DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 14 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 recites “the process tool” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation should be changed to “a process tool”.
Claim 20 recites “the process tool” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation should be changed to “a process tool”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Funk does not disclose a “frontend server” of the process tool or registering a monitoring device with such a frontend server, since Funk teaches that the “common tool agent can be installed on a plurality of processing tools.” Thus, Applicant argues that since Funk’s tool agent runs on the tool itself then Funk necessarily fails to disclose or suggest the claim 1 recitation of “receive, from a monitoring device registered with a frontend server of the process tool, data based on a data collection plan.” However, one does not follow from the other: Funk’s disclosure of a tool agent running on the tool itself does not preclude the possibility that the tool agent runs on (or is registered with) a frontend server of the tool.
A “server” is defined as a program that responds to commands from a client. Therefore, the tool agent of Funk is considered to read on the claimed “monitoring device registered with a frontend server of the process tool.” Funk’s tool agent is a “monitoring device registered with a frontend server” since it is data acquisition software that communicates directly between the tool process of the tool and the agent client of APC system 145 (e.g., [0026]), and it is “of the process tool” since it runs of the tool 110. The tool agent of Funk does not cause software changes to the actual process tool since it is a separate software from “the tool process” (e.g., [0026]).
It is also noted that there are embodiments of Funk where the process module 120 in Fig. 1 could be interpreted to read on the claimed “process tool” and the sensors 130 could then be interpreted to read on the claimed “monitoring device registered with a frontend server of the process tool” (e.g., [0046]).
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Funk et al. US 2005/0187649 (“Funk”).
Funk discloses:
1. An electronic device manufacturing system, comprising:
a process tool (e.g., Fig. 1 #110 or Fig. 1 #120); and
a tool server coupled to the process tool and comprising a communication node (e.g., Fig. 1 #150) and an evaluation system (e.g., Fig. 1 #160), wherein the communication node is configured to:
receive, from a monitoring device registered with a frontend server of the process tool (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not shown)”, [0035]: “a common tool agent can be installed on a plurality of processing tools”), data based on a data collection plan (e.g., [0026]: “which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110 and which can provide event information, context information, and start-stop timing commands used to synchronize data acquisition with the tool process”, [0036], [0043]-[0044]: “data collection plan”);
send the received data to the evaluation system (e.g., [0076]: “collecting data and then feeding that data into a software algorithm that models the behavior of a particular tool, process module, and/or sensor”);
receive, from the evaluation system, feedback data based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
cause the process tool to perform a corrective action based on the feedback data (e.g., [0076]: “fed forward or back to keep tool performance within the specified limits”, [0156]).
2. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the tool server is configured to send the feedback data to a client device (e.g., Fig. 1 #170, [0053], [0061]).
3. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node communicates with the evaluation system and the process tool using Remote Procedure Calls (e.g., [0030]).
4. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the feedback data comprises at least one of predictive data, diagnostic data, corrective data, optimization data, efficiency data, or health data (e.g., [0055]).
5. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node is further configured to: send the feedback data to a client device (e.g., Fig. 1 #170, [0053], [0061]).
6. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring device comprises at least one of a device driver, an application programming interface (API), a software application, a virtual device, an image file, or firmware (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not shown)”, which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110”).
7. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring device provides a data collection plan that is based on one or more attributes, wherein the one or more attributes comprise at least one of an input used by the process tool, an output generated from the process tool, a control mode, a recipe set-point to be monitored, or an equipment constant to be monitored (e.g., [0043]-[0048]).
9. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the evaluation system comprises at least one of a machine learning model, an inference engine, a heuristics model, a physics-based engine, or an algorithm (e.g., [0055]: “performs multivariate analysis of summary data using models based upon historical data”, [0076]-[0077]).
10. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring device is configured to obtain the received data via a system bus of the process tool (e.g., Fig. 7).
11. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node comprises a gateway node (e.g., [0022]: “IS 150 can comprise a real-time memory database that can be viewed as a “Hub”) that configures the monitoring device and communicates with a plurality of evaluation systems (e.g., [0051]-[0053]).
12. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node is further configured to:
register the monitoring device with the process tool without causing software changes to the process tool (e.g., [0064]: “configuration component for allowing a user to configure processing tools, processing modules, sensors”).
13. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node is further configured to:
assign, to a process recipe step of a process recipe, a trigger function (e.g., [0046], [0071]); and
responsive to receiving an indication associated with an output of the trigger function, initiating, via the monitoring device, data collection operations (e.g., [0046], [0071]).
14. A method, comprising:
receiving, by a processing device, from a monitoring device registered with a frontend server of a process tool (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not shown)”, [0035]: “a common tool agent can be installed on a plurality of processing tools”), data based on a data collection plan (e.g., [0026]: “which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110 and which can provide event information, context information, and start-stop timing commands used to synchronize data acquisition with the tool process”, [0036], [0043]-[0044]: “data collection plan”);
sending the received data to an evaluation system (e.g., [0076]: “collecting data and then feeding that data into a software algorithm that models the behavior of a particular tool, process module, and/or sensor”);
receiving, from the evaluation system, feedback data based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
causing the process tool to perform a corrective action based on the feedback data (e.g., [0076]: “fed forward or back to keep tool performance within the specified limits”, [0156]).
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the monitoring device comprises at least one of a device driver, an application programming interface (API), a software application, a virtual device, an image file, or firmware (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not shown)”, which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110”).
17. The method of claim 14, wherein the monitoring device is configured to obtain the received data via a system bus of the process tool (e.g., Fig. 7).
18. The method of claim 14, wherein the evaluation system comprises at least one of a machine learning model, an inference engine, a heuristics model, a physics-based engine, or an algorithm (e.g., [0055]: “performs multivariate analysis of summary data using models based upon historical data”, [0076]-[0077]).
19. The method of claim 14, further comprising: communicating with the evaluation system and the process tool using Remote Procedure Calls (e.g., [0030]).
20. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processing device operatively coupled to a memory, performs operations comprising:
receiving from a monitoring device registered with a frontend server of a process tool (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not shown)”, [0035]: “a common tool agent can be installed on a plurality of processing tools”), data based on a data collection plan (e.g., [0026]: “which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110 and which can provide event information, context information, and start-stop timing commands used to synchronize data acquisition with the tool process”, [0036], [0043]-[0044]: “data collection plan”);
sending the received data to an evaluation system (e.g., [0076]: “collecting data and then feeding that data into a software algorithm that models the behavior of a particular tool, process module, and/or sensor”);
receiving, from the evaluation system, feedback data based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
causing the process tool to perform a corrective action based on the feedback data (e.g., [0076]: “fed forward or back to keep tool performance within the specified limits”, [0156]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RYAN A JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-3742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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.
/RYAN A JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
08/26/26
Prosecution Insights