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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 11-20, in the reply filed on 08/18/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected system, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/18/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: claims 1-10 are indicated as “(original)" claims but should be indicated as “(canceled)” claims. Appropriate correction is required. The examiner would like to note that the claims submitted have not been written with the proper status identifiers. However, the examiner realizes claims 1-10 are canceled due to response of the electron/restriction of 08/18/2026. In the future, Applicant is requested to use the proper status identifiers when submitting amendments to avoid potential Notice of non-compliant letters.
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.
Claim 20 is 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.
Claim 20 recites “the reaction mixture”. However, there is positive recitation of a reaction mixture in claims 19 or 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim as written is indefinite and unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21 depends on claim 20; therefore, the claims are also indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 11, 13, 17, 19-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al. (WO 2011/123339 A1).
Claims 11, 13 and 17, Luo et al. teach a method of using a bonding structure (anti-slip component; see figures, examples and [0032-0034]) comprising attaching the component to a wafer support (substrate). Luo et al. teach a fluoroelastomer compositions (polymeric composition) which may be used in semiconductor manufacturing processes (see abstract, claims, examples and [0003]), wherein the composition comprises a fluoroelastomer doped [0022-0024] with a transition metal ceramic [0026 and 0030-0031] and further comprises a silicon oxide filler [0025 and 0029]. Luo et al. teach the transition metal ceramic is titanium carbide or yttrium oxide (yttria; [0026 and 0031]).
Although Luo et al. do not explicitly recite the bonding structure as anti-slip component as instantly claimed, the bonding structure of Luo et al. and the anti-slip component of the instant claims have the same chemical composition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to consider the bonding structure of Luo et al. to be anti-slip, absent any evidence in the contrary,
Claims 19-20 and 23, Luo et al. teach a method for forming a bonding structure (anti-slip component; see figures, examples and [0032-0034]) comprising placing a polymeric composition into a mold and molding [0078-0080] the polymer composition to form the component (examples and claims). Luo et al. teach a fluoroelastomer compositions (polymeric composition) which may be used in semiconductor manufacturing processes (see abstract, claims, examples and [0003]), wherein the composition comprises a fluoroelastomer doped [0022-0024] with a transition metal ceramic [0026 and 0030-0031] and further comprises a silicon oxide filler [0025 and 0029]. Luo et al. teach the transition metal ceramic is titanium carbide or yttrium oxide (yttria; [0026 and 0031]).
Although Luo et al. do not explicitly recite the bonding structure as anti-slip component as instantly claimed, the bonding structure of Luo et al. and the anti-slip component of the instant claims have the same chemical composition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to consider the bonding structure of Luo et al. to be anti-slip, absent any evidence in the contrary,
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 27-30 are allowed. The closest prior art, Christian et al. (US 2024/0368444 A1) fails to explicitly disclose a method for using an anti-slip component in an automated semiconductor wafer handling system, comprising: attaching the anti-slip component to an end effector portion of a robotic arm, wherein the anti-slip comment is formed from a polymeric composition comprising a fluoroelastomer doped with a transition metal ceramic as instantly claimed.
Claims 12, 14-16, 18, 22 and 24-26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANCEITY N ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:00 am-6:00 pm; IFP; PHP).
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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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.
/CHANCEITY N ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights