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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments received 13 April, 2026, have been fully considered. Claims 1-8 and 14-20 are pending. Claims 1, 3, 5, and 14-20 have been amended. Claims 9-13 have been canceled.
Applicant’s efforts to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been considered; while most issues have been resolved, the amendments have introduced new issues. Efforts to amend claims 16-17 to address issues were also unsatisfactory. Both claims still have an antecedent basis issue, since both recite “a substrate plating device” and depend from a base claim which already recites “a substrate plating device”. See 112(b) rejections below.
Applicant’s efforts to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 have are satisfactory, therefore all 101 rejections have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 14-15, and 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 14-15, and 18-20 all recite that the “substrate plating device” comprises “an encoder sensor” twice, which is redundant. For clarity, one of the references to “an encoder sensor” should be removed.
Claim 18 recites “…generated by a information generating part” at the end of the claim. The word ‘a’ should be replaced with ‘an’ in the above.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 14 and 16-19 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 14 and 19 end with “…generated by the information generating part,” which has no antecedent basis. For examination purposes, the above will be replaced with “…generated during the information generating process.”
Claim 16 recites “a substrate plating device” comprising “the information processing device according to claim 1.” This is confusing for multiple reasons. First, it refers to “a substrate plating device” but depends from claim 1 which already recites a “substrate plating device”; therefore, an antecedent basis issue exists. Second, since the substrate plating device of claim 16 can be interpreted as separate from that of claim 1, one could interpret the substrate plating device of claim 16 as only requiring the ability to perform the information processing device’s functions. Third, assuming that Applicant intends for the substrate plating device of claim 16 to be the same as the one referenced in claim 1, it is illogical to then recite that the substrate plating device comprises the information processing device, when claim 1 recited the information processing device as something separate from but communicably connected to the substrate plating device.
To fix these issues, the examiner believes that claim 16 should be written in independent form and suggests the following re-write:
A substrate plating device comprising an encoder sensor, a motion sensor, a rotation speed sensor, and a paddle vibration sensor, communicably connected to an information processing device comprising:
an information acquiring part configured to acquire plating process information from the substrate plating device, the plating process information including operational motion information including target paddle motion information measured by the encoder sensor and indicating an agitating motion of a target paddle corresponding to a paddle to be processed, plating solution motion information measured by the motion sensor and the rotation speed sensor and indicating a motion of supplying a plating solution to a plating tank, and carrier machine motion information measured by the encoder sensor and indicating a motion of carrying a substrate and operational-motion paddle vibration information measured by the paddle vibration sensor attached to the target paddle and indicating vibration characteristics of the target paddle when an operational motion is performed, the motion of agitating the target paddle, the motion of supplying a plating solution, and the motion of carrying a substrate being operational motions which are performed by the substrate plating device including one or more plating tanks storing a plating solution used for plating of a substrate, one or more paddles installed in the one or more plating tanks and agitating the plating solution, and one or more carrier machines carrying the substrate to the one or more plating tanks;
an information generating part configured to generate agitating-motion paddle vibration information in response to the plating process information by inputting the plating process information including the plating solution motion information measured by the motion sensor and the rotation speed sensor and the carrier machine motion information measured by the encoder sensor and the operational-motion paddle vibration information measured by the paddle vibration sensor to a learning model which is configured to operate as a filter to remove vibration noise caused by the operational motions of the plating solution and the carrier machine and has learned a correlation between the plating process information and the agitating-motion paddle vibration information indicating vibration characteristics of the target paddle of the substrate plating device when only the agitating motion indicated by the target paddle motion information of the operational motion information included in the plating process information has been performed using machine learning; and
an abnormality determining part configured to determine occurrence of an abnormality in the target paddle based on the agitating-motion paddle vibration information generated by the information generating part.
For examination purposes, claim 16 will be interpreted as reciting a device (separate from the substrate plating device of claim 1) which comprises the information processing device according to claim 1.
Claim 17 is confusing for essentially the same reasons as claim 16, and the examiner suggests the following re-write:
A substrate plating device comprising an encoder sensor, a motion sensor, a rotation speed sensor, and a paddle vibration sensor, communicably connected to a machine learning device comprising:
a training data storage part configured to store a plurality of sets of training data including plating process information acquired from the substrate plating device, the plating process information including operational motion information including target paddle motion information measured by the encoder sensor and indicating an agitating motion of a target paddle corresponding to a paddle to be processed, plating solution motion information measured by the motion sensor and the rotation speed sensor and indicating a motion of supplying a plating solution to a plating tank, and carrier machine motion information measured by the encoder sensor and indicating a motion of carrying a substrate and operational-motion paddle vibration information measured by the paddle vibration sensor attached to the target paddle and indicating vibration characteristics of the target paddle when an operational motion is performed and agitating-motion paddle vibration information indicating vibration characteristics of the target paddle of the substrate plating device when only the agitating motion indicated by the target paddle motion information of the operational motion information included in the plating process information has been performed, the motion of agitating the target paddle, the motion of supplying a plating solution, and the motion of carrying a substrate being operational motions which are performed by the substrate plating device including one or more plating tanks storing a plating solution used for plating of a substrate, one or more paddles installed in the one or more plating tanks and agitating the plating solution, and one or more carrier machines carrying the substrate to the one or more plating tanks;
a machine learning part configured to cause a learning model to learn a correlation between the plating process information and the agitating-motion paddle vibration information through machine learning by inputting the plurality of sets of training data to the learning model, wherein the learning model is configured to receive the plurality of sets of training data comprising the plating process information including the plating solution motion information measured by the motion sensor and the rotation speed sensor and the carrier machine motion information measured by the encoder sensor and the operational-motion paddle vibration information measured by the paddle vibration sensor, and the learning model is configured to operate as a filter to remove vibration noise caused by the operational motions of the plating solution and the carrier machine to generate agitating-motion paddle vibration information; and
a trained model storage part configured to store the learning model which has been caused to learn the correlation by the machine learning part.
For examination purposes, claim 17 will be interpreted as reciting a device (separate from the substrate plating device of claim 15) which comprises the machine learning device according to claim 15.
Claim 18 recites “an abnormality determining part configured to determine…” which is confusing because claim 18 is a method claim. It seems Applicant has copied language from claim 1. For examination purposes the above will be replaced with “an abnormality determining step of determining…”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8, 15, and 20 are allowed.
Regarding claim 1, Fujikata in view of Kajuluri teach most of the limitations of the pre-amended claim 1 as argued in the previous Office action filed 26 January, 2026. However, the examiner finds that it would not have been obvious to acquire plating solution motion information and carrier machine motion information, then to configure the learning model to accept this information and to remove vibration noise caused by the operational motions of the plating solution and the carrier machine in order to the generate agitating-motion paddle vibration information. While removing noise from signals to isolate a signal of interest is well-known as a general method, the amended claim recites collecting particular types of motion data from specific sources in the apparatus and filtering these to isolate agitating-motion paddle vibration information; this would not have been rendered obvious by the prior art of record. For at least these reasons, claim 1 is distinguishable over the prior art of record.
Regarding claims 2-8, these claims depend from claim 1 and are therefore also distinguishable over the prior art of record.
Regarding claims 15 and 20, these claims recite the same limitations for which claim 1 is distinguishable over the prior art of record, therefore they are also distinguishable over the prior art of record.
Claims 14, 16 and 17-19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claims 14 and 18-19, these claims recite the same limitations for which claim 1 is distinguishable over the prior art of record, therefore they are also distinguishable over the prior art of record.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, these claims depend from claims 1 and 15, therefore they are also distinguishable over the prior art of record.
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 ETHAN WESLEY EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)272-0266. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am-5pm.
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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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.
ETHAN WESLEY EDWARDS
Examiner
Art Unit 2857
/E.W.E./ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ANDREW SCHECHTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights