DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant alleges that the instant claims are directed towards a configuration in which detection operations are differentiated depending on direction and are assigned to separate detectors from each other while Hines is silent about any structural or functional separation of detection components according to different directions and performs the alignment and search processes through a single control system.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Para. 64 of the application as filed and Fig. 4 demonstrate the invention as also a single control system under controller 100 with “functional blocks” first detection unit 113 and second detection unit 114. There is no support for the detection units to be separate hardware controllers and therefore are interpreted to be functions. Additionally, there is no claim language that limits these functions to being executed in parallel and thus may be executed sequentially. Therefore, Hines reads on the claimed limitations as they teach performing the function of detecting the position of a target in a first direction and then performs the function of detecting the position of the target in a second direction.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 21 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Applicant’s amendments.
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) 1-4, 8-9, 12, 19 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hine (US 2002/0068992).
As per claim 1, Hine discloses robot system comprising:
a robot configured to support and transfer a substrate using a hand (see at least para. 49 for robot 26 for handling semiconductor wafers; see at least para. 55 for end effector 48 includes fingers 52a and 52b);
a target configured to be placed, instead of the substrate, on a substrate support in which the substrate is placed before or after transfer by the robot (see at least para. 62 and 68 for target 46 that is same size and configuration as workpieces handled by the robot is placed within a cassette as would a workpiece to be processed);
a sensor provided on the hand and configured to detect the target in a non-contact manner while facing the target (see at least para. 58 for sensor 50 on the distal end of the end effector being a reflective sensor);
a controller configured to control the robot (control system 58) and including:
a first controller configured to control the robot such that the sensor faces the target along a first direction, and detect a position of the target in the first direction based on a detection result of the sensor facing the target along the first direction and a position of the sensor (see at least para. 60 and 69-70 for using the reflective sensor to determine z-axis height to be aligned under target by moving vertically along the z direction; interpreted as a software function as there is no support in the specification for the first controller being a separate hardware within the controller); and
a second controller configured to control the robot to move the sensor along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and detect a position of the target in the second direction based on a change in the detection result of the sensor due to movement along the second direction and the position of the sensor (see at least para. 71-75 for after determining z coordinates moving the end effector in a clockwise or counterclockwise motion, which is in the x and y direction, about the z-axis to search for a pattern under the target in order to determine the x and y coordinates of the target; interpreted as a software function as there is no support in the specification for the first controller being a separate hardware within the controller),
wherein the first controller detects the position of the target in the first direction based on a switching of the detection result of the sensor between different states across a predetermined threshold (see at least para. 58 for the sensitivity of sensor may be set to detect minor changes in the amount of light reflected off of a surface, which is equivalent to a predetermined threshold).
As per claim 2, Hine further discloses wherein the second controller controls the robot to move the sensor along the second direction after the position of the target in the first direction is detected by the first controller (see at least para. 71 for after determining z coordinates, moving the end effector in a clockwise or counterclockwise motion about the z-axis).
As per claim 3, Hine further discloses wherein the second controller recognizes an outline of the target based on the change in the detection result of the sensor due to the movement along the second direction, and detects the position of the target in the second direction based on a position of the sensor when the outline is recognized (see at least para. 75 for determining the x and y coordinates of the target based on the robot position when detecting transition points 64 corresponding to boundary lines 62, equivalent to the outline, while performing the clockwise or counterclockwise search motion).
As per claim 4, Hine further discloses wherein, when viewed from a perspective facing the target along the first direction, the outline includes a first line and a second line that are non-parallel to each other and each intersects the second direction, and the second controller recognizes the first line and the second line based on the detection result of the sensor moving along the second direction, and detects a position of the target in a third direction perpendicular to both the first and second directions based on a position of the sensor when the first line is recognized and a position of the sensor when the second line is recognized (see at least Fig. 6 and para. 75 for example pattern 60 on the bottom of target with two perpendicular lines that run along the x and y direction which is used to determine x and y coordinates of the target while performing the clockwise or counterclockwise search motion).
As per claim 8, Hine further discloses wherein the target has a first surface and a second surface aligned along the second direction and each intersecting the first direction, and the first line and the second line are positioned between the first surface and the second surface (see at least Fig. 11-12 for square target which have a pair of parallel vertical faces along the x direction and a pair of parallel vertical faces along the y direction as it is a three-dimensional object and wherein the pattern would be on the horizontal face located between any pair of parallel vertical faces).
As per claim 9, Hine further discloses wherein the robot includes a multi-joint arm connected to the hand, and the multi-joint arm is configured to change a position of the hand in the first direction, a position of the hand in the second direction, and a posture of the hand around an axis perpendicular to both the first and second directions, through rotation of one or more joints (see at least para. 79 and Figs. 1 and 10 for a multi-link arm assembled with multiple joints that translates along the z-axis using shaft 34 and is capable of moving the distal end of the effector in a pitch and/or roll motion).
As per claim 12, Hine further discloses wherein the sensor is configured to output a signal indicating a distance to the target in a state of facing the target, and the first controller detects the position of the target in the first direction based on the signal output from the sensor facing the target along the first direction and the position of the sensor (see at least para. 70 for proximity sensor).
As per claim 19, Hine further discloses wherein the substrate support is provided inside a cassette accommodating the substrate, the robot system further comprises a target base capable of being placed on the substrate support inside the cassette instead of the substrate, and the target is provided on the target base to be placed at a position detectable by the sensor from an outside of the cassette in a state where the target base is supported by the substrate support (see at least Fig. 11 and para. 49 for a plurality of shelves within a cassette which hold target 46; target base is the bottom surface of target 46; see least Fig. 11 for target 46 overhangs outside of the shelf and cassette to allow robot to sense pattern).
As per claim 22, Hine discloses a calibration method comprising:
placing a target on a substrate support where a substrate is placed before or after transfer by a robot, the robot including a hand that supports and transfers the substrate and a sensor provided on the hand (see at least para. 62 and 68 for target 46 that is same size and configuration as workpieces handled by the robot is placed within a cassette as would a workpiece to be processed; see at least para. 49 for robot 26 for handling semiconductor wafers; see at least para. 55 for end effector 48 includes fingers 52a and 52b);
controlling the robot such that the sensor faces the target in a non-contact manner along a first direction, and detecting a position of the target in the first direction based on a detection result of the sensor facing the target in the non-contact manner along the first direction and a position of the sensor (see at least para. 60 and 69-70 for using the reflective sensor to determine z-axis height to be aligned under target by moving vertically along the z direction);
controlling the robot to move the sensor along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and detecting a position of the target in the second direction based on a change in the detection result of the sensor due to movement along the second direction and the position of the sensor (see at least para. 71-75 for after determining z coordinates moving the end effector in a clockwise or counterclockwise motion, which is in the x and y direction, about the z-axis to search for a pattern under the target in order to determine the x and y coordinates of the target); and
specifying a positional relationship between the robot and the substrate support based on the position of the target in each of the first direction and the second direction (see at least para. 76 for once the center of the target at the station has been identified the control system knows the spacial relationship between the workpiece handling robot and the station, and in particular the cassette seated on the station),
wherein the detecting the position of the target in the first direction includes determining the position based on a switching of the detection result of the sensor between different states across a predetermined threshold (see at least para. 58 for the sensitivity of sensor may be set to detect minor changes in the amount of light reflected off of a surface, which is equivalent to a predetermined threshold).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sanemasa (US 2024/0178043).
As per claim 21, Sanemasa discloses a calibration tool configured to specify a positional relationship between a robot and a cassette, the calibration tool comprising:
a target base capable of being introduced into and removed from the cassette along a first horizontal direction instead of a substrate (see at least para. 57 for teaching jig installed at each transfer position of cassette 200 in a manner analogous to substrate 500; Examiner notes that being capable of being introduced into/removed from a cassette along a first horizontal direction instead of a substrate is given little patentable weight as it is intended use language and does not modify the structure of the calibration tool as any target base is capable of being introduced into/removed from a cassette in any orientation or along any direction so long as there is sufficient space in the cassette), and
a target provided on the target base so as to be placed at a position detectable by a sensor from an outside of the cassette in a state where the target base is accommodated in the cassette (see at least para. 60 for second detected portion is a right-angled isosceles triangle-shaped hole with a first detection line and second detection line that are non-parallel to each other; see at least para. 89 for second detection portion may be a protrusion; the protrusions would therefore be detectable by a sensor outside of the cassette using Fig. 6 and 7 for reference),
the sensor being provided on a hand of the robot and detecting the target in a non-contact manner while facing the target, and the robot supporting the substrate using the hand that is introduced into and removed from the cassette along the horizontal first direction (the italicized limitation is not further examined on the merits as it is outside the scope of the calibration tool),
wherein a position of the target in the horizontal first direction is specified based on a switching of a detection result of the sensor between different states across a predetermined threshold (the italicized limitation is not further examined on the merits as it is outside the scope of the calibration tool);
when viewed from a perspective facing the target along the horizontal first direction, an outline of the target includes a first line and a second line that are non-parallel to each other and each intersects a horizontal second direction perpendicular to the horizontal first direction (see at least para. 60 for second detected portion is a right-angled isosceles triangle-shaped hole with a first detection line and second detection line that are non-parallel to each other; see at least para. 89 for second detection portion may be a protrusion), and
a positional relationship between the robot and the cassette is specified based on the detection result of the sensor (the italicized limitation is not further examined on the merits as it is outside the scope of the calibration tool).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 10-11, 13-15, 17-18, and 20 are allowed.
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 ROBERT NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, ANNA MOMPER can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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.
/ROBERT T NGUYEN/PRIMARY EXAMINER, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights