate requiring a treatment in a process chamber is carried, and
the second space is a space into which the substrate that has been treated in the process chamber is carried” of clam 10 and similar of claim 17, the order of operation is considered an intended use of the apparatus. An apparatus that is capable of performing treatment in this order is considered read into the claim.
The “performing a treating process to remove a thin film from an edge region of a substrate” and “a process chamber for performing a bevel etch process” of claim 17 is considered an intended use of the apparatus. An apparatus that is capable of performing this operation is considered read into the claim.
It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2111.02). When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01).
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 recites “the shaft includes: a shaft coupled to with the support platform”, this raise antecedent issue.
Claim 7 will be examined inclusive “the shaft is coupled to the support platform”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krupyshev et al. (US 20200395232, hereafter ‘232), in view of del Puerto et al. (US 20050264791, hereafter ‘791).
‘232 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 1: SUBSTRATE PROCESS APPARATUS (title, includes the claimed “An apparatus for treating a substrate, the apparatus comprising”):
the atmospheric front end 11000 generally includes load port modules 11005 and a mini-environment 11060 such as for example an equipment front end module (EFEM) (Figs. 1A-B, 1F, [0028]), The mini-environment 11060 may provide a controlled, clean zone for substrate transfer between multiple load port modules and the vacuum back end 11020 ([0029], last sentence, includes the claimed “an equipment front end module including a load port and a transfer frame”);
The vacuum back end 11020 generally includes a transport chamber 11025, one or more processing station(s) or module(s) 11030 and any suitable transport robot or apparatus 11014 ([0030], 4th sentence, includes the claimed “a process chamber for performing a process treatment on a substrate”);
The vacuum load lock 11010 is located between the atmospheric front end 11000 and the vacuum back end 11020 with the interior transport path 11998 extending through the load lock 11010. For example, the vacuum load lock 11010 may be located between and connected to both the mini-environment 11060 and the vacuum back end 11020 ([0031], includes the claimed “and a load lock chamber disposed in a transfer path of the substrate transferred between the transfer frame and the process chamber, wherein the load lock chamber includes: a housing having an interior space”);
in FIGS. 3A and 3B the load lock 300 includes two substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B ([0043], 6th sentence, includes the claimed “a compartmentalizing plate for compartmentalizing the interior space into a first space, and a second space independent of the first space”),
the load lock 11010 includes an aligner 11011 for aligning a fiducial of the substrate to a desired position for processing ([0031], 2nd last sentence, includes the claimed “and an aligner provided in any one of the first space and the second space”).
‘232 further teaches that In one aspect, the substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B may be configured so that the transport direction of substrates through each of the substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B is bi-directional ([0044], 9th sentence), ‘232 is silent on the details of the aligner 11011.
‘232 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 1: (1A) (an aligner) for aligning a notch of the substrate (provided in any one of the first space and the second space,
the aligner including: a support plate for supporting the substrate;
a light emitter for radiating light to an edge region of the substrate supported on the support plate; and
a light detector for receiving the light radiated by the light emitter, and for determining whether the notch of the substrate supported on the support plate is aligned based on whether the light is received, and
wherein the light emitter and the light detector are disposed in an exterior of the housing, and
(1B) the housing and the compartmentalizing plate are each provided with a view port through which the light radiated by the light emitter is transmitted.
‘791 is analogous art in the field of Wafer Handling Method For Use In Lithography Patterning (title), at least one alignment load-lock separated from the wafer exchange chamber by a second gate valve. The alignment load-lock includes an alignment stage that aligns a wafer during pump-down. The alignment load-lock can be uni-directional or bi-directional. The lithography system can include one or multiple alignment load-locks (abstract), While alignment load-locks 104, 105, and holding load-lock 114 are all preferably bi-directional load-locks, uni-directional load-locks could also be used without departing from the scope of the present invention ([0036]). ‘791 teaches that wafer 207 may have undergone coarse alignment prior to being placed on wafer supports 204-206. This coarse alignment can be performed in order to place notch 208 within the field of view 209 of camera 202. Since camera 202 can see notch 208, the camera 202 can determine both the center of the wafer from the radius of curvature visible within the field of view 209 as well as the orientation of the wafer from the location of notch 208 (Fig. 2A, [0046], 5th-6th sentences), also included within the alignment load-lock shown is a chuck 211 ([0041], 3rd last sentence), Once chuck 211 has been aligned with wafer 207, chuck 211 is moved up to and put in contact with wafer 207 ([0047], 5th sentence), Alignment load-lock roof 201 is an airtight transparent or semi-transparent window. A camera 202 and an illumination source 203 are disposed above alignment load-lock roof 201 ([0041]), for the purpose of high levels of overlay accuracy ([0008]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted the alignment load-lock chuck 211, a camera 202 and an illumination source 203 above alignment load-lock roof to detect the notch of wafer of ‘791 (the limitation of 1A), as the aligner 11011 of ‘232, for the purpose of high levels of overlay accuracy, as taught by ‘791 ([0008]).
In regarding to the limitation of 1B, ‘791 transparent load-lock roof 201 is one view port of the housing. When transferring wafer through the bottom substrate holding chamber 305A, a second transparent window has to be installed in the compartmentalizing plate to align the wafer in the bottom substrate holding chamber (see also ‘988 below).
‘791 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 2: Rotary seal 304 allows rotation of shaft 230 (Fig. 3A, [0049], 5th sentence, see also Fig. 2B, includes the claimed “wherein the aligner further includes: a rotating shaft for rotating the support plate”).
Claim 4: Fig. 2A shows the claimed “wherein the light emitter is configured to radiate the light in a direction inclined to a top surface of the substrate supported on the support plate”.
Alternatively, claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘232, in view of ‘791 and Papasouliotis et al. (US 20170067163, hereafter ‘163).
In case Applicants argue that as the top substrate holding chamber 305B can be used for transfer wafer into processing module, a view port in the compartmentalizing plate is not absolutely necessary.
‘163 is analogous art in the field of MULTIPLE CHAMBER CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION SYSTEM (title). ‘163 teaches that In embodiments with multiple load lock chambers and/or compartments, certain chambers and/or compartments can be designated to receive unprocessed wafers and process trays, while other chambers and/or compartments can be designated to receive processed wafers and process trays, such that wafers pass-through certain chambers and/or compartments only in a specified direction ([0102]), A partition 131 can be used to divide the second load lock 130 into two separate compartments or chambers 130A and 130B ([0100], Figs. 4A-4B show the bottom chamber being for input, same as Applicants’ Fig. 5).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a transparent window to the compartmentalizing plate of ‘232, for the purpose of using the imported camera from ‘791, to detect the wafer alignment in the bottom substrate holding chamber 305A of ‘232, as taught by ‘163, and for the purpose of high levels of overlay accuracy, as taught by ‘791 ([0008]).
Claims 2 and 4 rejections are discussed above.
Claims 5-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘232 and ‘791 (optionally with ‘163), as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Kim et al. (CN 101360988, hereafter ‘988). Claims 9-10 and 14-16 are rejected over ‘232, in view of ‘791 and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163).
The combination of ‘232 and ‘791 (optionally with ‘163) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 5: wherein the load lock chamber includes an inspector for inspecting a treatment status of the substrate provided in an other one of the first space and the second space.
‘988 is analogous art in the field of a cluster tool (P2, 1st complete paragraph), the sensor 140A, 140B is embedded in the load lock chambers 160 of the three holes 164, 166, 168, and corresponding reflectors 142A, 142B is placed under the three slotted holes. with load lock chambers of the three groove holes 160 may include one or more isolated from the environment of the processing chamber, for example, three layers of single-slot load lock (as shown in FIG. 3 A), single layer of three-slot load lock, three has a vertically stacked negative load block room of single groove hole, or combination of other load lock chambers. Similarly, in another example, FIG. 3B depicts a four-slot load lock chamber 170 near the sensor 140A, a view of the 140B. sensors 140A, 140B are embedded in the load lock chambers 170 of the four slots 174, 176, 178, 180 and corresponding reflectors 142A, 142B is disposed above the four slot holes. with load lock chambers of the four slot holes 170 may include one or more isolated from the environment of the processing chamber (P7, 1st complete paragraph), transfer chamber adjacent to the inlet of each load lock chamber and process processing chamber assembled multi-group of four a group of sensor, the sensor can detect the presence of four corners of the rectangular glass panel, to the mechanical arm transmitting the substrate to the processing chamber prior to the first sensing alignment of the panel (P3, 1st complete paragraph, similar to two holding chambers of load lock 300 and one aligner of ‘232). ‘988 teaches that FIG. 2 is a part sectional view magnifying process system, it indicates the proximity technology processing chamber inlet / sensor outlet port is provided, the setting for detecting substrate processing damage and deviation before and after process chamber; in the process system of FIG. 3A FIG. 3B FIG. 1 sectional view enlarged along part line 3-3 section, it indicates the sensor ambient environment of the factory interface is set. wherein FIG. 3A close to the three-slot load lock of the sensor, which is used for detecting the substrate damage transfer out to the substrate deviation of slotted holes, and FIG. 3 B depicts a close sensor of four-slot load lock chamber (P4, 2nd complete paragraph), for the purpose of avoiding the deviation of the substrate from causing damage to the substrate or yield loss, because this will cause increased cost and reduced yield (top of page 3). Note Figs. 3A and 3B also shows view ports for each compartmentalizing plates for light beams to pass.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a sensor for detecting substrate processing damage to one of the holding chamber 305A or 305B, other than the one holding chamber of the load-lock containing 11011, of ‘232, as taught by ‘988, for the purpose of avoiding the deviation of the substrate from causing damage to the substrate or yield loss, because this will cause increased cost and reduced yield, as taught by ‘988 (top of page 3). In the option rejection with ‘163, the sensor should be on the top substrate holding chamber 305, same as Applicants’ Fig. 5.
The combination of ‘232, ‘791, (optionally with ‘163) and ‘988 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 6: FIG. 2 is a part sectional view magnifying process system, it indicates the proximity technology processing chamber inlet / sensor outlet port is provided, the setting for detecting substrate processing damage and deviation before and after process chamber (‘988, P4, 2nd complete paragraph), the substrate in the load lock chamber or processing chamber of the slot or other disorder, not because of transmission process in the alignment offset (i.e., offset) generated by collision. collision gap (chip) or breaking (ferro-coke) not only will cause the flat panel display substrate, but also in the load-lock chamber or processing chamber generate fragments and cause debris deposition. generating the debris may cause process defects or other display of the display or subsequent processing damage (bottom of page 2, i.e. the detection support can be similar to process chamber, it is obvious to have adopted the chuck 211 in Fig. 2A-3A of ‘791 as the detecting support, includes the claimed “inspector includes: a support platform for supporting a substrate; a shaft for rotating the support platform; and a camera for acquiring an image of an edge region of the substrate supported on the support platform”).
Claim 8: FIG. 2 is a part sectional view magnifying process system, it indicates the proximity technology processing chamber inlet / sensor outlet port is provided, the setting for detecting substrate processing damage and deviation before and after process chamber (‘988 P4, 2nd complete paragraph), Preferably, the sensors 140A, 140B are arranged outside the window 128 (i.e., outside of the transfer chamber) so that the sensors 140A, 140B are isolated from the environment and may reduce the transmission chamber 120 in the high temperature (bridging sentence between P5-6, description suitable for load lock chamber, see also Fig. 1, includes the claimed “wherein the camera is disposed in the exterior of the housing, and the housing is provided with the view port for allowing the camera to acquire the image”).
‘232 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 9: The vacuum load lock 11010 is located between the atmospheric front end 11000 and the vacuum back end 11020 with the interior transport path 11998 extending through the load lock 11010. For example, the vacuum load lock 11010 may be located between and connected to both the mini-environment 11060 and the vacuum back end 11020 … The vacuum load lock 11010 generally includes atmospheric and vacuum slot valves 307 (see, e.g., FIG. 3C) ([0031], includes the claimed “A load lock chamber where an internal atmosphere switches between a vacuum pressure atmosphere and an atmospheric pressure atmosphere, the load lock chamber comprising”);
in FIGS. 3A and 3B the load lock 300 includes two substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B; ([0043], 6th sentence, includes the claimed “a chamber having a first space, and a second space independent of the first space”),
the load lock 11010 includes an aligner 11011 for aligning a fiducial of the substrate to a desired position for processing ([0031], 2nd last sentence, includes the claimed “and an aligner provided in the first space”),
The vacuum load lock 11010 is located between the atmospheric front end 11000 and the vacuum back end 11020 with the interior transport path 11998 extending through the load lock 11010. For example, the vacuum load lock 11010 may be located between and connected to both the mini-environment 11060 and the vacuum back end 11020 ([0031], includes the claimed “wherein the chamber includes: a housing having an interior space”);
in FIGS. 3A and 3B the load lock 300 includes two substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B ([0043], 6th sentence, includes the claimed “a compartmentalizing plate for compartmentalizing the interior space into the first space, and the second space independent of the first space”).
‘232 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 9: (9A) (an aligner) for aligning a notch of a substrate (provided in the first space);
the aligner including:
a support plate for supporting the substrate;
a light emitter for radiating light to an edge region of the substrate supported on the support plate; and
a light detector for receiving the light radiated by the light emitter, and for determining whether the notch of the substrate supported on the support plate is aligned based on whether the light is received; and
(9B) an inspector for inspecting a treatment status of the substrate provided in the second space,
(9C) wherein the light emitter and the light detector are disposed in an exterior of the chamber, and the housing and the compartmentalizing plate are each provided with a view port through which the light radiated by the light emitter is transmitted.
‘791 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted the alignment load-lock chuck 211, a camera 202 and an illumination source 203 above alignment load-lock roof to detect the notch of wafer of ‘791 (the limitation of 9A and 9C), as the aligner 11011 of ‘232, for the purpose of high levels of overlay accuracy, as taught by ‘791 ([0008]).
In regarding to the limitation of 9C, ‘791 transparent load-lock roof 201 is one view port of the housing. When transferring wafer through the bottom substrate holding chamber 305A, a second transparent window has to be installed in the compartmentalizing plate to align the wafer in the bottom substrate holding chamber. Note ‘163 further supporting the need of detecting wafer in the bottom substrate holding chamber 305A.
‘988 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a sensor for detecting substrate processing damage to one of the holding chamber 305A or 305B, other than the one holding chamber of the load-lock containing 11011, of ‘232 (the limitations of 9B), as taught by ‘988, for the purpose of avoiding the deviation of the substrate from causing damage to the substrate or yield loss, because this will cause increased cost and reduced yield, as taught by ‘988 (top of page 3).
The combination of ‘232, ‘791, and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163) further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 10: the load lock 11010 includes an aligner 11011 for aligning a fiducial of the substrate to a desired position for processing (‘232, [0031], 2nd last sentence, includes the claimed “wherein the first space is a space into which an untreated substrate requiring a treatment in a process chamber is carried”, note bidirectional alignment load-lock of ‘791 and claim 20 of ‘988. Note ‘163 also teaches this limitation. Note this is also an intended use of the apparatus),
FIG. 2 is a part sectional view magnifying process system, it indicates the proximity technology processing chamber inlet / sensor outlet port is provided, the setting for detecting substrate processing damage and deviation before and after process chamber; (‘988, P4, 2nd complete paragraph, includes the clamed “and the second space is a space into which the substrate that has been treated in the process chamber is carried”, also taught by ‘163).
‘791 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 14: Fig. 2A shows the claimed “wherein the light emitter is configured to radiate the light in a direction inclined to a top surface of the substrate supported on the support plate”.
Claims 15-16 are rejected for substantially the same reason as claims 6 and 8 rejection above.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘232, ‘791, and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163), as being applied to claim 6 rejection above, further in view of SHIMIZU (US 20110215090, hereafter ‘090).
‘791 further teaches some limitations of:
Claim 7: Rotary seal 304 allows rotation of shaft 230 (Fig. 3A, [0049], 5th sentence, see also Fig. 2B, includes the claimed “wherein the shaft includes: a shaft coupled to with the support platform”),
Bellows 302 allow vertical and horizontal translations of shaft 230 relative to load-lock floor 216, ([0049], 2nd sentence, includes the claimed “and a shaft housing surrounding the shaft”).
‘791 also teaches It will also be apparent that the transfer of rotary motion accomplished by 304-308 could have also been accomplished via a magnetic coupling ([0049], last sentence). ‘791 does not expressly teaches the magnetic coupling is a magnetic fluid seal.
The combination of ‘232, ‘791, and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 7: the shaft and the shaft housing are sealed by a magnetic fluid.
‘090 is analogous art in the field of PROCESSING APPARATUS (title), a load-lock chamber in which the atmospheric atmosphere and the vacuum atmosphere is selectively switched, a vacuum pump such as a dry pump or the like is used as the gas exhaust unit 90 (Fig. 1, [0050], last sentence). ‘090 teaches that the rotation shaft 58 inserted through the cylindrical hollow coupling shaft 118, and is rotatably supported in the coupling shaft 118 by the magnetic fluid seal 56. Accordingly, the rotation shaft 58 can be rotated while ensuring the airtightness in the processing chamber 4 (Fig. 10, [0096]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted magnetic fluid seal of ‘090 as the magnetic coupling of ‘971, and then combine with ‘232 and ‘988, for the purpose of airtightness, as taught by ‘090 ([0096]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘232, ‘791, and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163), as being applied to claim 9 rejection above, further in view of Halsey et al. (US 20030172508, hereafter ‘508).
‘791 further teaches some limitations of:
Claim 11: Rotary seal 304 allows rotation of shaft 230 (Fig. 3A, [0049], 5th sentence, see also Fig. 2B, includes the claimed “a shaft for rotating the support plate”).
The combination of ‘232, ‘791, and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 11: a support pad provided on a top surface of the support plate and being in contact with a lower surface of the substrate.
‘508 is analogous art in the field of A chamber for transitioning a semiconductor substrate between modules operating at different pressures is provided (abstract). ‘508 teaches that Within load lock 100, is wafer support 110 having pads 112 on which a semiconductor substrate 108 rests on when inside the load lock. Of course, pads 112 can be pins (Fig. 1, [0006], 2nd sentence).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added pads/pins 112 of ‘508, to the chuck of ‘232 (or the chuck 211 of ‘791), for its suitability with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘232, ‘791, ‘988, and ‘508 (optionally with ‘163), as being applied to claim 11 rejection above, further in view of Arai (US 20150287626, hereafter ‘626).
The combination of ‘232, ‘791, ‘988, and ‘508 (optionally with ‘163) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 12: wherein the support pad is provided in a form of an O-ring or a gecko.
‘626 is analogous art in the field of Anti-Slip End Effector For Transporting Workpiece Using Van Der Waals Force (title), including load lock chamber (Fig. 1, [0061]). ‘626 teaches that The top face 84a is capable of contacting and adhering to the backside of a workpiece by van der Waals force. For example, a gecko tape is attached to the pad 84b or carbon nanotubes are deposited on the top portion 84b, constituting the top face 84a (Fig. 13, [0060], last two sentences), for the purpose of wafer adhesion ([0007]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a gecko tape to the imported pads/pins 112 of ‘626 from to the chuck of ‘232 (or the chuck 211 of ‘791), for the purpose of wafer adhesion, as taught by ‘626 ([0007]).
Claims 17-20 are rejected over ‘232, in view of ‘791 and ‘988 (optionally with ‘163) and Mok et al. (US 20020113039, hereafter ‘039).
‘232 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 17: SUBSTRATE PROCESS APPARATUS (title, includes the claimed “An apparatus for treating a substrate, the apparatus comprising”):
the atmospheric front end 11000 generally includes load port modules 11005 and a mini-environment 11060 such as for example an equipment front end module (EFEM) (Figs. 1A-B, 1F, [0028]), The mini-environment 11060 may provide a controlled, clean zone for substrate transfer between multiple load port modules and the vacuum back end 11020 ([0029], last sentence, includes the claimed “an equipment front end module including a load port and a transfer frame”);
Referring to FIGS. 1A and 1B, a substrate processing apparatus 11090 (also referred to herein as a substrate processing system or tool), such as for example a semiconductor tool station ([0025]), The load port modules 11005 may be configured to receive substrate carriers or cassettes 11050 from an overhead transport system ([0028], 3rd last sentence, includes the claimed “a treating module for receiving a substrate stored in a container placed at the load port”),
The vacuum back end 11020 generally includes a transport chamber 11025, one or more processing station(s) or module(s) 11030 and any suitable transport robot or apparatus 11014 ([0030], 4th sentence, includes the claimed “a process chamber”);
the load port modules 11005 and load ports 11040 are substantially directly coupled to the vacuum back end 11020 so that a cassette 11050 mounted on the load port interfaces substantially directly (e.g. in one aspect at least the mini-environment 11060 is omitted while in other aspects the vacuum load lock 11010 is also omitted such that the cassette 11050 is pumped down to vacuum in a manner similar to that of the vacuum load lock 11010) with a vacuum environment of the transfer chamber 11025 and/or a processing vacuum of a processing station 11030 ([0030], last sentence), The vacuum load lock 11010 is located between the atmospheric front end 11000 and the vacuum back end 11020 with the interior transport path 11998 extending through the load lock 11010. For example, the vacuum load lock 11010 may be located between and connected to both the mini-environment 11060 and the vacuum back end 11020 ([0031], includes the claimed “wherein the treating module includes: a transfer chamber for transferring a substrate transferred from the equipment front end module to the process chamber; and a load lock chamber disposed between the transfer chamber and the transfer frame”),
in FIGS. 3A and 3B the load lock 300 includes two substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B ([0043], 6th sentence, includes the claimed “and the load lock chamber includes: a chamber having a first space into which an untreated substrate is carried, and a second space which is disposed above the first space and independent of the first space”), the substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B may be configured so that the transport direction of substrates through each of the substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B is bi-directional ([0044], 9th sentence, is capable of using the upper substrate holding chamber 305B for output of the treated substrate, the claimed “into which the substrate treated in the process chamber is carried”),
the load lock 11010 includes an aligner 11011 for aligning a fiducial of the substrate to a desired position for processing ([0031], 2nd last sentence, includes the claimed “an aligner provided in the first space”),
The vacuum load lock 11010 is located between the atmospheric front end 11000 and the vacuum back end 11020 with the interior transport path 11998 extending through the load lock 11010. For example, the vacuum load lock 11010 may be located between and connected to both the mini-environment 11060 and the vacuum back end 11020 ([0031], includes the claimed “wherein the chamber includes: a housing having an interior space”);
in FIGS. 3A and 3B the load lock 300 includes two substrate holding chambers 305A, 305B ([0043], 6th sentence, includes the claimed “and a compartmentalizing plate for compartmentalizing the interior space into the first space, and the second space independent of the first space”).
‘232 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 17: (17A) (a treating module …) and performing a treating process to remove a thin film from an edge region of a substrate,
(a process chamber) for performing a bevel etch process;
(17B) (an aligner) for aligning a notch of a substrate (provided in the first space); and
(17C) the aligner including: a support plate for supporting the substrate;
a light emitter for radiating light to an edge region of the substrate supported on the support plate; and
a light detector for receiving the light radiated by the light emitter, and for determining whether the notch of the substrate supported on the support plate is aligned based on whether the light is received; and
an inspector for inspecting a treatment status of the substrate provided in the second spaces,
(17D) wherein the light emitter and the light detector are disposed in an exterior of the chamber, and the housing and the compartmentalizing plate are each provided with a view port through which the light radiated by the light emitter is transmitted.
‘039 is analogous art in the field of a cluster tool (Fig. 6, [0024]). ‘039 teaches that Integrated Semiconductor Substrate Bevel Cleaning Apparatus And Method (title), for the purpose of edge irregularities “peel off” problem ([0012]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added substrate bevel cleaning apparatus of ‘039 to the cluster tool of ‘232 (the limitations of 17A), for the purpose of edge irregularities “peel off” problem, as taught by ‘039 ([0012]).
‘791 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted the alignment load-lock chuck 211, a camera 202 and an illumination source 203 above alignment load-lock roof to detect the notch of wafer of ‘791 (the limitation of 17B and 17D), as the aligner 11011 of ‘232, for the purpose of high levels of overlay accuracy, as taught by ‘791 ([0008]).
In regarding to the limitation of 17D, ‘791 transparent load-lock roof 201 is one view port of the housing. When transferring wafer through the bottom substrate holding chamber 305A, a second transparent window has to be installed in the compartmentalizing plate to align the wafer in the bottom substrate holding chamber. Note ‘163 further supporting the need of detecting wafer in the bottom substrate holding chamber 305A.
‘988 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a sensor for detecting substrate processing damage to one of the holding chamber 305A or 305B, other than the one holding chamber of the load-lock containing 11011, of ‘232 (the limitations of 17C) , as taught by ‘988, for the purpose of avoiding the deviation of the substrate from causing damage to the substrate or yield loss, because this will cause increased cost and reduced yield, as taught by ‘988 (top of page 3).
Claim 18-19 are rejected for substantially the same reason as claims 2 and 6 rejection above.
The combination of ‘232, ‘791, ‘988, and ‘039 (optionally with ‘163) further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 20: Fig. 2A of ‘791 shows the claimed “wherein the light emitter is configured to radiate the light in a direction inclined to a top surface of the substrate supported on the support plate”,
It would have been obvious to change the viewing angle of the sensors 140A of ‘988 by the teaching of Fig. 2A of ‘791 (includes the clamed “and the camera photographs an edge region of the substrate in a direction inclined to a top surface of the substrate supported on the support platform”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, further in view of the new grounds of rejection above.
In regarding the drawing objection, see the top of page 10, Applicants assert that specification has been amended. However, no replacement Specification has been submitted.
In regarding to 112(a) and 112(b) rejection and 112(f) interpretation, see bottom of page 10 and the top of page 11, Applicants’ amendment overcomes these issues but also introduces a new 112(b) issue for claim 7.
In regarding to 103 rejection, Applicants argue that the combination of Krupyshev ‘232 and del Puerto ‘791 does not teach “a light emitter for radiating light to an edge region of the substrate supported on the support plate; and a light detector for receiving the light radiated by the light emitter, and for determining whether the notch of the substrate supported on the support plate is aligned based on whether the light is received”, because ‘791 is analyzing the radius of curvature and notch location within a field of view, [0046] and [0070], see the first three paragraphs of P 13.
This argument is found not persuasive.
‘791 clearly teaches the above limitation, for example, “This coarse alignment can be performed in order to place notch 208 within the field of view 209 of camera 202” ([0046], 6th sentence).
In short, the illumination source 203 is the light emitter and the camera 202 received light from the illumination source 203.
It appears Applicants are arguing the instant application the camera receive light passing through the notch. However, the claim is much broader than that. The light reflected from the illumination source 203 and received by the camera 202 is also “a light detector for receiving the light radiated by the light emitter”.
The rest of the argument with boiler plate of hindsight, no motivation to combine of all references. Since no specific argument is directed toward specific reference, the examiner has to maintain that each combination has a clear motivation to combine as described in the OC above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20160078612 is cited for using a half mirror 45 to direct light detection therefore, needs two windows (Fig. 2),
US 5474647 is cited for wafer pre-aligner (abstract), “cleaning and inspecting said plurality of semiconductor wafers before and after processing” (claim 3). US 20070189596 is cited for “the wafer aligning apparatus comprising a laser sensor” ([0014]).
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 KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 pm.
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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights