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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In para 0037, “the acceleration versus time graph illustrated in Fig. 6” seems to a typo since Fig. 6 does not show acceleration versus time graph.
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 5 and 12 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.
Regarding claims 5 and 12, it is not clear what is being claimed. What does it mean for the first sub-segment and the second sub-segment to have half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value as the corresponding one or more segments? Does it mean each of the first sub-segment and the second sub-segment has half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value, or does it mean the first and the second sub-segments together, have half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value? Further, what does it mean for a segment of a sub-segment to have half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value? What is half of a jerk time? Is it defined in the specification?
In order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that during the first sub-segment or the second sub-segment, it takes a half of a jerk time, where a jerk time is the time the jerk slopes up and the time the jerk is constant and the time the jerk slopes down. Also, during the first sub-segment or the second sub-segment, it takes half of the time for acceleration to reach maximum value.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 4-9, 11-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki (2018/0356737) in view of Fang et al. (Fang) (“Smooth and time-optimal S-curve trajectory planning for automated robots and machines”).
Regarding claim 1, Shibazaki discloses a system (Fig. 8, 9, para 0029, 0063) comprising: a controller (60, Fig. 8, 9, para 0062, 0063) configured to modify a motion profile for a stage of a semiconductor tool (26, Fig. 1) , the controller comprising one or more processors configured to execute program instructions stored in memory (para 0062, 0065, 0086, controller 60 and processor 74 to execute program, para 0076, 0094, discloses memory to store instruction), wherein the program instructions are configured to cause the one or more processors to: receive at least a target position for the stage; generate the motion profile for transitioning the stage to the target position (para 0065, 0084-0088, “to the instruction from main controller 60, target value output section 74 creates a position command profile with respect to stage 26, and generates a position command per unit time in the profile”). However, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein the motion profile includes an acceleration profile having one or more segments that vary as a function of time, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to modify the one or more segments of the acceleration profile by: determining a midpoint for each of the one or more segments of the acceleration profile; determining a reference line for each of the one or more segments, the reference line configured to bisect a corresponding segment and have a slope greater than the slope of the corresponding segment; dividing each of the one or more segments into at least a first sub-segment and a second sub-segment; defining the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line; defining the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation; and actuating the stage to at least the target position in response to the generated motion profile.
Fang discloses wherein the motion profile includes an acceleration profile having one or more segments that vary as a function of time (Fig. 1 (a) and 1(b)). Fang also discloses in section 2.1.1., the trapezoidal acceleration profile (Fig. 1(a)) with the rectangular-shaped jerk weakens excessive stress on the actuator but the jumps in jerk (rectangular-shaped jerk in Fig. 1(a)) and nonzero instantaneous jerks at the target points will lead to unexpected vibrations with extra settling time, which deteriorates positioning accuracy. Fang discloses in section 2.1.2 removing detrimental jerk effect using the fourth order S-curve model, where each acceleration ramp splits into three separate phases with respect to the third order profile and modifying the acceleration profile of Fig. 1(a) by achieving a jerk curve growing and descending linearly with prespecified slopes in lieu of step jumps (Fig. 1(b)). Although not stated explicitly, this modification results in the same changes to the acceleration profile as determining a midpoint for each of the one or more segments of the acceleration profile; determining a reference line for each of the one or more segments, the reference line configured to bisect a corresponding segment and have a slope greater than the slope of the corresponding segment; dividing each of the one or more segments into at least a first sub-segment and a second sub-segment; defining the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line; defining the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation (see Fig. 1(a) and 1(b)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the fourth order S-curve model as taught by Fang to the invention of Shibazaki to provide a modified acceleration profile which defines the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line, which bisects a segment and has a slope greater than the slope of the segment; and defines the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation and actuate the stage to at least the target position in response to the generated motion profile in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Regarding claim 8, Shibazaki discloses a semiconductor characterization system (Fig. 1, para 0025), comprising: a stage (26, para 0028) of a semiconductor tool (100, para 0025); a controller (60, Fig. 8, 9, para 0062, 0063) configured to modify a motion profile for a stage of a semiconductor tool (26, Fig. 1) , the controller comprising one or more processors configured to execute program instructions stored in memory (para 0062, 0065, 0086, controller 60 and processor 74 to execute program, para 0076, 0094, discloses memory to store instruction), wherein the program instructions are configured to cause the one or more processors to: receive at least a target position for the stage; generate the motion profile for transitioning the stage to the target position (para 0065, 0084-0088, “to the instruction from main controller 60, target value output section 74 creates a position command profile with respect to stage 26, and generates a position command per unit time in the profile”). However, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein the motion profile includes an acceleration profile having one or more segments that vary as a function of time, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to modify the one or more segments of the acceleration profile by: determining a midpoint for each of the one or more segments of the acceleration profile; determining a reference line for each of the one or more segments, the reference line configured to bisect a corresponding segment and have a slope greater than the slope of the corresponding segment; dividing each of the one or more segments into at least a first sub-segment and a second sub-segment; defining the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line; defining the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation; and actuating the stage to at least the target position in response to the generated motion profile.
Fang discloses wherein the motion profile includes an acceleration profile having one or more segments that vary as a function of time (Fig. 1 (a) and 1(b)). Fang also discloses in section 2.1.1., the trapezoidal acceleration profile (Fig. 1(a)) with the rectangular-shaped jerk weakens excessive stress on the actuator but the jumps in jerk (rectangular-shaped jerk in Fig. 1(a)) and nonzero instantaneous jerks at the target points will lead to unexpected vibrations with extra settling time, which deteriorates positioning accuracy. Fang discloses in section 2.1.2 removing detrimental jerk effect using the fourth order S-curve model, where each acceleration ramp splits into three separate phases with respect to the third order profile and modifFangng the acceleration profile of Fig. 1(a) by achieve a jerk curve growing and descending linearly with prespecified slopes in lieu of step jumps (Fig. 1(b)). Although not stated explicitly, this modification results in the same changes to the acceleration profile as determining a midpoint for each of the one or more segments of the acceleration profile; determining a reference line for each of the one or more segments, the reference line configured to bisect a corresponding segment and have a slope greater than the slope of the corresponding segment; dividing each of the one or more segments into at least a first sub-segment and a second sub-segment; defining the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line; defining the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation (see Fig. 1(a) and 1(b)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the fourth order S-curve model as taught by Fang to the invention of Shibazaki to provide a modified acceleration profile which defines the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line, which bisects a segment and has a slope greater than the slope of the segment; and defines the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation and actuate the stage to at least the target position in response to the generated motion profile in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Regarding claim 15, Shibazaki discloses a method for generating a motion profile, comprising: receiving at least a target position for a stage of a semiconductor tool; generating a motion profile for transitioning the stage to the target position, wherein the motion profile includes an acceleration profile having one or more segments that vary as a function of time (para 0065, 0084-0088, “to the instruction from main controller 60, target value output section 74 creates a position command profile with respect to stage 26, and generates a position command per unit time in the profile”). However, Shibazaki does not disclose modifFangng, via one or more processors, the one or more segments of the acceleration profile by: determining a midpoint for each of the one or more segments of the acceleration profile; determining a reference line for each of the one or more segments, the reference line configured to bisect a corresponding segment and have a slope greater than the slope of the corresponding segment; dividing each of the one or more segments into at least a first sub-segment and a second sub-segment; defining the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line; defining the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation; and actuating the stage to at least the target position in response to the generated motion profile.
Fang discloses wherein the motion profile includes an acceleration profile having one or more segments that vary as a function of time (Fig. 1 (a) and 1(b)). Fang also discloses in section 2.1.1., the trapezoidal acceleration profile (Fig. 1(a)) with the rectangular-shaped jerk weakens excessive stress on the actuator but the jumps in jerk (rectangular-shaped jerk in Fig. 1(a)) and nonzero instantaneous jerks at the target points will lead to unexpected vibrations with extra settling time, which deteriorates positioning accuracy. Fang discloses in section 2.1.2 removing detrimental jerk effect using the fourth order S-curve model, where each acceleration ramp splits into three separate phases with respect to the third order profile and modifFangng the acceleration profile of Fig. 1(a) by achieve a jerk curve growing and descending linearly with prespecified slopes in lieu of step jumps (Fig. 1(b)). Although not stated explicitly, this modification results in the same changes to the acceleration profile as determining a midpoint for each of the one or more segments of the acceleration profile; determining a reference line for each of the one or more segments, the reference line configured to bisect a corresponding segment and have a slope greater than the slope of the corresponding segment; dividing each of the one or more segments into at least a first sub-segment and a second sub-segment; defining the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line; defining the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation (see Fig. 1(a) and 1(b)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the fourth order S-curve model as taught by Fang to the invention of Shibazaki to provide a modified acceleration profile which defines the first sub-segment as a function such that a starting point is tangential to a first axis and an ending point is tangential to the reference line, which bisects a segment and has a slope greater than the slope of the segment; and defines the second sub-segment by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint by a selected angle of rotation and actuate the stage to at least the target position in response to the generated motion profile in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate the motion profile as a function of at least one defined constraint, wherein the at least one defined constraint includes at least one of a sample time, a velocity limit, an acceleration limit, a jerk limit, or a deceleration limit. Fang discloses that the generated motion profile as a function of defined constraint of a sample time and a jerk limit (Fig. 1, pg. 129-130, “The time optimality and jerk limitation are simultaneously taken into account to achieve a rapid and precise synchronized motion compliant with prescribed constraints”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to generate the motion profile as a function of at least one defined constraint, wherein the at least one defined constraint includes at least one of a sample time, a velocity limit, an acceleration limit, a jerk limit, or a deceleration limit as taught by Fang for the reasons stated above.
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein each sub-segment of the acceleration profile includes a smooth acceleration curve. Fang discloses wherein each sub-segment of the acceleration profile includes a smooth acceleration curve including the first sub-segment and the second sub-segment (Fig. 1(b)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide wherein each sub-segment of the acceleration profile includes a smooth acceleration curve to the invention of Shibazaki in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein the first sub-segment and the second sub-segment have half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value as the corresponding one or more segments. Fang shows wherein the first sub-segment and the second sub-segment have half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value as the corresponding one or more segments in Fig. 1(b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide wherein the first sub-segment and the second sub-segment have half of a jerk time and half of an acceleration maximum value as the corresponding one or more segments to the invention of Shibazaki in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 19, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein the second sub-segment is defined by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint for 180 degrees. Fang discloses wherein the second sub-segment is defined by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint for 180 degrees in Fig. 1(b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide wherein the second sub-segment is defined by rotating the first sub-segment about the midpoint for 180 degrees to the invention of Shibazaki in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, Shibazaki does not disclose wherein one or more higher-order segments are introduced into the acceleration profile, the one or more higher-order segments including at least one of a snap, crackle, or pop. Fang discloses wherein one or more higher-order segments are introduced into the acceleration profile, the one or more higher-order segments including at least one of a snap, crackle, or pop (pg. 130, “the bound value on snap (time derivative of jerk) can be defined to achieve a jerk curve growing and descending linearly with prespecified slopes in lieu of step jumps”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide wherein one or more higher-order segments are introduced into the acceleration profile, the one or more higher-order segments including at least one of a snap, crackle, or pop to the invention of Shibazaki in order to remove the detrimental jerk effect as taught by Fang.
Claim(s) 3, 10 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki in view of Fang et al. (Fang) as applied to claims 2, 9 and 16 above, and further in view of Rogers (10,580,681).
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17, the further difference between the claimed invention and the modified Shibazaki is wherein the controller includes an interface device configured to receive an input specifFangng the at least one defined constraint. Rogers discloses and acceleration control unit (22, 104) including an interface device (116, 36) configured to receive an input specifFangng the at least one defined constraint to modify acceleration (col. 5, lines 17-19). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an interface device with an input device to define the constraint to modify acceleration for fine tuning the modification and to provide flexibility.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Aldridge et al. (2018/0101166) disclose in para 0050 smoothing out the corners of the trapezoidal profile using the S-curve and reducing jerk.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER B KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2120. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Toan Ton can be reached at (571) 272-2303. 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.
/PETER B KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 March 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights