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 Invention I and Species A-1, B-1, C-1, and D-1 in the reply filed on January 6, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that that the subject matter of claims 1 – 20 is sufficiently related that a thorough search for the subject matter of any one group would necessarily encompass a search for the subject matter of the remaining groups, and there is thus no serious burden placed on the examiner to examine the entire set of claims. This is not found persuasive because a primary form of evidence of a burden on the examiner is a showing of separate classification of the distinct inventions. Such is the case here. The elected claims are classified in B23Q 3/062, while the non-elected claims are classified in H01L 21/683. A search of the elected invention would not require a search of the non-elected invention. Having to perform two separate, non-overlapping searches in a single application would indeed be a burden on the examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 5 – 7 and 9 – 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species (Invention II, Species A-2, A-3, B-2, C-2, and/or D-2), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on January 6, 2026.
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:
“support pin spacing device” recited in claim 1
“support pin elevating and lowering device” recited in claim 2
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.
The limitation “support pin spacing device” invokes interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because:
(A) The limitation uses a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder for performing the claimed function (“device”).
(B) The generic placeholder is modified by functional language (“support pin spacing” or ‘configured for spacing a support pin’ and “configured to space the substrate and at least one of the support pins from each other while the chuck pin is gripping the substrate”).
(C) The generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Due to the invocation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the limitation “support pin spacing device” is interpreted so as to comprise ‘a support pin elevating and lowering device and a controller configured to apply a lowering control signal to the support pin elevating and lowering device based on a type of a process, wherein the support pin elevating and lowering device comprises a support pin moving table and a support pin elevating and lowering driver device,’ as taught by the Specification (page 17), or a functional equivalent thereof.
The limitation “support pin elevating and lowering device” invokes interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because:
(A) The limitation uses a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder for performing the claimed function (“device”).
(B) The generic placeholder is modified by functional language (“support pin elevating and lowering” or ‘configured for elevating and lowering a support pin’ and “configured to lower the at least one support pin such that a vertical level of a top of the at least one support pin is lower than a vertical level of a top of the chuck pin”).
(C) The generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Due to the invocation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the limitation “support pin elevating and lowering device” is interpreted so as to comprise ‘a support pin moving table and a support pin elevating and lowering driver device,’ as taught by the Specification (page 17), or a functional equivalent thereof.
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 – 4 and 8 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 “the chuck pin” in the fourth paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to one or all of the “plurality of chuck pins” previously set forth in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “at least one of the plurality of chuck pins,” so as to clearly refer to one of the ‘plurality of chuck pins’ previously set forth in the claim.
Claim 1 further recites the limitation “the support pin” in the fourth paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to one or all of the “plurality of support pins” previously set forth in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “at least one of the plurality of support pins,” so as to clearly refer to one of the ‘plurality of support pins’ previously set forth in the claim. Examiner further notes that the limitation of “at least one of the support pins,” subsequently set forth in the claim, will refer to the “at least one of the plurality of support pins” limitation.
Claims 2 and 4 each recite the limitation “the chuck pin.” It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitations to refer to one or all of the “plurality of chuck pins” previously set forth in the claims. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitations as “the at least one of the plurality of chuck pins.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2012/0227666).
As to claim 1, Kim teaches a substrate processing apparatus (abstract) comprising: a body configured to spin-rotate (figures 5a and 5b, element 102 being the ‘body’; paragraph 40). Examiner notes that the body is configured to spin-rotate because the entirety of the apparatus, including the body, may be rotated as an entire unit. Kim further teaches a plurality of support pins installed on the body so as to support the substrate thereon (figures 5a and 5b, elements 150 being the ‘plurality of support pins’; paragraph 45); a plurality of chuck pins installed on teh body so as to grip a side surface of the substrate (figures 5a and 5b, elements 110 being the ‘plurality of chuck pins’; paragraph 45); a chuck pin driver device configured to move one of the plurality of chuck pins from a stand-by position to a grip position when the substrate has been seated on one of the plurality of support pins (figures 5a and 5b; paragraphs 45 and 54). Examiner notes that this can be found because Kim teaches that each of the plurality of chuck pins are “actuated and extended vertically” from a position within the base to a position along the side surface of the substrate (figures 5b and 9, elements 110 and 120 and step S3; paragraphs 45 and 54). This inherently requires some type of “chuck pin driver device” to perform the ‘actuation.’ Kim further teaches a support pin spacing device configured to space the substrate and the one of the plurality of support pins from each other while the chuck pin is gripping the substrate (figures 5a and 5b; paragraphs 45 and 54). Examiner notes that this can be found because Kim teaches that each of the plurality of support pins are “retracted” from an extended position above the body to a lowered position within the body (figure 9, step S4; paragraph 54). This inherently requires some type of “support pin spacing device” to perform the ‘retraction.’ Examiner notes that while Kim does not expressly teach the structure of the ‘support pin spacing device,’ the ‘support pin spacing device’ of Kim is a functional equivalent of the ‘support pin spacing device’ of the Specification because Kim teaches that the ‘support pin spacing device’ acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 2 – 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi (Korean Patent Number 10-2017-0015676 A, cited in IDS) and Furuya (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0083038).
As to claim 2, while Kim teaches the support pin spacing device, Kim does not teach the structure of the support pin spacing device. Choi teaches a substrate processing apparatus (machine translation, paragraph 1) comprising: a plurality of support pins configured to support the substrate thereon (figure 3, elements 210 being the ‘plurality of support pins’; machine translation, paragraphs 50 – 51); and a support pin spacing device configured to raise and lower one support pin of the plurality of support pins (figure 3, elements 220 and 230 being the ‘support pin spacing device’; machine translation, paragraphs 50 – 53). Choi further teaches that the support pin spacing device includes: a support pin elevating and lowering device, comprising a support pin moving table and support pin elevating and lowering driver device, configured to lower the one support pin of the plurality of support pins (figure 3, element 220 being the ‘support pin moving table’ and element 230 being the ‘support pin elevating and lowering driver device’; machine translation, paragraphs 50 – 53). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide a support pin spacing device for raising and lowering a support pin, as taught by Kim, wherein the support pin spacing device comprises a support pin moving table and support pin elevating and lowering driver device, as taught by Choi, because Choi teaches that such a support pin spacing device provides the benefit of raising and lowering a substrate, as desired by Kim.
However, while Kim in view of Choi teaches a support pin spacing device for raising and lowering support pins, and Kim teaches raising and lowering the support pins in a given sequential order (figure 9, steps S1 and S4; paragraphs 53 – 54), neither Kim nor Choi teach how to sequentially operate the support pin spacing device. Furuya teaches a substrate processing apparatus (abstract) comprising: a plurality of support pins configured to support a substrate thereon (figure 1, elements 21 being the ‘plurality of support pins’; paragraph 29); a support pin spacing device configured actuate one support pin of the plurality of support pins (figure 1, element 4d being the ‘support pin spacing device’; paragraphs 32 – 34). Furuya further teaches that the support pin spacing device comprises a controller configured to apply a control signal to the support pin spacing device based on a type of process (figure 1, element 7 being the ‘controller’; paragraphs 21 and 76). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide the support pin elevating and lowering device of Kim in view of Choi with the controller of Furuya because Kim teaches the support pin spacing device being configured to lower the plurality of support pins at a given time and one skilled in the art would appreciate that the controller of Furuya would provide the benefit of operating the support pin spacing device of Kim in view of Choi with the ability to provide a lowering control signal to the support pin spacing device at the desired time, based on the type of process.
As to claim 3, the discussion of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
As to claim 4, the support pin elevating and lower device of Kim in view of Choi and Furuya is configured to lower all the support pins relative to the one chuck pin of the plurality of chuck pins when the one chuck pin of the plurality of chuck pin grips the substrate.
As to claim 8, Choi teaches an embodiment in which the support pin moving table is embodied as a support pin moving plate for supporting the plurality of support pins (figure 6, element 220a being the ‘support pin moving plate’; machine translation, paragraph 69), wherein the support pin elevating and lowering driver device is embodied as a support pin moving plate cylinder for elevating and lowering the support pin moving plate (figure 6, element 230a being the ‘support pin moving plate cylinder; paragraphs 69 and 53).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (EST).
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726