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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “51201A”, “520” and “52321”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “main apparatus configured to process the silicon wafers” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a lateral conveying device”, “a silicon wafer flipping mechanism”, “a silicon wafer lateral moving mechanism”, “a silicon wafer shift mechanism”, “a conveying apparatus” and a “main apparatus” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
In Claim 1: “a lateral conveying device” is element 30 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraphs 18 and 26 and includes “a flow conveying component” including an “upper end surface”, “a flow moving component” including a lateral moving power component, which is driven by a ball screw transmission method”. “a silicon wafer flipping mechanism” is element 40 in the drawings and is described in the specification in paragraph 27-29 and includes “a suction component 400, a flipping motor 401, “suction component 408”, “longitudinal movement component 407”, “a first suction plate”, “suction plate 404”, “first suction cups 409a”, “second suction cups 409b”, “second suction cup plate 405”, “first U-shaped sensor 402”, “baffle 403” and “second U-shaped sensor 406”. Structure is recited in Claim 3 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 3. “a silicon wafer lateral moving mechanism” is element 41 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraph 27 and includes “a silicon wafer lateral moving power component” driven by a ball screw. “a silicon wafer shift mechanism” is element 42 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraphs 18 and 27 and includes “a silicon wafer offset power component” driven by a ball screw. “a conveying apparatus” is element 60 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraph 30-42 and includes “a basket positioning-moving mechanism 50, a basket silicon wafer lifting mechanism 51, a silicon wafer regularity mechanism 52, a carrier silicon wafer lifting mechanism 53, a suction cup lateral moving mechanism 54, a carrier positioning-moving mechanism 55, a carrier flipping-moving component 56, and a carrier holder conveying mechanism 57”. Structure is recited in Claim 4 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claims 4 and 5.
“a main apparatus” is no further defined in the specification or drawings.
In Claim 2: “a loading docking-conveying mechanism” is element 11 in the drawings and described in Paragraphs 19 and 20. Structure is recited in Claim 14 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 14. “loading basket lifting mechanism” is element 13 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraphs 19 and 22. "loading basket conveying mechanism" is element 14 in the drawings and described in Paragraphs 19, 21 and 26. Structure is recited in Claim 13 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 13. "loading silicon wafer conveying mechanism" is element 15 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraph 19 and 23. "loading-receiving mechanism" is element 17 in the drawings and described in the specification in Paragraph 19, 24 and 25. “an unloading docking-conveying mechanism” is element 21 in the drawings and described in Paragraph 19. “an unloading basket conveying mechanism” is element 24 in the drawings and described in Paragraphs 19 and 26. Structure is recited in Claim 13 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 13. “an unloading silicon wafer conveying mechanism” is element 25 in the drawings and described in Paragraphs 19.
In Claim 4: “basket positioning-moving mechanism” is element 50 in the specification and described in Paragraphs 30 and 31 of the specification. Structure is recited in Claim 5 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 5. “basket silicon wafer lifting mechanism” is element 51 in the specification and described in Paragraphs 30 and 43 of the specification. Structure is recited in Claim 5 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 5. “silicon wafer regularity mechanism” is element 52 in the specification and described in Paragraphs 30 and 38 of the specification. Structure is recited in Claim 9 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 9. “carrier silicon wafer lifting mechanism” is element 53 in the specification and described in Paragraphs 30 and 40 of the specification. “suction cup lateral moving mechanism” is element 54 in the specification and described in Paragraphs 30 and 41 of the specification. “carrier positioning-moving mechanism” is element 55 in the drawings and described in Paragraph 30 of the specification. “carrier flipping-moving component” is element 56 in the specification and described in Paragraph 30 of the specification. “carrier holder conveying mechanism” is element 57 in the drawings and described in Paragraphs 30, 42 and 43 of the specification. Structure is recited in Claim 12 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 12.
Claim 5 “supporting component” is element 501 in the drawings and in the specification described in Paragraphs 32 and 34 of the specification. “driving component” is element 502 in the drawings and in the specification described in Paragraph 31 of the specification.
Claim 9 “silicon wafer regularity power component” is element 521A in the drawings and described in Paragraph 38 of the specification. Structure is recited in Claim 10 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 10. “silicon wafer regularity restriction component” is element 521A in the drawings and described in Paragraph 38 of the specification. Structure is recited in Claim 11 and 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is no longer invoked in Claim 11.
Claim 12 “carrier holder component” is element 572 in the drawings and is described in Paragraph 42 of the specification. “moving component” is element 571 in the drawings and is described in Paragraph 42 of the specification.
Claim 13 “flow moving component” is element 302 in the drawings and is described in Paragraph 26 of the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “main apparatus configured for” without structure invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, there is no further description in the specification or drawing for “main apparatus” and rendering the limitation indefinite.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the lateral conveying mechanism" in Line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, “the lateral conveying mechanism” is being interpreted as “the lateral conveying device”.
The remaining claims are rejected because they depend on a rejected claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 and 3-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Phan et al., Shen et al. and Feng et al. teach a loading and unloading system for a silicon wafer comprising a wafer guiding apparatus a wafer flipping apparatus and a conveyor apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLENN F MYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 PM.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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.
GLENN F. MYERS
Examiner
Art Unit 3652
/GLENN F MYERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights