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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on -09/01/2023- is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, 3, 5, 8-10 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 3, recite, … a sensor constructed to detect… the informality can be corrected as sensor configured to detect….
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8-10 recite, … the processor is further constructed to… the informality can be corrected as the processor is further configured to…
Claim 9 is missing a semicolon after further comprising. Semicolon ( : ) should be included as, The semiconductor …. further comprising: a sensor
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, claim 1 recites:
A semiconductor manufacturing apparatus for processing a rectangular substrate, comprising:
a first sensor pair for measuring a first length of the rectangular substrate along a first line, wherein the first sensor pair comprises a sensor constructed to detect a position of one edge of the rectangular substrate on the first line, and a sensor constructed to detect a position of the other edge of the rectangular substrate on the first line;
a second sensor pair for measuring a second length of the rectangular substrate along a second line, wherein the second sensor pair comprises a sensor constructed to detect a position of one edge of the rectangular substrate on the second line, and a sensor constructed to detect a position of the other edge of the rectangular substrate on the second line; and
one or plural processors;
wherein the processor is constructed to
calculate the first length based on the positions of the one edge and the other edge, that are on the first line and detected by the first sensor pair, of the rectangular substrate,
calculate the second length based on the positions of the one edge and the other edge, that are on the second line and detected by the second sensor pair, of the rectangular substrate, and
identify the size or the shape of the rectangular substrate, based on the calculated first length and the calculated second length.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above.
Under the step 1 of the eligibility analysis, it is determined whether the claims are drawn to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter fall within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C 101: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in the statutory category of (machine).
Under the step 2A, prong one, it is considered whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that cover mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations) and mental process – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion.
For example, a step of calculate the first length based on the positions of the one edge and the other edge, that are on the first line and detected by the first sensor pair, of the rectangular substrate (is considered to be a mathematical step),
calculate the second length based on the positions of the one edge and the other edge, that are on the second line and detected by the second sensor pair, of the rectangular substrate (is considered to be a mathematical step), and
identify the size or the shape of the rectangular substrate, based on the calculated first length and the calculated second length (is considered to be a mental step).
These mental steps represent that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind.
Next, under the step 2A, prong two, it is considered whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, it is evaluated whether the claim recites meaningful additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
In claim 1, the additional elements/steps are: sensors, processor. The above additional elements/steps (hardware- sensors and processors) are recited in generality and represent extra solution activity to the judicial exception. The additional element in the preamble of “A semiconductor manufacturing apparatus…” is not qualified for a meaningful limitation because it only generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements/steps “a first sensor pair for measuring a first length… a second sensor pair for measuring a second length…” are also recited in generality which seem to merely be gathering data and not really performing any kind of inventive step to provide any meaningful additional element. Also, it represents an extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. All uses of judicial exception require it.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the step 2B.
Considering the independent claim as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would not know the practical application of the present invention since the claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in some meaningful way.
The independent claim, therefore, is not patent eligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, the claims 2-9 comprise the analogous subject matter and also comprise additional features/steps which are the part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claim 1 (additionally comprising mathematical relationship/mental process steps) and additional steps, therefore, the dependent claim is not eligible without additional elements that reflect a practical application and qualified for significantly more for substantially similar reason as discussed with regards to claim 1.
Claim 10 is considered to recite a practical application of the invention that integrate with the recited abstract ideas in claim 1, therefore applicant is suggested to include the claim 10 in claim 1 to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 2, 6, 8, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki (US 20190189480 A1) in view of Ishimori et al (JP2015114255 A) herein after “Ishimori”
Regarding claim 1 Yamasaki teaches, a semiconductor manufacturing apparatus for processing a rectangular substrate (para [0042] FIG. 4 is a plan view of a substrate position detection device according to a first embodiment.), comprising:
a first sensor pair for measuring a first length of the rectangular substrate along a first line, wherein the first sensor pair comprises a sensor constructed to detect a position of one edge of the rectangular substrate on the first line, and a sensor constructed to detect a position of the other edge of the rectangular substrate on the first line (para [0043] The sensor 60a is a sensor for detecting the side L1 which is a Y edge adjacent thereto. The sensor 60b is a sensor for detecting the side L3 which is a Y edge adjacent thereto.);
From Fig. 4 examiner views the first pair sensor (sensors 6a and 6b) measure a first length of the rectangular substrate S along first line (i.e., Y-axis) and sensor 6a detect the position of one edge L1 of the rectangular substrate on the first line and the sensor 6b on the other edge L3 on the first line.
a second sensor pair for measuring a second length of the rectangular substrate along a second line, wherein the second sensor pair comprises a sensor constructed to detect a position of one edge of the rectangular substrate on the second line, and a sensor constructed to detect a position of the other edge of the rectangular substrate on the second line (para [0043] The sensor 60c is a sensor for detecting the side L2 which is an X edge adjacent thereto. The sensor 60d is a sensor for detecting the side L4 which is an X edge adjacent thereto.); and
From Fig. 4 examiner views the second pair sensor (sensors 6c and 6d) measure a second length of the rectangular substrate S along second line (i.e., X-axis) and sensor 6c detect the position of one edge L2 of the rectangular substrate on the second line and the sensor 6d on the other edge L4 on the second line.
one or plural processors (para [0053] One or more of the controller 175 of the substrate processing apparatus 100, the control unit 29a of the substrate attaching/detaching section 290, and the control unit 27a of the transport robot 27 cooperate with each other so as to execute this control.);
Controller is viewed as processor control the operation of measurements.
wherein the processor is constructed to
calculate the first length based on the positions of the one edge and the other edge, that are on the first line and detected by the first sensor pair, of the rectangular substrate (para [0061] In addition, by measuring the movement amounts A1, A2, B1, and B2, the actual dimensions 2X1 of the substrate S can be calculated from Equation (1) or (2), and 2Y1 of the substrate S can be calculated from Equation (3) or (4).),)
Herein examiner views the first length (2Y1) which is calculated based on the positions of the one edge L1 and the other edge L3 that are on the first line Y-axis and detected by first sensor pair (60a and 60b) of the rectangular substrate.
calculate the second length based on the positions of the one edge and the other edge, that are on the second line and detected by the second sensor pair, of the rectangular substrate and
Herein examiner views the second length (2X1) which is calculated based on the positions of the one edge L2 and the other edge L4 that are on the second line X-axis and detected by second sensor pair (60c and 60d) of the rectangular substrate.
Yamasaki does not clearly teach identify the size or the shape of the rectangular substrate, based on the calculated first length and the calculated second length
Ishimori teaches identify the size or the shape of the rectangular substrate, based on the calculated first length and the calculated second length (Fig. 4 (a), page 3 line 1. In the dimension inspection apparatus, the time when the sensor 5 that acquires the inspection timing detects the leading end of the printing book 3 in the conveyance direction is set as the inspection timing, and the dimension of the line segment 8 between the sensors 6a and 6c at that timing (the dimension in the conveyance direction). ) And the dimension of the line segment 9 between the sensors 6b and 6d (the dimension in the direction perpendicular to the transport direction), and the dimension of the printing book 3 is inspected.).
In Fig. 4 a, Examiner views the dimension (i.e., size or shape- rectangle or square) of the printing book 3 is determined based on the calculated dimension of first length 8 and dimension of second length 9.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Ishimori into Yamasaki for the purpose of finding a dimension of a rectangular substrate using the length and breadth of the rectangular substrate so that an accurate substrate dimension (size or shape) can be distinguished in the manufacturing process.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Yamasaki and Ishimori teach the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus as recited in claim 1, Yamasaki teaches wherein the first sensor pair and the second sensor pair are arranged in such a manner that the first line and the second line correspond to a lateral direction and a longitudinal direction, respectively, in the rectangular substrate (From Fig. 4 examiner views the first pair sensor (sensors 6a and 6b) measure a first length of the rectangular substrate S along first line L1, L3 or Y-axis (i.e., lateral direction) and the second pair sensor (sensors 6c and 6d) measure a second length of the rectangular substrate S along second line L2, L4 (X-axis) (i.e., longitudinal direction).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Yamasaki and Ishimori teach the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus as recited in claim 1, Yamasaki teaches wherein the two sensors included in each of the sensor pairs comprise a light emitter which emits belt-shaped measuring light toward the rectangular substrate, and a light receiver which receives a part of the belt-shaped measuring light, wherein the part of the belt-shaped measuring light is light, in the belt-shaped measuring light, that was not blocked by the rectangular substrate ( para [0041] The sensors 60 are optical sensors such as, for example, photoelectric sensors and laser sensors…. In the case where the sensor 60 is of a transmissive type, when the substrate is moved to the predetermined position, a light-emitting element and a light-receiving element of the sensor are arranged on opposite sides with respect to the substrate S. In the case where the sensor 60 is a reflective type, the sensor 60 may be disposed on either side (upper side or lower side) of the substrate when the substrate is moved to the predetermined position.);
Examiner views the sensors 60 include light emitter and receiver, that emit and receiver laser light (i.e., belt shaped measuring light). The receiver receives the laser light that is not blocked or absorbed by the rectangular substrate.
and detection of each of the positions of the rectangular substrate is based on the quantity of light received by the light receiver in the each sensor. From above paragraph Examiner views the positions of the rectangular substrate is detected by the each sensor 60 based on received quantity of light (i.e., is not blocked by the substrate).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Yamasaki and Ishimori teach further the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus as recited in claim 1, comprising: Yamasaki teaches a substrate holder storage for storing plural kinds of substrate holders corresponding to rectangular substrates having different sizes and shapes, respectively, wherein each of the substrate holders is that for holding a rectangular substrate (para [0033] Incidentally, the substrate includes an angular substrate and a circular substrate. Further, the angular substrate includes a polygonal workpiece such as, for example, a polygonal (e.g., rectangular) glass substrate, liquid crystal substrate, or printed circuit board. The circular substrate includes a circular workpiece such as, for example, a semiconductor wafer or a glass substrate.
para [0034] The loading/unloading section 110 includes a plurality of cassette tables 25 and a substrate attaching/detaching device 29. The cassette table 25 is equipped with a cassette 25a containing substrates S. The substrate attaching/detaching device 29 is disposed in the substrate attaching/detaching section 290 and is configured to attach/detach the substrate S to/from the substrate holder 11.);
In Fig. 1-4, Examiner views the cassette table 25 with multiple cassette 25a as holder storage for storing plural kinds of substrate holders corresponding to rectangular substrate having different sizes and shapes, the cassette (substrate holder) is for holding rectangular substrate.
wherein the processor is further constructed to select, from the substrate holder storage, a substrate holder which fits the identified size or shape of the rectangular substrate (para [0034] The cassette table 25 is equipped with a cassette 25a containing substrates S. The substrate attaching/detaching device 29 is disposed in the substrate attaching/detaching section 290 and is configured to attach/detach the substrate S to/from the substrate holder 11. The substrate attaching/detaching device 29 includes a control device 29a. The control device 29a communicates with the controller 175 of the substrate processing apparatus 100, and controls the operation of the substrate attaching/detaching device 29. A stocker 30 configured to accommodate the substrate holder 11 is provided in the vicinity of (e.g., below) the substrate attaching/detaching device 29.).
Examiner views the controller (i.e. processor) is configured to control attach or detach the substrate from the substrate holder (i.e., select a substrate holder which fits the identified size or shape of the rectangular substrate).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Yamasaki and Ishimori teach further the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus as recited in claim 1, Ishimori teaches wherein the processor is further constructed to perform at least one of (i) an action for discontinuing or suspending processing of the rectangular substrate (page 7 line 16. In addition, when the true dimensions of the above-mentioned book bindings 23 and 43 obtained by the dimension calculating unit 31 are determined to be defective, the discharge means discharges them to the outside of the conveying means, thereby preventing the introduction of defective products and (ii) an action for communicating an alarm, in the case that the identified size, shape, or warp of the rectangular substrate is judged to be inappropriate in view of a predetermined criteria. (page 7, line 14. In this way, even when the printing book 43 is a parallelogram, even if the degree of inclination is 0 degree or αdegree, if the printing book 23 is a parallelogram, it can be determined that the dimension is defective)
Above examiner views the calculating unit 31 (processor) indicate (i.e., also a communication of alarm) the identified defect by comparing with degree of inclination (i.e., predetermined criteria) of the product/printing book (i.e., rectangular substrate), the defective product is discharged outside (i.e., discontinued) from processing of the substrate.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Ishimori into Yamasaki for the purpose of an accurate substrate dimension (size or shape) determination from the defective substrate in the manufacturing process so that the performance of the manufacturing process can be improved by discontinuing and suspending the defective product for defect cause analysis in case the defect is detected in the process.
Allowable Subject Matter
There are no prior art rejections for claims 3, 4, 5, 7, 9. However, examiner cannot comment on their allowability until the rejections under USC 101 are adequately addressed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Onishi (US 20110084903 A1) discuss detecting position of substrate using laser light.
Bussink et al (US 8514368 B2) discuss detecting orientation of substrate using light.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARAD TIMILSINA whose telephone number is (571)272-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 571-270-0349. 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.
/SHARAD TIMILSINA/Examiner, Art Unit 2863
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863