DETAILED ACTION
This application includes independent claims 1 and 12 and dependent claims 2-11, 13, and 14.
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 .
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 8 and 9 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 8 and 9 recite “a second target” without reciting a first target. How many targets do these claims require?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oh Sae (KR 102598788 B1, reference paragraphs are directed to English translation attached to this Office Action).
Regarding independent claim 1, Oh Sae discloses a method of calibrating a substrate transfer apparatus comprising: fixing the substrate transfer apparatus (200, see at least para. 049); measuring an operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 055-067); generating eigendata relating to the operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 055-067); and storing the eigendata in the substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 055-067).
Regarding independent claim 12, Oh Sae discloses a substrate transfer apparatus comprising: a base (see Fig. 1, generally at 200); an elevator (see Fig. 1 generally at 200 and see at least paras. 060-061) connected to the base, which extends and retracts; and an end effector (210) comprising a target that reflects light (see at least para. 045) and a memory (300), and is lifted and lowered with extension and retraction of the elevator (see at least paras. 060-061), wherein the memory stores eigendata related to fixing of the substrate transfer apparatus at a time of testing and eigendata related to an operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 055-067).
Regarding dependent claims 2-8 and 10-14, Oh Sae discloses reading the stored eigendata relating to the operation of the substrate transfer apparatus (see at least para. 0068); and performing calibration based on the eigendata related to the operation of the substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 067-081). Oh Sae discloses generating eigendata relating to eigendata for fixing of the substrate transfer apparatus see at least paras. 055-067); and storing the eigendata in the substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 055-067). Oh Sae discloses reading the stored eigendata relating to the operation of the substrate transfer apparatus (see at last para. 068); and performing calibration based on eigendata related to the operation of the substrate transfer apparatus in a state where the substrate transfer apparatus is fixed based on the eigendata (see at least paras. 068-081). The eigendata related to the fixing of the substrate transfer apparatus includes data related to a position of a pin (211a) used when fixing the substrate transfer apparatus. The substrate transfer apparatus comprises: an elevator (see Fig. 1 generally at 200 and see at least paras. 060-061); and an end effector (210) comprising a first target that reflects light (see at least para. 045), the end effector is lifted and lowered with lifting and lowering of the elevator, wherein the eigendata related to the operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus comprises data related to three-dimensional position coordinates of the first target measured by the lifted and lowered of the end effector (see at least para. 061). The substrate transfer apparatus comprises: a link (see Fig. 1); and an end effector (210) comprising a second target that reflects light (see at least para. 045), the end effector is rotated with rotation of the link, wherein the eigendata related to the operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus comprises data related to three-dimensional position coordinates of the second target measured by the rotation of the end effector (see at least para. 061). Reading the stored eigendata relating to the operation of the substrate transfer apparatus, the eigendata relating to the operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus comprises a correction value calculated based on the measured operation of the substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 057-067), and the substrate transfer apparatus operates based on the correction value (see at least paras. 068-079). The correction value is calculated based on an actual measurement value of the measured operation of the substrate transfer apparatus and a theoretical value in design of the substrate transfer apparatus (see at least paras. 057-067). Oh Sae discloses that the eigendata related to the fixing of the substrate transfer apparatus includes data related to a position of a pin (211a) used when the substrate transfer apparatus is fixed; and the eigendata related to the operation of the fixed substrate transfer apparatus comprises data related to three-dimensional position coordinates of a measured target (see at least paras. 060-061).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jung (KR 102342264) discloses resetting a substrate transfer apparatus before calibrating it. Kim et al. (US 2023/0163009) discloses acquiring teaching data for a substrate transfer apparatus using a reference substrate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK HEWEY MACKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6916. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9-5.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/PATRICK H MACKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights