DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 5/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Species I, II, and III are related by the common elements and separate searches would likely identify the same references. This is not found persuasive because Species I, II, and III disclose mutually exclusive limitations and cannot be used together.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
It is noted that elected claims 4 and 14 read on non-elected Species. Therefore, claims 4 and 14 have been withdrawn from further examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a substrate” in line 3 should be corrected as --[[a]]the substrate--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a substrate” in line 9 should be corrected as --[[a]]the substrate--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kurita et al (US 2005/0180737 A1).
Regarding claim 1¸ Kurita et al (‘737) discloses a support assembly (fig1A) for supporting a substrate in a processing station, comprising:
a housing 102 (para[0026], fig1A) including a bore 105 (para[0027], fig1C), a groove 107 (para[0027], fig1C) formed on an exterior surface of the housing 102 (fig1C), and a plurality of windows (figA below, an open end portion of the groove adjacent to the bore) disposed in the groove 107 that intersect the bore 105 (figsA, 1D);
a pin 120 (para[0026]) disposed in the bore 105 (figs1A,1D) and moveable between a retracted position and an extended position, wherein the pin 120 includes a shaft (fig1A) including a plurality of bearing surfaces (exterior surfaces);
a plurality of bearing elements 112 (para[0028]) at least partially disposed in a corresponding window of the plurality of windows (figsA,1D), wherein each bearing element 112 includes an outer surface configured to engage a corresponding bearing surface of the shaft (fig1D), wherein the plurality of bearing elements 112 and bearing surfaces cooperate to maintain an angular orientation of the pin as the pin moves between the retracted position and the extended position; and
a retaining member 114 (para[0028]) disposed in the groove (figA).
PNG
media_image1.png
523
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Kurita et al discloses the support assembly of claim 1, wherein the pin 120 includes a head 120A (fig1A) that extends beyond a periphery of the shaft (fig1A), the head 120A comprising a support surface (a top planar surface) configured to engage a bottom edge of the substrate.
Regarding claim 9¸ Kurita et al discloses the support assembly of claim 1, wherein a lower end of the shaft of the pin 120 is connected to a pin lift assembly (para[0047], “a lift assembly”) configured to move the pin 120 between the extended position and the retracted position (para[0047]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita et al (US 2005/0180737 A1) in view of Mochizuki (US 2003/0026646 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Kurita et al discloses the support assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of bearing elements 112 comprises four bearing elements (figs1C,1D) arranged in a square configuration. However, Kurita et al does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of bearing surfaces comprise four flat bearing surfaces. Mochizuki (‘646) teaches that it is known to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements (fig15) or a set of curved bearing surfaces and curved bearing elements (fig6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements, as taught by Mochizuki, to use bearing surfaces and bearing elements that correspond to each other.
Regarding claim 4, Kurita et al discloses the support assembly of claim 1, however, Kurita et al does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of bearing surfaces comprise four flat bearing surfaces. Mochizuki (‘646) teaches that it is known to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements (fig15) or a set of curved bearing surfaces and curved bearing elements (fig6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements, as taught by Mochizuki, to use bearing surfaces and bearing elements that correspond to each other. Also, it is held that the configuration of the claimed structure was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant (MPEP 2144.04 IV. B.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use triangular configuration instead of a square configuration, as a change of a shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04 IV. B.).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita et al (US 2005/0180737 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 2019/0043744 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kurita et al discloses the support assembly of claim 1, wherein the pin 120 is formed from a ceramic material (para[0036],[0037]). However, Kurita et al does not explicitly disclose that the housing and the rollers of the bearing elements are also formed from a ceramic material. Cho et al (‘744) teaches a use of a housing 210 (para[0035], fig2), a pin 205 (para[0035], fig2), and rollers 230 (para[0035], fig2), used in a support assembly, formed from a ceramic material (para[0035]) to make the housing, the pin, and the rollers to be made of an inert material that is not reactive with process gases or plasma (para[0035]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to form a housing from a ceramic material, as taught by Cho et al, as a ceramic material is an inert material that is not reactive with process gases or plasma (para[0035]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita et al (US 2005/0180737 A1) in view of Or et al (US 2004/0045509 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Kurita et al discloses the support assembly of claim 1, however, does not explicitly disclose that the housing includes a shoulder. Or et al (‘509) teaches that a housing can have either a shoulder (a protruding portion, fig3) at an upper end of a housing 202 (fig3) or no shoulder at the upper end of the housing 202 (fig2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use a shoulder, as taught by Or et al, depending on a configuration of a support 110 (figs1-3).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita et al (US 2005/0180737 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 2019/0043744 A1) and Or et al (US 2004/0045509 A1).
Regarding claim 11¸ Kurita et al (‘737) discloses a support assembly (fig1A) for supporting a substrate in a processing station, comprising:
a housing 102 (para[0026], fig1A) including a bore 105 (para[0027], fig1C), a groove 107 (para[0027], fig1C) formed on an exterior surface of the housing 102 (fig1C), and a plurality of windows (figA above, an open end portion of the groove adjacent to the bore) disposed in the groove 107 that intersect the bore 105 (figsA, 1D);
a ceramic pin 120 (para[0026],[0036]) disposed in the bore 105 (figs1A,1D) and moveable between a retracted position and an extended position, wherein the ceramic pin 120 includes a shaft (fig1A) including a plurality of bearing surfaces (exterior surfaces) and a head 120A comprising a support surface (a top planar surface) configured to engage a bottom edge of the substrate;
a plurality of bearing elements 112 (para[0028]) at least partially disposed in a corresponding window of the plurality of windows (figsA,1D), wherein each bearing element 112 includes a roller 112 (para[0028]) with an outer surface configured to engage a corresponding bearing surface of the shaft (fig1D), wherein the plurality of bearing elements 112 and bearing surfaces cooperate to maintain the support surface in alignment with the bottom edge of the substrate as the ceramic pin 120 moves between the retracted position and the extended position; and
a retaining member 114 (para[0028]) disposed in the groove (figA).
However, Kurita et al does not explicitly disclose that the housing and the rollers of the bearing elements are also formed from a ceramic material, and a use of a shoulder of the housing.
Cho et al (‘744) teaches a use of a housing 210 (para[0035], fig2), a pin 205 (para[0035], fig2), and rollers 230 (para[0035], fig2), used in a support assembly, formed from a ceramic material (para[0035]) to make the housing, the pin, and the rollers to be made of an inert material that is not reactive with process gases or plasma (para[0035]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to form a housing from a ceramic material, as taught by Cho et al, as a ceramic material is an inert material that is not reactive with process gases or plasma (para[0035]).
Or et al (‘509) teaches that a housing can have either a shoulder (a protruding portion, fig3) at an upper end of a housing 202 (fig3) or no shoulder at the upper end of the housing 202 (fig2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use a shoulder, as taught by Or et al, depending on a configuration of a support 110 (figs1-3).
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of over Kurita et al (US 2005/0180737 A1), Cho et al (US 2019/0043744 A1), and Or et al (US 2004/0045509 A1) in further view of Mochizuki (US 2003/0026646 A1).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kurita et al, Cho et al, and Or et al teaches the support assembly of claim 11. Kurita et al further discloses wherein the plurality of bearing elements 112 comprises four bearing elements (figs1C,1D) arranged in a square configuration. However, Kurita et al does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of bearing surfaces comprise four flat bearing surfaces. Mochizuki (‘646) teaches that it is known to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements (fig15) or a set of curved bearing surfaces and curved bearing elements (fig6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements, as further taught by Mochizuki, to use bearing surfaces and bearing elements that correspond to each other.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kurita et al, Cho et al, and Or et al teaches the support assembly of claim 11, however, does not explicitly teach that the plurality of bearing surfaces comprise four flat bearing surfaces. Mochizuki (‘646) teaches that it is known to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements (fig15) or a set of curved bearing surfaces and curved bearing elements (fig6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use a set of flat bearing surfaces and flat bearing elements, as further taught by Mochizuki, to use bearing surfaces and bearing elements that correspond to each other. Also, it is held that the configuration of the claimed structure was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant (MPEP 2144.04 IV. B.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita et al to use triangular configuration instead of a square configuration, as a change of a shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04 IV. B.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Dubost et al (US 2006/0016398 A1), Yang (US 2009/0279814 A1), Polyak (US 2011/0014396 A1), Hou et al (US 2013/0101241 A1), Hao et al (US 2018/0114716 A1), Wise (2,907,610), and Graae et al (3,887,247) teach similar support assemblies and/or bearing elements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights