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 .
This Office Action acknowledges the applicant’s amendment filed on 9/1/2026. Claims 1, 4-8 and 9 are pending in the application. Claims 2-3, 8 and 10 are cancelled.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of LU et al. US 2011/0155598 A1 in view of CHIU et al. US 2019/0214287 A1, all previously presented.
PNG
media_image1.png
434
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 1, LU discloses (Fig. 2-6) a reticle pod, comprising: a lower cover 12 having a carrying surface and a plurality of mounting seats (corners where hole 111 and fastener 125 extends through); and a support mechanism 100 having a supporting member 131 extending upward for supporting a reticle or a reticle carrier and a mounting member 121 opposite to the supporting member, wherein the support mechanism has a lateral extension portion 150, a first inclined arm (shown above with 141) extending from the lateral extension portion and a second inclined arm (shown above with 141) extending from the lateral extension portion, wherein the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm are configured to support a bottom of the reticle or a bottom of the reticle carrier, the lateral extension portion extends from the mounting member (via the 1st and 2nd inclined arms) toward the reticle or the reticle carrier, and the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm extend from the lateral extension portion toward different edges of the reticle or the reticle carrier.
LU discloses the support mechanisms 100 are mounted at the corners of the lower cover but it does not specifically disclose they are detachably connected to the mounting seats.
However, CHIU (Fig. 6) teaches that it was known in the art to have reticle pod have a plurality of support mechanisms detachably connected to the mounting seats (with the fasteners 124). (Para. 0045)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mounting seat and mounting member in LU by having the support mechanism detachably connected to the mounting member as taught by CHIU for the purposes of providing an alternative way of connecting the two structures together.
With regards to claim 4, the combination of LU and CHIU discloses the mounting member is configured to connect to the corresponding mounting seat by a male-female connection (fastener and the aperture the fastener extends through) to avoid the support mechanism (100; LU) from rotating relatively to the corresponding mounting seat 111/125. (Para. 0029)
With regards to claim 5, the combination of LU and CHIU further teaches the mounting member 123 is a female connector and the corresponding mounting seat is a male connector 125.
With regards to claim 6, the combination of LU and CHIU (Fig. 2; shown above) discloses the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm extend toward different edges of the reticle or the reticle carrier for limiting a side displacement of the reticle or the carrier, depending on the reticle or the carrier, to be held.
Claim(s) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEN et al. US 2008/0254377 A1 in view of LU et al. US 2011/0155598 A1 and further in view of Maeda et al. US 3,816,882, all previously presented.
PNG
media_image2.png
520
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
320
389
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 7, CHEN (Fig. 5A and Para. 0043) discloses a reticle pod 1, comprising: an upper cover 11 having an abutting surface and a plurality of upper-cover mounting seats (Para. 0034 and 0043; corners where base 31 of support mechanism 3 sits) located on the abutting surface; a lower cover 12 having a carrying surface and a plurality of lower-cover mounting seats located on the carrying surface (Para. 0034 and 0043; corners where base 31 of support mechanism 3 sits); at least one first support mechanism (3; on the lower cover) having a supporting member 32 extending upward for supporting a reticle or a reticle carrier and a mounting member 31 /311 opposite to the supporting member, wherein the first support mechanism has a lateral extension portion 313, a first inclined arm (shown above) extending from the lateral extension portion and a second inclined arm (shown above) extending from the lateral extension portion, wherein the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm are configured to support a bottom of the reticle or a bottom of the reticle carrier, the lateral extension portion (31; shown above) extends from the mounting member toward the reticle or the reticle carrier, and the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm extend from the lateral extension portion toward different edges of the reticle or the reticle carrier (opposite sides); and at least one second support mechanism (3; on the upper cover) having an abutting portion (shown above) for abutting a top of the reticle and a joint portion (shown above) connecting with the abutting portion.
Chen discloses the support mechanisms 3 are mounted (mounting seats) at the corners of the lower cover but it does not specifically disclose the mounting seats extending from the carrying surface; wherein the mounting member is configured to be detachably connected to the corresponding one of the mounting seats such that the support mechanism is optionally loaded to the lower cover; and wherein the mounting member is configured to connect to the corresponding lower-cover mounting seat by male-female connection.
However, Lu teaches that it was known in the art to have mounting seats 111/125 extending from the carrying surface (of cover 12) and support mechanisms 100 detachably connected to the mounting seats; and wherein the mounting member is configured to connect to the corresponding lower-cover mounting seat by male-female connection 111/125.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mounting seat and mounting member in Chen by having the mounting seat extend from the surface to the mounting member as taught by LU for the purposes of providing an alternative way of connecting the two structures together.
The combination of CHEN and LU discloses an upper-cover mounting seat but it does not specifically disclose the upper-cover mounting seat, such that the second support mechanism is optionally loaded to the upper cove, has multiple protruding wing portions, the joint portion of the second support mechanism has an opening defined therethrough, the opening has a first channel that allows the protruding wing portions enter therein or depart therefrom, and the opening has a second channel that allows the protruding wing portions rotate relatively to the opening.
However, Maeda (Fig. 6-8) teaches it was known in the art to have a mounting seat 38 has multiple protruding wing portions 41/42, a joint portion of a second support mechanism has an opening defined therethrough, the opening has a first channel 34/35 that allows the protruding wing portions enter therein or depart therefrom, and the opening has a second channel 36/37 that allows the protruding wing portions rotate relatively to the opening.
As recited above, Maeda teaches that it is known in the art that fastening mechanisms are interchangeable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have upper-cover mounting seat in CHEN by providing the mounting seat with multiple protruding wing portions, a joint portion of a second support mechanism having an opening with a first channel and second channel to allow the protruding wing portions to enter or depart and allows the protruding wing portions to rotate relatively to the opening as taught by Maeda for the purposes of providing an alternative method of attaching the structures together
With regards to claim 9, the combination of CHEN, LU, and MAEDA further teaches male-female connection 111/125 between the mounting member 123 of the first support mechanism and the lower-cover mounting seat prevents the first support mechanism from rotating relatively to the lower-cover mounting seat.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/1/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues the reference Lu does not disclose the lateral extension portion extends from the mounting member toward the reticle or the reticle carrier, and the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm extend from the lateral extension portion toward different edges of the reticle or the reticle carrier. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated above Lu discloses the lateral extension portion (shown above) extends from the mounting member (via the 1st and 2nd inclined arms) toward the reticle or the reticle carrier, and the first inclined arm and the second inclined arm extend from the lateral extension portion toward different edges of the reticle or the reticle carrier. Although the lateral extension portion does not directly extend from the mounting portion it does extend upwardly from the structure by being connected to the inclined arms.
The Applicant argues “A person skilled in the art could not have easily arrived at the invention of Claim 7. For the reasons above, the combination of CHEN, LU, and Maeda does not disclose or teach the configuration of the first support mechanism in which the lateral extension portion extends from the mounting member and the first and second inclined arms extend from a lateral extension portion toward different edges.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENINE SPICER whose telephone number is (313)446-4924. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm, Monday-Thursday.
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, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached at (571) 270-5531. 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.
/JENINE SPICER/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736
