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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the edge ring of claim 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to because.
The first, second and third transfer chambers are referenced as - 2242a, 2242b, and 2242c – in
the drawings, and – 2342a, 2342b, 2342c – in the specification.
Reference 2246b is shown in drawings but is not mentioned in specification
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis
for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 4, 9, and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wakabayashi (US PUB 20130302115 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Wakabayashi teaches, a substrate processing apparatus comprising:
a plurality of process chambers for processing a substrate (fig. 1 – (PM 1- 4), [0001], [0002]);
a first transfer robot configured to transfer the substrate and arranged in a first transfer chamber (fig. 1 – (30), [0037]);
a second transfer robot configured to transfer the substrate and arranged apart from the first transfer robot in a second transfer chamber (fig. 1 – (32), [0038]);
and a share module arranged adjacent to the first transfer chamber and the second transfer chamber (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2))
and configured to receive the substrate from any one of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2) [0094] – describes the second transfer robot delivering a substrate to the share module),
wherein an inside of each of the first transfer chamber and the second transfer chamber is in a vacuum state ([0001], [0002], describes vacuum state transfer chambers)
and the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot each transfer the substrate in a vacuum state ([0001], [0002], [0037], [0038] describes robots transferring in vacuum state).
PNG
media_image1.png
650
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the first transfer robot transfers the substrate to a first process chamber in which a first process is performed, among the plurality of process chambers (fig. 2 – (PM1/2)),
the second transfer robot transfers the substrate to a second process chamber in which a second process is performed, among the plurality of process chambers (fig. 3 – (PM3/4)),
and the first process is different from the second process ([0055], states that the chambers perform different processes).
Regarding Claim 3, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 2,
wherein, when the second transfer robot is incapable of transferring the substrate, the first transfer robot transfers the substrate to any one of the first process chamber and the second process chamber ([0055]- vacuum conveyance systems are independent, if the second transfer robot is nonfunctional, the first transfer robot can still transfer wafer to a process chamber).
Regarding Claim 4, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot are arranged in at least one of a parallel structure in which the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot overlap each other in a vertical direction (fig 2 – (30/32), shows overlap in vertical direction)
and a serial structure in which the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot overlap each other in a horizontal direction. (fig 2 – (30/32), shows overlap in horizontal direction)
Regarding claim 9, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
wherein an inside of the share module remains in a vacuum state (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2), shown to still be within vacuum conveyance region),
and the share module keeps the substrate for a preset time period (share module has set time for vertical movement and delivery).
Regarding claim 11, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot are arranged at the same vertical level (fig. 2 – (30/32), robots are shown at same vertical level),
and a transfer direction of the first transfer robot is parallel with a transfer direction of the second transfer robot (fig. 1 – shows transfer directions to PM1/2 and PM3/4 being parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 12, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the share module transfers the substrate in a vertical direction (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2), transfer substrates vertically),
and the share module delivers the substrate to any one of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2) [0076] – describes the share module delivering substrate to second transfer robot).
Regarding claim 13, Wakabayashi teaches, A substrate processing apparatus comprising:
a load port for storing a substrate (fig.1 – (LP1-4), [0057]);
a load lock module configured to substitute an atmosphere of the substrate (fig.1 – (LML1/2 and LMU1/2), [0058], describes 4 load lock modules within an atmospheric system;
an atmosphere transfer robot (ATR) configured to transfer the substrate between the load port and the load lock module (fig 1 – (64), [0059] – describes an atmospheric robot that accesses load lock modules and load port);
a plurality of process chambers for processing the substrate (fig.1 – (PM1-4));
a plurality of transfer robots configured to transfer the substrate to any one of the plurality of process chambers (fig. 1 – (30/32/HR1/HR2));
and a share module arranged adjacent to a transfer chamber in which the plurality of transfer robots are disposed (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2)),
wherein the load lock module is arranged between the ATR and the transfer robots and substitutes the atmosphere of the substrate with a normal pressure atmosphere or a vacuum atmosphere (fig.1 – (16), shows load lock modules between ATR and transfer robots),
the plurality of transfer robots includes an upper transfer robot and a lower transfer robot which is arranged under the upper transfer robot in a vertical direction (fig 2 – (30,32, HR1/HR2), [0037 – 0039], describes plurality of transfer robots and shows them on separate levels)
and the plurality of transfer robots transfer the substrate in a vacuum state (fig.2 – (10), robots located inside vacuum chamber).
Regarding claim 16, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 13,
wherein the upper transfer robot and the lower transfer robot transfer the substrate from the share module to the load lock module ([0083], [0090] – describes wafer transfer from transfer robot to share module to load lock module).
Regarding claim 17, Wakabayashi teaches, a substrate processing method comprising:
providing a substrate to a cassette ([0065] – describes transfer of substrates within the cassettes);
transferring the substrate from the cassette to a load lock module ([0070] – Lines 3 and 4 describe transfer of wafer from cassette to load lock module),
and substituting a normal pressure atmosphere of the substrate with a vacuum atmosphere ([0070] – lines 6/7 describe vacuum evacuation);
transferring the substrate to a process chamber and performing a semiconductor process ([0077] – substrate is transferred from load lock module to process module);
transferring the substrate to the load lock module after the semiconductor process ([0087] – transfer from process module to load lock module)
and substituting the vacuum atmosphere of the substrate with the normal pressure atmosphere ([0088] –load lock module is opened to atmosphere);
and taking the substrate out to the cassette ([0089] – substrate is moved to cassette).
Regarding claim 18, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing method of claim 17,
wherein the transferring of the substrate to the process chamber is performed by a plurality of transfer robots arranged apart from each other ([0080] and [0081] describe the use of two vacuum transfer robots 30/32).
Regarding claim 19, the substrate processing method of claim 18,
wherein the plurality of transfer robots, include an upper transfer robot and a lower transfer robot arranged under the upper transfer robot in a vertical direction (fig.2 – (30/32/HR1/HR2) – are plurality of transfer robots arranged on different vertical levels)
Regarding claim 20, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing method of claim 19,
wherein the upper transfer robot and the lower transfer robot transfer different substrates from each other ([0074] – HR1 transfers wafer 1, [0084] – transfers wafer 6).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi (US PUB 20130302115 A1) in view of Toyomaki (US PUB 20200321227 A1)
Regarding Claim 5, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 4,
Wherein the share module is arranged to ascend of descend (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2), shown to move vertically).
Wakabayashi fails to teach, the shared module being placed between the first transfer chamber and the second transfer chamber,
and the share module allowing the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot to deliver the substrate to the other one of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot.
However, Toyomaki teaches,
a substrate processing apparatus, wherein the share module is placed between the first and second transfer chamber (fig. 2 – (40/41)),
and the share module being arranged to allow any one of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot to deliver the substrate to the other one of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot (fig. 2 – (42a/42b), shows access to both transfer robots)
Wakabayashi and Toyomaki are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of substrate processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wakabayashi to incorporate the share module and buffer chamber taught by Toyomaki. Doing so would increase system redundancy by allowing both transfer robots to access the share module while maintaining separate vacuum chambers.
PNG
media_image2.png
340
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi (US PUB 20130302115 A1)
Regarding claim 6, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
further comprising a third transfer robot configured to transfer the substrate and arranged in a third transfer chamber (fig. 2 – (HR1/HR2 and TE3)),
wherein the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot are arranged at the same vertical level (fig. 2 – (30/32), both transfer robots shown on same level)
Wakabayashi in fig. 2 does not explicitly teach,
that the third transfer robot is arranged at a level that is lower than the vertical level of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot.
However, Wakabayashi in paragraph [0118] explicitly states that there are alternate embodiments where different arrangements for the vacuum process chambers are possible, and wherein the third transfer robot is arranged at a level that is lower than the vertical level of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot, because the vacuum process chambers and their associated transfer robots are flipped upside down – wherein TE1 and TE2 are now above TE3.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Wakabayashi embodiment of fig. 2 so that the third transfer robot is arranged at a level that is lower than the vertical level of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot, because conveyance speed can be increased for the third transfer robot [0117], and since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (See MPEP 2144.04). In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 7, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 6,
wherein the third transfer robot delivers the substrate to any one of the first transfer robot and the second transfer robot (fig.2 – (HR1/HR2), delivers substrate to second transfer robot).
Regarding claim 8, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 6,
wherein the share module includes a first connection and a second connection which move a substrate in the share module (fig. 5 – (50/48)).
and the first connection and the second connection are ascended or descended by a motor (fig. 5 – (52/50/48), show VR1 and VR2 ascending and descending via motor).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi (US PUB 20130302115 A1) in view of Lee (US PUB 20200013657 A1)
Regarding claim 10, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 1,
Wakabayashi fails to teach, wherein the share module keeps an edge ring which needs to be replaced in the process chambers in a vacuum state.
However, Lee teaches the replacement and removal of edge rings from substrate processing modules occurring in a vacuum state.
Wakabayashi and Lee are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of substrate processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wakabayashi’s share module and processing modules to include the edge ring transferring apparatus and method taught by Lee. Doing so would increase yield and decrease processing time by allowing the share module to keep an edge ring and replace it in the process chamber without breaking the vacuum state of the process chamber.
Claims 14 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi (US PUB 20130302115 A1) in view of Huang (US PUB 20230069085 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Wakabayashi teaches,
the substrate processing apparatus of claim 13, wherein the share module receives from any one of the pluralities of transfer robots a substrate processed in the process chambers (fig. 2 – (VR1/VR2) [0076] describes share module receiving substrate from second transfer robot.
Wakabayashi fails to explicitly teach, wherein the share module cools the substrate.
However, Huang teaches a cooling mechanism for a substrate processing station (fig 3B – (306/30/312/316), [0026]).
Wakabayashi and Huang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of substrate processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wakabayashi to incorporate the cooling mechanism taught by Huang. Doing so would reduce substrate thermal stress, decrease processing time and facilitate post-processing by stabilizing the substrate after high temperature treatments.
Regarding claim 15, Wakabayashi teaches, the substrate processing apparatus of claim 14,
wherein the share module further includes a first connection and a second connection which move a substrate in the share module (fig. 5 – (50/48)),
the first connection is arranged on the substrate (fig. 5 – (48)),
the second connection is arranged under the substrate (fig. 5 – (50)),
and the share module is configured to ascend or descend by using the first connection and the second connection (fig. 5 – (52) – [0043] - shows driving unit that causes vertical movement).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kobayashi (US PUB 20140003891 A1) - describes multi-level substrate processing apparatus, does not disclose a third transfer robot.
Ishida (US PUB 20100129182 A1) – describes multi-level substrate treatment with various substrate treatment units.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN SALVADOR MOSCOSO whose telephone number is (571)272-8604. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/JUAN S MOSCOSO/Examiner, Art Unit 3652