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 without traverse of Group I, Species B (including claims 1-4 and 6-12) in the reply filed on 20 January 2025 was previously acknowledged.
Claims 2, 5, 7, 10, 13-21 and 24 have been cancelled in previous replies.
Specification
Amendments to the specification submitted on 8 May 2026 are accepted.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: lift pin module in claims 1 and 9 which has been interpreted as including lift pins and an actuator (and equivalents thereto) as set forth in the specification, for example, at para. 99; irradiation member in claims 1 and 9 which has been interpreted as a laser (and equivalents thereto) as set forth in the specification, for example, at para. 91; claims 1 and 9 measurement unit/light receiving member wherein no specific structure for performing the recited function has been located in the specification (see resulting rejections below with respect to 35 USC 112 a, b); claim 1 and 9 support unit which has been interpreted as a chuck and (and equivalents thereto) as set forth in the specification, for example, at para. 92-94; and claim 9 gas supply unit which has been interpreted as a gas supply source and gas supply line (and equivalents thereto) as set forth, for example, at para. 102 in the specification; claim 9 power supply unit which has been interpreted as power supply and a matcher (and equivalents thereto) as set forth, for example, in the specification, for example, at para. 92; claims 22-23 substrate lift pin module which has been interpreted as including lift pins, an actuator, a lifting plate and bellows (and equivalents thereto) as set forth in the specification, for example, at para. 100.
Note: although claims 1, 9 and 22-23 include recitations drawn to lift pins, for the lift pin module and/or substrate lift pin module, mere reference to lift pin(s) is not considered sufficient structure to perform the recited function. Thus, the limitations are interpreted as set forth above.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Further Claim Interpretations
Interpretation of the controller is based on the following language in the specification (para. 85): The controller 700 may include a process controller, a user interface, and a storage unit. The process controller may include a microprocessor (a computer) that executes the control of the substrate treating apparatus 1000. The user interface may include a keyboard through which the operator inputs a command to manage the substrate treating apparatus 1000 or a display that visually displays an operational state of the substrate treating apparatus 1000. The storage unit may store a process recipe, such as a control program for executing a process in the substrate treating apparatus 1000 under the control of the process controller or a program for causing each component to execute a process according to various types of data and process conditions. Furthermore, the user interface and the storage unit may be connected to the process controller. The process recipe may be stored in a storage medium of the storage unit. The storage medium may be a hard disk, a portable disk such as CD-ROM or DVD, or a semiconductor memory such as a flash memory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, 11-12 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Any claim not specifically mentioned is rejected based on its dependence.
As discussed above, “measurement unit…light receiving member” invokes interpretation under U.S.C. 112(f). However, no reference of “measurement unit…light receiving member” in the disclosure details a specific structure to perform the claimed function attributed thereto. Without any disclosure of any structure, materials, or acts for performing the functions or any link of structure to the functions, one cannot conclude that the inventor was in possession of the claimed invention. Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
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.
Claim 1 and 9 limitation “measurement unit…light receiving member” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, 11-12 and 22-23 are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Any claim not specifically mentioned is rejected based on its dependence.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Response to Arguments
The previous prior art rejections have been withdrawn with respect to the claimed invention as a whole. However, Examiner does note disagreement with the argument regarding Negishi limiting to real-time measurement in order to preclude making the invention unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. The very paragraph that Applicant points to for support (i.e. para. 47) for limiting to real-time measurement also states that detection/measurement may take place before the start of etching or after the completion of etching.
Regarding claim limitation “measurement unit…light receiving member”, Examiner has thoroughly reviewed the original disclosure thoroughly with their supervisor and at least one other specialist and did not find any structure readable on the claimed recitation. At this time, Examiner’s best suggestion regarding pursuing apparatus claims including the feature at issue is that Applicant may want to review the foreign priority documents to determine whether or not there is any non-translated feature that might be readable thereon and properly incorporating the same in the specification of the instant application.
Examiner has reviewed Applicant’s response to the rejections under 35 USC 112 a,b. Examiner does not find any evidence in the original disclosure that the light receiving member is necessarily a type of “sensor” such as an “optical light receiving sensor”, as argued by Applicant, nor has Applicant provided any convincing evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art would assume the same. Thus, the rejections are maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USP Pub. 2017/0117172 discloses automated replacement of consumable parts using interfacing chambers. USP Pub. 2015/0010381 discloses a wafer processing chamber and method for transferring wafer and focus ring in the same. CN 107093569B discloses an apparatus with a focus ring and lift ring module for positioning the same.
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 whose telephone number is (571)272-1440. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm 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, PARVIZ HASSANZADEH can be reached on (571) 272-1435. 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.
/KARLA A MOORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights