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 with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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) 1, 2, 6, 11, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya).
Regarding clam 1, Moura teaches:
A system (at least as in paragraph 0030, “a semiconductor tool station 11090”) comprising:
a chamber (at least as in paragraph 0035, “The vacuum back end 11020 generally includes a transport chamber 11025, one or more processing station(s) or module(s) 11030 and any suitable transfer robot or apparatus 11014”);
a robot within the chamber, the robot comprising a plurality of links (at least as in paragraph 0035, “The transfer robot 11014 will be described below and may be located within the transport chamber 11025 to transport substrates between the load lock 11010 and the various processing stations 11030”; at least as in paragraph 0050, “the transport apparatus 2300 is illustrated with the arm 2300A mounted inside the vacuum chamber 599”; at least as in paragraph 0040, “Generally the transport apparatus 2300 includes the SCARA arm 2300A (generally referred to as arm 2300A) which has an upper arm 23201, a forearm 23202, a substrate holder or end effector 23203 (having a substrate holding station thereon), and drive section 23204”);
a vertically oriented sensor within the chamber, the vertically oriented sensor to detect a presence of one or more of the plurality of links (at least as in paragraph 0050, “The transport apparatus 2300 includes an imaging system 600 with at least one imaging sensor 601 mounted through the mounting interface 510 in a predetermined location with respect to the vacuum chamber 599 and disposed so as to image at least part of the arm 2300A”); and
a controller (at least as in paragraph 0030, “The components of each of the front end 11000, load lock 11010 and back end 11020 may be connected to a controller 11091 which may be part of any suitable control architecture”) to:
for each link of the plurality of links (at least as in paragraph 0056, “The controller 11091 may identify/detect this change in shape or position of the target 700-702 and determine the thermal expansion/contraction of the arm links for modifying controlled movement of the arm 2300A for picking and placing substrates. The measurements of one or more target locations may be taken either simultaneously or at different times…the measurements can be taken at different arm positions to accommodate the mechanism and/or motion constraints of the arm 2300A (compare FIGS. 8A and 8C where the arm 2300A is extended to measure target 701 located at the wrist bearing location)”; see also 0058-0061, wherein each target or arm link is measured and its variance is calculated), perform the following:
cause the robot to move the link through a field of view of the vertically oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0051, “The controller 11091 is communicably connected to the imaging system 600 (e.g., through suitable wired and/or wireless connections) and is configured to image, with the imaging sensor 601, at least part of the arm 2300A (or at least part of a set of one or more indicia provided on the arm 2300A as described herein) moving to or in a predetermined repeatable position/pose (e.g., the bot top center pose or other predetermined pose) defined by the at least one independent drive axis, or in other aspects, to image, with the imaging sensor 601, the at least part of the robot arm 2300A (or at least part of a set of one or more indicia on the arm as described herein) moving along a path defined by the at least one independent drive axis to or in the predetermined location”); and
automatically calibrate the robot within the chamber based on the zero horizontal position determined for each of the plurality of links (at least as in paragraph 0051, “The controller is configured to calculate a positional variance of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A, or a substrate holding station of the end effector 23203 of the multi-link robot arm 2300A, from comparison of the first or subsequent image with a calibration image of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A, or at least part of the set of one or more indicia 701-702 (as described herein) on the multi-link robot arm 2300A, and from the positional variance determine a motion compensation factor changing the extended position of the robot arm 2300A, wherein each imaging sensor 601-603 effecting capture of the first or subsequent image is disposed inside the perimeter of the mounting interface 510… The positional variance calculated by the controller from the comparison of the first or subsequent image and calibration image of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A include a positional variance component in the radial direction and another variance component in a direction angled at a non-zero crossing angle with the radial direction, and the motion compensation factor changes the extended position of the robot arm 2300A in at least one of the radial direction and in the angled direction”; at least as in paragraph 0052, “Registry of the arm 2300A may occur at installation of the arm 2300A to the at least one independent drive axis with the at least one drive axis in a predetermined orientation such that the encoder(s) 570-572 (see also FIG. 5) of the at least one drive axis are at a home or zeroed position (e.g., the home or zeroed position being the position from which a degree of rotation (and arm extension) of the at least one drive axis is measured). As described above, this home or zeroed position of the at least one drive axis, in one aspect, corresponds to the bot top center pose”).
Moura does not explicitly disclose:
determine a zero horizontal position for the link based on a position of the link at which the link was detected by the vertically oriented sensor, wherein the zero horizontal position zeroes a horizontal coordinate of the robot with respect to the link to a coordinate system of the chamber.
However, Nakaya, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration and deformation detection by determining a touched position of the hand with the vertical target pin to determine the amount of deformation, specifically teaches determine a zero horizontal position for the link based on a position of the link at which the link was detected by the vertically oriented sensor, wherein the zero horizontal position zeroes a horizontal coordinate of the robot with respect to the link to a coordinate system of the chamber (at least as in paragraph 0050, “If the hand 5 touching the target pin 9 is detected (YES at Step S14), the deformation detecting device 8 acquires the positional information (touched position information) of the detection part SP when the hand 5 touches the target pin 9 (Step S15). The touched position information includes a position of a wrist reference point (a given point on the third axis L3) of the robotic arm 4 and an orientation of the wrist, for example. The positional information on the wrist reference point of the robotic arm 4 is acquirable from the position detectors E0, E1, and E2 of the servo motors M0, M1, and M2 of the elevating drive unit 60, the first joint drive unit 61, and the second joint drive unit 62, respectively. The information related to the orientation of the wrist of the robotic arm 4 is acquirable from the position detectors E3 and E4 of the servo motors M3 and M4 of the third joint drive unit 63 and the fourth joint drive unit 64, respectively”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Nakaya’s teaching of determining the touched position information, since Nakaya teaches wherein the system improves productivity by reducing the frequency of stopping the robot and the need to disassemble the robot as it can detect, correct, and adjust for any errors.
Regarding clam 2, in view of the above combination of Moura and Nakaya, Moura further teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the chamber comprises a transfer chamber for an electronics manufacturing system (at least as in paragraph 0035, “The vacuum back end 11020 generally includes a transport chamber 11025, one or more processing station(s) or module(s) 11030 and any suitable transfer robot or apparatus 11014”).
Regarding clam 6, in view of the above combination of Moura and Nakaya, Moura further teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein causing the robot to move the link through the field of view of the vertically oriented sensor comprises causing the robot to sweep the link through one or more arcs that cause the link to pass through the field of view of the vertically oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0080, “The imaging system 600 is mounted on the mounting interface 510 in a predetermined location with respect to the transport chamber and the robot arm 2300A is imaged moving to or in the predetermined repeatable position or moving to or in the predetermined location”).
Regarding clam 11, in view of the above combination of Moura and Nakaya, Moura further teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the controller is to automatically calibrate the robot at one or more operating conditions (at least as in paragraph 0051, “The controller is configured to calculate a positional variance of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A… and from the positional variance determine a motion compensation factor changing the extended position of the robot arm 2300A”; at least as in paragraph 0051, “the motion compensation factor changes the extended position of the robot arm 2300A in at least one of the radial direction and in the angled direction”).
Regarding clam 20, Moura teaches:
A method comprising:
for each link of a plurality of links of a robot within a chamber (at least as in paragraph 0056, “The controller 11091 may identify/detect this change in shape or position of the target 700-702 and determine the thermal expansion/contraction of the arm links for modifying controlled movement of the arm 2300A for picking and placing substrates. The measurements of one or more target locations may be taken either simultaneously or at different times…the measurements can be taken at different arm positions to accommodate the mechanism and/or motion constraints of the arm 2300A (compare FIGS. 8A and 8C where the arm 2300A is extended to measure target 701 located at the wrist bearing location)”; see also 0058-0061, wherein each target or arm link is measured and its variance is calculated), perform the following:
causing the robot to move the link through a field of view of a vertically oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0051, “The controller 11091 is communicably connected to the imaging system 600 (e.g., through suitable wired and/or wireless connections) and is configured to image, with the imaging sensor 601, at least part of the arm 2300A (or at least part of a set of one or more indicia provided on the arm 2300A as described herein) moving to or in a predetermined repeatable position/pose (e.g., the bot top center pose or other predetermined pose) defined by the at least one independent drive axis, or in other aspects, to image, with the imaging sensor 601, the at least part of the robot arm 2300A (or at least part of a set of one or more indicia on the arm as described herein) moving along a path defined by the at least one independent drive axis to or in the predetermined location”);
generating sensor data using the vertically oriented sensor as the link moves through the field of view of a vertically oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0050, “The transport apparatus 2300 includes an imaging system 600 with at least one imaging sensor 601 mounted through the mounting interface 510 in a predetermined location with respect to the vacuum chamber 599 and disposed so as to image at least part of the arm 2300A”);
automatically calibrating the robot within the chamber based on the zero horizontal position determined for each of the plurality of links (at least as in paragraph 0051, “The controller is configured to calculate a positional variance of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A, or a substrate holding station of the end effector 23203 of the multi-link robot arm 2300A, from comparison of the first or subsequent image with a calibration image of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A, or at least part of the set of one or more indicia 701-702 (as described herein) on the multi-link robot arm 2300A, and from the positional variance determine a motion compensation factor changing the extended position of the robot arm 2300A, wherein each imaging sensor 601-603 effecting capture of the first or subsequent image is disposed inside the perimeter of the mounting interface 510… The positional variance calculated by the controller from the comparison of the first or subsequent image and calibration image of the at least part of the robot arm 2300A include a positional variance component in the radial direction and another variance component in a direction angled at a non-zero crossing angle with the radial direction, and the motion compensation factor changes the extended position of the robot arm 2300A in at least one of the radial direction and in the angled direction”; at least as in paragraph 0052, “Registry of the arm 2300A may occur at installation of the arm 2300A to the at least one independent drive axis with the at least one drive axis in a predetermined orientation such that the encoder(s) 570-572 (see also FIG. 5) of the at least one drive axis are at a home or zeroed position (e.g., the home or zeroed position being the position from which a degree of rotation (and arm extension) of the at least one drive axis is measured). As described above, this home or zeroed position of the at least one drive axis, in one aspect, corresponds to the bot top center pose”).
Moura does not explicitly disclose determining, based on the sensor data, a zero horizontal position for the link based on a position of the link at which the link was detected by the vertically oriented sensor wherein the zero horizontal position zeroes a horizontal coordinate of the robot with respect to the link to a coordinate system of the chamber.
However, Nakaya, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration and deformation detection by determining a touched position of the hand with the vertical target pin to determine the amount of deformation, specifically teaches determining, based on the sensor data, a zero horizontal position for the link based on a position of the link at which the link was detected by the vertically oriented sensor wherein the zero horizontal position zeroes a horizontal coordinate of the robot with respect to the link to a coordinate system of the chamber (at least as in paragraph 0050, “If the hand 5 touching the target pin 9 is detected (YES at Step S14), the deformation detecting device 8 acquires the positional information (touched position information) of the detection part SP when the hand 5 touches the target pin 9 (Step S15). The touched position information includes a position of a wrist reference point (a given point on the third axis L3) of the robotic arm 4 and an orientation of the wrist, for example. The positional information on the wrist reference point of the robotic arm 4 is acquirable from the position detectors E0, E1, and E2 of the servo motors M0, M1, and M2 of the elevating drive unit 60, the first joint drive unit 61, and the second joint drive unit 62, respectively. The information related to the orientation of the wrist of the robotic arm 4 is acquirable from the position detectors E3 and E4 of the servo motors M3 and M4 of the third joint drive unit 63 and the fourth joint drive unit 64, respectively”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Nakaya’s teaching of determining the touched position information, since Nakaya teaches wherein the system improves productivity by reducing the frequency of stopping the robot and the need to disassemble the robot as it can detect, correct, and adjust for any errors.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya), and further in view of Takizawa et al. (US 20090093906 A1, hereinafter Takizawa).
Regarding clam 3, in view of the above combination of Moura and Nakaya, Moura further teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the vertically oriented sensor comprises (at least as in paragraph 0050, “The imaging sensor 601 may be any suitable imaging sensor such as a CCD or CMOS sensor, an infrared sensor, and/or an infrared camera that is mounted to the mounting interface 510 or otherwise positioned in any suitable manner so that the imaging sensor 601 field of view extends through the window 605 and aperture 606 into the interior of the vacuum chamber 599”).
Moura does not explicitly teach “a laser emitter to emit a vertical light beam… based on the vertical light beam being received by the receiver or not being received by the receiver.”
However, Takizawa, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, specifically teaches a laser emitter to emit a vertical light beam… based on the vertical light beam being received by the receiver or not being received by the receiver (At least as in paragraph 0048, “Each position sensor 82, 84 is preferably a photosensor that comprises a light beam emitter 116 and a light beam receiver 118… The emitter 116 is preferably configured and oriented to emit a laser beam of light 120 toward the receiver 118, and the receiver is preferably configured to receive the light beam 120 from the emitter”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Takizawa's teaching of calibration system utilizing a light beam emitter and receiver as the position sensor, since Takizawa teaches wherein calibration system utilizing the position sensor improves the precision of the substrate transfer robot thus reducing the possibility of substrate drift.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya), and further in view of Bergantz et al. (US 20200324410 A1, hereinafter Bergantz ‘410).
Regarding clam 4, in view of the above combination of Moura and Nakaya, Moura teaches the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to:
cause the robot to rotate a first link of the plurality of links about a first rotational axis to determine the zero horizontal position for the first link (at least as in paragraph 0051, “The controller 11091 is communicably connected to the imaging system 600 (e.g., through suitable wired and/or wireless connections) and is configured to image, with the imaging sensor 601, at least part of the arm 2300A (or at least part of a set of one or more indicia provided on the arm 2300A as described herein) moving to or in a predetermined repeatable position/pose (e.g., the bot top center pose or other predetermined pose) defined by the at least one independent drive axis, or in other aspects, to image, with the imaging sensor 601, the at least part of the robot arm 2300A (or at least part of a set of one or more indicia on the arm as described herein) moving along a path defined by the at least one independent drive axis to or in the predetermined location”; at least as in paragraph 0052, “Registry of the arm 2300A may occur at installation of the arm 2300A to the at least one independent drive axis with the at least one drive axis in a predetermined orientation such that the encoder(s) 570-572 (see also FIG. 5) of the at least one drive axis are at a home or zeroed position (e.g., the home or zeroed position being the position from which a degree of rotation (and arm extension) of the at least one drive axis is measured). As described above, this home or zeroed position of the at least one drive axis, in one aspect, corresponds to the bot top center pose”);
(at least as in paragraph 0048, “The arms 25155A, 25155B, are shown as three link SCARA arms, and may be coupled co-axially to the drive section 23204, and may be vertically stacked on top of each other to allow for independent theta motion (using e.g. a four axis drive—see drive shaft 23668d) or coupled theta motion (using e.g. a three axis drive) where the coupled theta motion is rotation of the robot arms as a unit about the shoulder axis Z1 substantially without extension or retraction”).
Moura does not explicitly teach “subsequently cause a second link coupled to the first link at a second rotational axis to rotate about the second rotational axis while the first link is positioned at the zero horizontal position for the first link to detect the zero horizontal position for the second link; and
subsequently cause a third link coupled to the second link at a third rotational axis to rotate about the third rotational axis while the first link is positioned at the zero horizontal position for the first link and the second link is positioned at the zero horizontal position for the second link.”
However, Bergantz ‘410, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, specifically teaches subsequently cause a second link coupled to the first link at a second rotational axis to rotate about the second rotational axis while the first link is positioned at the zero horizontal position for the first link to detect the zero horizontal position for the second link; and
subsequently cause a third link coupled to the second link at a third rotational axis to rotate about the third rotational axis while the first link is positioned at the zero horizontal position for the first link and the second link is positioned at the zero horizontal position for the second link (At least as in paragraph 0058, “Sensor data is generated that identifies the fixed location relative to the robot in the different postures. Based on the sensor data, error values are determined corresponding to one or more components of the substrate processing system and, based on the error values, performance of one or more corrective actions associated with the one or more components are caused. In some embodiments, the error values and the corrective actions correspond to joint rotation about one or more of first joint 240, second joint 242, and/or third joint 244. In some embodiments, the controller 228 (e.g., controller 109 of FIG. 1) determines each error value for each component separately (e.g., by isolating movement of each component)”; at least as in paragraph 0074, “the centering is achieved by rotating the end effector 108 back and forth via a single joint (e.g., an isolated joint, the third joint 244) as the end effector 108 is slightly moved parallel to a tangent of the pin 468”; at least as in paragraph 0143, “At block 1010 of method 1000B, the processing logic positions a robot in postures relative to a fixed location. In some embodiments, the processing logic positions the robot in different postures by isolating movement of one or more portions of the robot (e.g., moving only the joint at the wrist member, etc.)”; at least as in paragraph 0163, “method 1000B is repeated to determine error values and corrective actions for different components of the processing system (e.g., by isolating a component, such as a joint, to determine the error value and corrective action). In some embodiments, responsive to performing a corrective action after one iteration of method 1000B, a second iteration of method 1000B is performed (e.g., using the same or different postures of the robot) to determine if further corrective actions are needed”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Bergantz ‘410’s teaching of calibrating each joint or component of the substrate carrying robot, since Bergantz ‘410’s teaches wherein the calibration system improves the efficiency and precision of the substrate transfer robot thus reducing the overall operating costs.
Regarding clam 5, the above combination of Moura, Nakaya, and Bergantz ‘410 teaches the system of claim 4, but does not explicitly teach wherein the third link comprises an end effector for the robot, and wherein the zero horizontal position for the third link is determined based on identifying a center of the end effector.
However, Bergantz ‘410, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, specifically teaches wherein the third link comprises an end effector for the robot, and wherein the zero horizontal position for the third link is determined based on identifying a center of the end effector (at least as in paragraph 0039, “The robot 118 is taught a fixed location relative to a load port, substrate carrier 114, load lock 119, SSP, aligner device, LCF device, etc. using an object, such as a pin (e.g., autoteach pin of the autoteach enclosure system) in embodiments. The fixed location in one embodiment corresponds to a center location of a substrate carrier 114 (e.g., autoteach enclosure system) placed at a particular load port, which in embodiments also corresponds to a center location of a different substrate carrier 114 (e.g., cassette of substrates) placed at the particular load port. Alternatively, the fixed location corresponds to other fixed locations within the processing system 100 (e.g., front or back of the substrate carrier 114, aligner device, load lock 119, LCF device, etc.). The robot 118 is calibrated using the object (e.g., autoteach pin and/or calibration substrate of the autoteach enclosure system) in some embodiments. The robot 118 is diagnosed using the object (e.g., calibration substrate of the autoteach enclosure system) in some embodiments”; at least as in paragraph 0067, “The robot 310 has a robot wrist center 370 that corresponds to an actual wafer center 372. A characteristic error 374 (e.g., robot arm error) of the robot 310 is the distance or angle between a center line and an error line. The center line is between the robot wrist center 370 and actual wafer center 372 (e.g., vector wrist to wafer center). The error line (e.g., vector wrist to beam) is perpendicular (e.g., at a 90 degree angle 376) to the light transmission path 374 (e.g., beam triggering path). In some embodiments, the robot 310 determines the characteristic error 374 via a calibration operation”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Bergantz ‘410’ teaching of calibrating using the center of the end effector, since Bergantz ‘410 teaches wherein calibration system improves the efficiency and precision of the substrate transfer robot thus reducing the overall operating costs.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya), and further in view of Graciano et al. (US 20230343626 A1, hereinafter Graciano).
Regarding clam 7, in view of the above combination of Moura and Nakaya, Moura teaches the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the robot comprises one or more end effectors, the system further comprising:
a horizontally oriented sensor configured to detect a presence of the one or more end effectors;
wherein for each end effector of the one or more end effectors the controller is to:
cause the robot to extend the end effector;
cause the robot to move vertically to cause the extended end effector to move through a field of view of the horizontally oriented sensor; and
determine a zero vertical position for the end effector based on a vertical position of the robot at which the end effector was detected by the horizontally oriented sensor; and
automatically calibrate the end effector based on the zero vertical position determined for each of the one or more end effectors.
However, Graciano, in the same field of endeavor of a robotic system for automatic teaching and calibration, specifically teaches:
a horizontally oriented sensor configured to detect a presence of the one or more end effectors (at least as in paragraph 0056, “The at least one fixed imaging sensor has a predetermined pose with respect to the predetermined load station reference location 11005L and includes at least one rearward (e.g., in the Y or R directions) facing sensor 581, at least one vertically (e.g., in the Z direction) facing sensor 583, and at least one laterally (e.g., in the X or θ directions) facing sensor 582”);
wherein for each end effector of the one or more end effectors the controller is to:
cause the robot to extend the end effector (at least as in paragraph 0084, “The controller 11091 commands the transport robot 11013 to move to adjust the position of the target 800 so that the target 800 is located in the center of the field of view (see center FOV) to verify the initial teach location of the transport robot 11013 in the R (or Y) direction and in the Z direction”);
cause the robot to move vertically to cause the extended end effector to move through a field of view of the horizontally oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0084, “movement/stroke of the end effector 420A in the Z direction is verified by moving the end effector 420A a predetermined distance in the minus Z direction (e.g., downward) and verifying that the predetermined distance has been moved with the laterally facing sensor 582 and moving the end effector 420A a predetermined distance in the plus Z direction (e.g., upward) and verifying that the predetermined distance has been moved with the laterally facing sensor 582”); and
determine a zero vertical position for the end effector based on a vertical position of the robot at which the end effector was detected by the horizontally oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0084, “The transport robot 11013 may be commanded to adjust the position of the target 800 any suitable number of times until the distance offset(s) ΔR (ΔY) and/or ΔZ are within a predetermined tolerance… The (at least one) target 541 is imaged at each of the positions in the series of positions, where the image of the (at least one) target 541 comprises a series of images of the (at least one) target 541 along the motion path MP and the resolution of the offset (in this example distance offset(s) ΔR (ΔY) and/or ΔZ) is based on the series of images (e.g., see the different fields of view in FIG. 10)”); and
automatically calibrate the end effector based on the zero vertical position determined for each of the one or more end effectors (at least as in paragraph 0054, “the resolved offset, based on the image (see FIG. 10) of the at least one arm target 540-542 in the direction extending through the opening 636, operates to align the at least one arm target 540-542 to another progressive teach position (e.g., that is progressive from a previous teach position) so that offset resolution based on the image of the at least one arm target 540-542 in the crossing direction progressively resolves the resolved offset”; at least as in paragraph 0055, “the controller 11091 verifies or progressively resolves the resolved offset ΔX, Δθ, ΔY, ΔR, ΔZ (as described herein) based on the end effector target image (see FIG. 10) from the at least one fixed imaging sensor imaging the end effector target image with the end effector 420A, 420B, 502 positioning the wafer plane WP within each (or at least one) of the at least one mock workpiece holding slots 610, 611, 612”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Graciano’s teaching of calibrating using a horizontal sensor, since Graciano teaches wherein robot control system further improves the positional accuracy in subsequent procedures in the same or additional axes of movement.
Regarding clam 8, in view of the above combination of Moura, Nakaya, and Graciano, Moura further teaches the system of claim 7, wherein the chamber comprises a transfer chamber, the system further comprising:
a load lock coupled to the transfer chamber, (at least as in paragraph 0037, “the transport chamber 416 may have one or more transfer chamber module(s) 18B, 18i”; at least as in paragraph 0034, “The vacuum load lock 11010 may be located between and connected to the mini-environment 11060 and the back end 11020”).
Moura does not explicitly teach wherein the horizontally oriented sensor is positioned within the load lock.
However, Graciano, in the same field of endeavor of a robotic system for automatic teaching and calibration, specifically teaches wherein the horizontally oriented sensor is positioned within the load lock (At least as in paragraph 0038, “the vacuum load lock may be located in any suitable location of the processing apparatus and have any suitable configuration and/or metrology equipment”; at least as in paragraph 0056, “The at least one laterally facing sensor 582 is, in one or more aspects, located within the frame 550 at a Z height location corresponding to the Z height location of workpiece holding slot number thirteen (13) (or any other suitable predetermined Z height of any suitable workpiece holding slot number) of a conventional 25 substrate carrier”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Graciano’s teaching of calibration system placed within the load lock, since Graciano teaches wherein the system improves the positional accuracy in subsequent procedures in the same or additional axes of movement and simplifies the calibration method by maintaining the required calibration equipment within the vacuum seal.
Regarding clam 9, the above combination of Moura, Nakaya, and Graciano teaches the system of claim 7, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to automatically recalibrate the end effector, and to determine droop of the end effector based on a change in the zero vertical position after recalibration.
However, Graciano, in the same field of endeavor of a robotic system for automatic teaching and calibration, specifically teaches wherein the controller is to automatically recalibrate the end effector, and to determine droop of the end effector based on a change in the zero vertical position after recalibration (At least as in paragraph 0065, “Each of the targets 540-542 characterizes different offset aspects. Each of the different offset aspects (e.g., the target and offset aspect characterized thereby) correspond, distinct from each other, to different respective drive axis pairs (e.g., X(or θ)-Y(or R) drive axes, Z-X(or θ) drive axes, Z-Y(or R) drive axes) effecting at least one degree of freedom motion of the transport arm 11013TA. Each of the drive axis pairs correspond to different respective planes Z-X(or θ) plane, the R(or Y)-X(or θ) plane, and Z-Y(or R) plane of the of the load port module 11005, so that each different offset aspect, corresponding to the different drive axis pairs, is resolved by a separate image of the respective target, and the distance offset ΔX, Δθ, ΔY, ΔR, ΔZ is effected in entirety by combination (or superposition, or sequence) of the resolved different offset aspect as described herein. As may be realized, a first of the different drive axis pair (e.g., X(or θ)-Y(or R) drive axes, Z-X(or θ) drive axes, Z-Y(or R) drive axes) that correspond to a first of the arm targets 540-542, shares a drive axis (X, θ, R, Y, Z) with a second of the different drive axis pair (e.g., X(or θ)-Y(or R) drive axes, Z-X(or θ) drive axes, Z-Y(or R) drive axes) that correspond to a second one of the arm target 540-542, wherein resolution of a second of the different offset aspect (with the second arm target) confirms or serves to refine part of a first offset aspect with respect to a load station reference axis (X, θ, Y, R, Z) corresponding to the shared drive axis and resolved with the first arm target”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Graciano’s teaching of calibrating using a horizontal sensor, since Graciano teaches wherein robot control system further improves the positional accuracy in subsequent procedures in the same or additional axes of movement.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya) and Graciano et al. (US 20230343626 A1, hereinafter Graciano), and further in view of Cranmer (US 20220083026 A1).
Regarding clam 10, the above combination of Moura, Nakaya, and Graciano teaches the system of claim 7, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to measure a frequency response of the end effector based on causing the end effector to perform a vertical movement and measuring an oscillation of the end effector caused by the vertical movement using the horizontally oriented sensor.
However, Cranmer, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, teaches wherein the controller is to measure a frequency response of the end effector based on causing the end effector to perform a vertical movement and measuring an oscillation of the end effector caused by the vertical movement using the horizontally oriented sensor (At least as in paragraph 0021, “frequency response diagnostics, also referred to as frequency response analysis (FRA), may successfully detect incorrect tensioning of pulley belts on a motor stack that impart force to components of the robot linkages, in addition to detecting the effects of natural resonances and bearing friction levels”; At least as in paragraph 0030, “a motion instruction with respect to gap calibration generated by the motion controller 102 (master) may initiate movement of the motor 160A between a first position (e.g., a safe starting position) and a second position (e.g., a target position beyond the expected contact position) within predefined constraints of velocity and acceleration. The motion instruction may be received by a motion planner internal to an actuator driver (slave) which, based on the motion instruction data, generates a motion profile precisely describing the motion of the first motor 160A on an instant by instant basis to control speed and acceleration changes, e.g., to limit “jerk,” the first derivative of acceleration, the latter which may produce undesired wear or oscillations on the motor and attached components”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Cranmer’s teaching of calibrating using frequency response diagnostics and jerk amount, since Cranmer teaches wherein calibration system improves the positional accuracy of the robot and reduces maintenance costs by providing accurate diagnostics without the need to disassemble or ship the robot.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya), and further in view of Bergantz et al. (US 20210291374 A1, hereinafter Bergantz ‘374).
Regarding clam 12, the above combination of Moura in view of Nakaya teaches the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to periodically automatically recalibrate the robot without user input.
However, Bergantz ‘374, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, specifically teaches wherein the controller is to periodically automatically recalibrate the robot without user input (at least as in paragraph 0118, “a sudden shift may occur if, for example, a processing chamber is jarred or maintenance is performed on a processing chamber or robot. To detect such drift and/or sudden changes, calibration operations may be performed periodically”; at least as in paragraph 0124, “FIG. 13 is flow chart for a method 1300 of determining whether taught positions of two robot arms that transfer objects to one another via a load lock are calibrated to one another, according to embodiments of the present disclosure. Method 1300 may be performed periodically after method 1200 has been performed”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Bergantz ‘374’s teaching of periodically recalibrating, since Bergantz ‘374 teaches wherein the periodically performing the calibration detects any drift or sudden change thus improving the precision of robot control and substrate production.
Regarding clam 13, the above combination of Moura, Nakaya, and Bergantz ‘374 teaches the system of claim 12, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to determine drift based on changes in the zero horizontal position for one or more of the plurality of links over time.
However, Bergantz ‘374, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, specifically teaches wherein the controller is to determine drift based on changes in the zero horizontal position for one or more of the plurality of links over time (at least as in paragraph 0120, “the system controller may determine whether there is a difference between the originally computed characteristic error value(s) and newly computed characteristic error value(s). If the calibration process has been performed more than twice, then multiple comparisons may be made. The system controller may determine, based on such comparisons, any drift in the computed characteristic error values or any sudden change in the characteristic error values. If a difference is determined and that difference exceeds a difference threshold, then the method proceeds to block 1120 and system controller determines that the system has changed (e.g., due to drift or a sudden change) and that the original result transfer sequence is out of calibration”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Bergantz ‘374’s teaching of determining drift, since Bergantz ‘374 teaches wherein determining the drift allows for the system to automatically determine how often the robot requires recalibration thus improving the overall accuracy of its controls.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moura (US 20220130696 A1) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya), and further in view of Hiester et al. (US 20250062156 A1, hereinafter Hiester).
Regarding clam 14, the above combination of Moura in view of Nakaya teaches the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the robot is a parallel arm robot.
However, Hiester, in the same field of endeavor of substrate handling robot control, specifically teaches wherein the robot is a parallel arm robot (at least as in paragraph 0059, “a wafer support and positioning system that incorporates a hexapod mechanism such as is discussed herein may allow for dynamic adjustment of the position and orientation of the pedestal supported thereby relative to, for example, a showerhead of the processing chamber with which it is used”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Moura, to include Hiester’s teaching of using a hexapod in wafer transport systems, since Hiester teaches wherein the hexapod mechanism dramatically increases its supporting capability by providing up to six degrees of freedom thus greatly improving its alignment capabilities.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graciano et al. (US 20230343626 A1, hereinafter Graciano) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya).
Regarding clam 15, Graciano teaches:
A system comprising:
a chamber (at least as in paragraph 0039, “The vacuum back end 11020 generally includes a transport chamber 11025, one or more processing station(s) or module(s) 11030 and any suitable transport robot 11014”);
a robot within the chamber, the robot comprising a plurality of links and one or more end effectors (at least as in paragraph 0039, “The transport robot 11014 will be described below and may be located within the transport chamber 11025”; at least as in paragraph 0042, “the transport apparatus 26B may have a general SCARA arm configuration (though in other aspects the transport arms may have any other desired arrangement such as, for example, an arrangement substantially similar to the transport robots 11013, 11014 of the cluster tool illustrated in FIGS. 1A and 1B, a linearly sliding arm 214 as shown in FIG. 2F or other suitable arm having any suitable arm linkage mechanisms”);
a horizontally oriented sensor configured to detect a presence of the one or more end effectors (at least as in paragraph 0056, “The at least one fixed imaging sensor has a predetermined pose with respect to the predetermined load station reference location 11005L and includes at least one rearward (e.g., in the Y or R directions) facing sensor 581, at least one vertically (e.g., in the Z direction) facing sensor 583, and at least one laterally (e.g., in the X or θ directions) facing sensor 582”); and
a controller to:
for each end effector of the one or more end effectors, perform the following:
cause the robot to extend the end effector (at least as in paragraph 0084, “The controller 11091 commands the transport robot 11013 to move to adjust the position of the target 800 so that the target 800 is located in the center of the field of view (see center FOV) to verify the initial teach location of the transport robot 11013 in the R (or Y) direction and in the Z direction”);
cause the robot to move vertically to cause the extended end effector to move through a field of view of the horizontally oriented sensor (at least as in paragraph 0084, “movement/stroke of the end effector 420A in the Z direction is verified by moving the end effector 420A a predetermined distance in the minus Z direction (e.g., downward) and verifying that the predetermined distance has been moved with the laterally facing sensor 582 and moving the end effector 420A a predetermined distance in the plus Z direction (e.g., upward) and verifying that the predetermined distance has been moved with the laterally facing sensor 582”); and
automatically calibrate the end effector based on the zero vertical position determined for each of the one or more end effectors (at least as in paragraph 0084, “The transport robot 11013 may be commanded to adjust the position of the target 800 any suitable number of times until the distance offset(s) ΔR (ΔY) and/or ΔZ are within a predetermined tolerance… The (at least one) target 541 is imaged at each of the positions in the series of positions, where the image of the (at least one) target 541 comprises a series of images of the (at least one) target 541 along the motion path MP and the resolution of the offset (in this example distance offset(s) ΔR (ΔY) and/or ΔZ) is based on the series of images (e.g., see the different fields of view in FIG. 10)”; at least as in paragraph 0054, “the resolved offset, based on the image (see FIG. 10) of the at least one arm target 540-542 in the direction extending through the opening 636, operates to align the at least one arm target 540-542 to another progressive teach position (e.g., that is progressive from a previous teach position) so that offset resolution based on the image of the at least one arm target 540-542 in the crossing direction progressively resolves the resolved offset”; at least as in paragraph 0055, “the controller 11091 verifies or progressively resolves the resolved offset ΔX, Δθ, ΔY, ΔR, ΔZ (as described herein) based on the end effector target image (see FIG. 10) from the at least one fixed imaging sensor imaging the end effector target image with the end effector 420A, 420B, 502 positioning the wafer plane WP within each (or at least one) of the at least one mock workpiece holding slots 610, 611, 612”).
Graciano does not explicitly disclose determine a zero vertical position for the end effector based on a vertical position of the robot at which the end effector was detected by the horizontally oriented sensor, wherein the zero vertical position zeroes a vertical coordinate of the robot with respect to the end effector to a coordinate system of the chamber.
However, Nakaya, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration and deformation detection by determining a touched position of the hand with the vertical target pin to determine the amount of deformation, specifically teaches determine a zero vertical position for the end effector based on a vertical position of the robot at which the end effector was detected by the horizontally oriented sensor, wherein the zero vertical position zeroes a vertical coordinate of the robot with respect to the end effector to a coordinate system of the chamber (at least as in paragraph 0027, “Note that the robotic arm 4 is not limited to the horizontally articulated robot, but may be a vertically articulated robot”; at least as in paragraph 0050, “If the hand 5 touching the target pin 9 is detected (YES at Step S14), the deformation detecting device 8 acquires the positional information (touched position information) of the detection part SP when the hand 5 touches the target pin 9 (Step S15). The touched position information includes a position of a wrist reference point (a given point on the third axis L3) of the robotic arm 4 and an orientation of the wrist, for example. The positional information on the wrist reference point of the robotic arm 4 is acquirable from the position detectors E0, E1, and E2 of the servo motors M0, M1, and M2 of the elevating drive unit 60, the first joint drive unit 61, and the second joint drive unit 62, respectively. The information related to the orientation of the wrist of the robotic arm 4 is acquirable from the position detectors E3 and E4 of the servo motors M3 and M4 of the third joint drive unit 63 and the fourth joint drive unit 64, respectively”; at least as in paragraph 0080, “For example, if the robotic arm is a vertically articulated robot, the end effector may be rotated during the search processing on a rotational axis extending in the X-direction or the Y-direction. In this case, the target pin 9 is disposed so that the extending direction of the target pin 9 is parallel with the rotational axis of the end effector extending direction”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Graciano, to include Nakaya’s teaching of determining the touched position information, since Nakaya teaches wherein the system improves productivity by reducing the frequency of stopping the robot and the need to disassemble the robot as it can detect, correct, and adjust for any errors.
Regarding clam 16, in view of the above combination of Graciano and Nakaya, Graciano further teaches:
The system of claim 15, wherein the controller is to automatically recalibrate the end effector, and to determine droop of the end effector based on a change in the zero vertical position after recalibration (At least as in paragraph 0065, “Each of the targets 540-542 characterizes different offset aspects. Each of the different offset aspects (e.g., the target and offset aspect characterized thereby) correspond, distinct from each other, to different respective drive axis pairs (e.g., X(or θ)-Y(or R) drive axes, Z-X(or θ) drive axes, Z-Y(or R) drive axes) effecting at least one degree of freedom motion of the transport arm 11013TA. Each of the drive axis pairs correspond to different respective planes Z-X(or θ) plane, the R(or Y)-X(or θ) plane, and Z-Y(or R) plane of the of the load port module 11005, so that each different offset aspect, corresponding to the different drive axis pairs, is resolved by a separate image of the respective target, and the distance offset ΔX, Δθ, ΔY, ΔR, ΔZ is effected in entirety by combination (or superposition, or sequence) of the resolved different offset aspect as described herein. As may be realized, a first of the different drive axis pair (e.g., X(or θ)-Y(or R) drive axes, Z-X(or θ) drive axes, Z-Y(or R) drive axes) that correspond to a first of the arm targets 540-542, shares a drive axis (X, θ, R, Y, Z) with a second of the different drive axis pair (e.g., X(or θ)-Y(or R) drive axes, Z-X(or θ) drive axes, Z-Y(or R) drive axes) that correspond to a second one of the arm target 540-542, wherein resolution of a second of the different offset aspect (with the second arm target) confirms or serves to refine part of a first offset aspect with respect to a load station reference axis (X, θ, Y, R, Z) corresponding to the shared drive axis and resolved with the first arm target”).
Regarding clam 17, in view of the above combination of Graciano and Nakaya, Graciano further teaches:
The system of claim 15, wherein the controller is to automatically determine at least one of a presence of a substrate disposed on the end effector, a thickness of the substrate, a material of the substrate, a warpage of the substrate, or a profile of the substrate based on one or more vertical robot positions at which the horizontally oriented sensor detected the substrate (at least as in paragraph 0056, “The at least one laterally facing sensor 582 is, in one or more aspects, located within the frame 550 at a Z height location corresponding to the Z height location of workpiece holding slot number thirteen (13) (or any other suitable predetermined Z height of any suitable workpiece holding slot number) of a conventional 25 substrate carrier such as those illustrated in FIG. 1A.”).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graciano et al. (US 20230343626 A1, hereinafter Graciano) in view of Nakaya et al. (US 20180015620 A1, hereinafter Nakaya), and further in view of Cranmer (US 20220083026 A1).
Regarding clam 18, the above combination of Graciano in view of Nakaya teaches the system of claim 15, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to measure a frequency response of the end effector based on causing the end effector to perform a vertical movement and measuring an oscillation of the end effector caused by the vertical movement using the horizontally oriented sensor.
However, Cranmer, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, teaches wherein the controller is to measure a frequency response of the end effector based on causing the end effector to perform a vertical movement and measuring an oscillation of the end effector caused by the vertical movement using the horizontally oriented sensor (At least as in paragraph 0021, “frequency response diagnostics, also referred to as frequency response analysis (FRA), may successfully detect incorrect tensioning of pulley belts on a motor stack that impart force to components of the robot linkages, in addition to detecting the effects of natural resonances and bearing friction levels”; At least as in paragraph 0030, “a motion instruction with respect to gap calibration generated by the motion controller 102 (master) may initiate movement of the motor 160A between a first position (e.g., a safe starting position) and a second position (e.g., a target position beyond the expected contact position) within predefined constraints of velocity and acceleration. The motion instruction may be received by a motion planner internal to an actuator driver (slave) which, based on the motion instruction data, generates a motion profile precisely describing the motion of the first motor 160A on an instant by instant basis to control speed and acceleration changes, e.g., to limit “jerk,” the first derivative of acceleration, the latter which may produce undesired wear or oscillations on the motor and attached components”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Graciano, to include Cranmer’s teaching of calibrating using frequency response diagnostics and jerk amount, since Cranmer teaches wherein calibration system improves the positional accuracy of the robot and reduces maintenance costs by providing accurate diagnostics without the need to disassemble or ship the robot.
Regarding clam 19, the above combination of Graciano, Nakaya, and Cranmer teaches the system of claim 18, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is to determine a system wear based on changes in the frequency response for the end effector.
However, Cranmer, in the same field of endeavor of robot calibration systems, teaches wherein the controller is to determine a system wear based on changes in the frequency response for the end effector (at least as in paragraph 0024, “Because the disclosed frequency response analysis is performed while the motor stack and robot linkage are still interconnected within the manufacturing facility, the diagnostics using FRA may collect a frequency response between motors in the a manufacturing configuration, thus being able to diagnose possible defects in the robot linkage and motor stack or if there is damage or incorrectly tensioned pulley belts”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Graciano, to include Cranmer’s teaching of calibrating using frequency response diagnostics and jerk amount, since Cranmer teaches wherein calibration system improves the positional accuracy of the robot and reduces maintenance costs by providing accurate diagnostics without the need to disassemble or ship the robot.
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 RICARDO ICHIKAWA VISCARRA whose telephone number is (571)270-0154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-12 & 2-4 PST.
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, Adam Mott can be reached on (571) 270-5376. 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.
/RICARDO I VISCARRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3657 /ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights