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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atsumi (US 2010/0221089) in view of Shufflebotham (WO 97/23899).
Regarding claim 1, Atsumi teaches a substrate attaching/detaching robot, comprising:
a substrate holding member (5) configured to hold a substrate; a robot arm (3) configured to move the substrate holding member (5, fig. 2a-2c);
and at least three line-shaped members (4a, 4b, 4c, fig. 8) connecting the substrate holding member (5) and an end of the robot arm (3), and
a plate shaped member (81) to which the substrate holding member (5) is attached,
each of the three line shaped members (4a-4c) is fixed in a state of being in contact with an inner wall surface (81a, fig. 5b) that defines a hole provided in the plate shaped member (81).
The Examiner interprets “ in a state of being in contact” as encompassing “indirect contact” or “electrical contact” or “thermal contact” through the mechanism (50).
Atsumi does not teach wherein the three line-shaped members are made of a shape-memory alloy.
Shufflebotham is directed to processing substrates loaded with a robot (pg. 3, ln. 20). It teaches lift pins comprising line-shaped members made of a shape-memory alloy because it would allow a bent lift pin to be recovered to a memorized shape using heat without removal and replacement. This would decrease maintenance cost and increased system up time (pg. 2). Therefore Shufflebotham teaches shape memory components that are operable and useful in the vacuum arts for wafer handling. The Examine notes that Atsumi’s line shaped members are the same shape as Shufflebotham lift pins and each are used to support a substrate wafer. The Examiner finds that modifying the material of Atsumi with the shape memory material of Shufflebotham would have been obvious because shape memory materials are well known and operable to support a substrate wafer for wafer handling. Therefore modification of the line shaped members of Atsumi with the shape member alloy of Shufflebotham would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Lastly selection of materials has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the three line shaped members of Atsumi by providing the three line-shaped members are made of a shape-memory alloy, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow the shape of the member to be recovered using heat energy increasing machine uptime and reducing maintenance costs (pg.2 of Shufflebotham) and would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Atsumi does not explicitly teach and a temperature of the substrate holding member (5) during attaching or detaching of the substrate onto or from a substrate holder (5) configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner is in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy. However, this recitation is an intended use of the apparatus because maintaining the substrate holding member at a temperature indicates how the apparatus should be used. Even if it isn’t considered intended use this recited function is well known in the art.
Shufflebotham teaches maintaining the environment of its shape memory lift pins at a temperature in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape memory alloy (pg. 7, ln. 10). Therefore the function of providing “ a temperature of the substrate holding member (5) during attaching or detaching of the substrate onto or from a substrate holder (5) configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner is in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy” is well known in the art.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the temperature of the substrate holding member (5) during attaching or detaching of the substrate onto or from a substrate holder configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner of Shufflebotham by providing the temperature is in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow the shape of the member to be recovered using heat energy increasing machine uptime and reducing maintenance costs (pg.2 of Shufflebotham) and would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Atsumi does not teach the shape-memory alloy is a NiTi-based alloy, and the range of the shape recovery temperature is from 20°C through 80°C.
Shufflebotham teaches the shape-memory alloy is a NiTi-based alloy, and the range of the shape recovery temperature is from 20°C through 80°C (pg. 6, lin. 25-30).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the shape recovery alloy of Atsumi by providing the shape-memory alloy is a NiTi-based alloy, and the range of the shape recovery temperature is from 20°C through 80°C, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow for room temperature shape recovery of the material (pg. 2, ln. 25-pg. 3, ln. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Atsumi teaches a substrate attaching/detaching method, comprising:
connecting, as preparation, a substrate holding member (5) configured to hold a substrate (1) and an end of a robot arm (3) configured to move the substrate holding member (5, fig. 2a-2c), using at least three line-shaped members (4a-4c);
inserting the substrate holding member (5) into an opening in the substrate to make the substrate holdable by the substrate holding member (Fig. 2a);
and attaching or detaching the substrate onto or from a substrate holder configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner (Fig. 2a-2c, pg. 2).
Atsumi does not teach the line shaped member are made of a shape-memory alloy, nor does it teach setting, as preparation, a temperature of the substrate holding member during attaching or detaching of the substrate in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy. Nor does it teach “ in a state of controlling the temperature of the substrate holding member to be maintained in the range of the shape recovery temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recovery of the shape memory alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate.”
Shufflebotham is directed to processing substrates loaded with a robot. It teaches lift pins comprising line-shaped members made of a shape-memory alloy because it would allow a bent lift pin to be recovered to a memorized shape using heat without removal and replacement. This would decrease maintenance cost and increased system up time (pg. 2). Therefore Shufflebotham teaches shape memory components that are operable and useful in the vacuum arts for wafer handling. Shufflebotham teaches operating its apparatus at ambient temperature (pg. 4, ln. 14-26). Shufflebotham teaches a shape memory allow in the shape recovery temperature above or below ambient temperature (pg. 3, ln. 2). Shufflebotham teaches lift pins (6; line shaped members), made of shape memory alloy (pg. 5-6) operating in an environment in which the lift pins are normally in the austenitic condition (pg. 7, ln. 10; pg. 5, ln. 15-pg. 6, ln. 10) which reads on “is in the range of a shape recovery temperature of shape memory alloy” and also reads on “in a state of controlling the temperature of the substrate holding member to be maintained in the range of the shape recovery temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recovery of the shape memory alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate.”
The Examiner looks to Applicant’s specification to determine the breadth of interpretation for “controlling the temperature”. In paragraph [0059] of Applicant’s specification as filed, control of the temperature is performed by the loading chamber, unloading chamber in which the substrate robot exists. Shufflebotham teaches control of temperature within these chambers because it teaches that they are maintained at ambient temperature, as cited above.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the line shaped member of Atsumi by providing the line shaped members are made of a shape-memory alloy, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow the shape of the member to be recovered using heat energy increasing machine uptime and reducing maintenance costs (pg.2 of Shufflebotham) and would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the temperature of the substrate holder of Atsumi by setting, as preparation, a temperature of the substrate holding member during attaching or detaching of the substrate in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy,
and modify the attaching and detaching of the substrate of Atsumi by providing a state of controlling the temperature of the substrate holding member to be maintained in the range of the shape recovery temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recovery of the shape memory alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow the shape of the member to be recovered using heat energy increasing machine uptime and reducing maintenance costs (pg.2 of Shufflebotham) and would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, Atsumi teaches a film formation apparatus, comprising:
a chamber (201, Fig. 10) in which a film formation process is performed on a substrate (1);
a carrier (2) on which a substrate holder (2a) is situated, the substrate holder (2a) being configured to hold the substrate (1) in a detachably attachable manner (Fig. 2a-2c, 10);
a conveying mechanism configured to convey the carrier (Fig. 10, pg. 6);
and the substrate attaching/detaching robot of claim 1 (the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein), the substrate attaching/detaching robot (3) being configured to attach or detach the substrate (1) onto or from the substrate holder (2, fig. 2a-2c).
Regarding claim 5, Atsumi teaches a substrate attaching/detaching robot, comprising:
a substrate holding member (5) configured to hold a substrate;
a robot arm (3) configured to move the substrate holding member (5, fig. 2a-2c);
at least three line-shaped members (4a, 4b, 4c, fig. 8) connecting the substrate holding member (5) and an end of the robot arm (3), and
a plate shaped member (81) to which the substrate holding member (5) is attached,
wherein the three line shaped members (4a-4c) is fixed in a state of being in contact with an inner wall surface (81a, fig. 5b) that defines a hole provided in the plate shaped member (81).
The Examiner interprets “ in a state of being in contact” as encompassing “indirect contact” or “electrical contact” or “thermal contact” through the mechanism (50).
Atsumi does not teach wherein the three line-shaped members are made of a shape-memory alloy.
Shufflebotham is directed to processing substrates loaded with a robot. It teaches lift pins comprising line-shaped members made of a shape-memory alloy because it would allow a bent lift pin to be recovered to a memorized shape using heat without removal and replacement. This would decrease maintenance cost and increased system up time (pg. 2). Therefore Shufflebotham teaches shape memory components that are operable and useful in the vacuum arts for wafer handling. The Examine notes that Atsumi’s line shaped members are the same shape as Shufflebotham lift pins and each are used to support a substrate wafer. The Examiner finds that modifying the material of Atsumi with the shape memory material of Shufflebotham would have been obvious because shape memory materials are well known and operable to support a substrate wafer for wafer handling. Therefore modification of the line shaped members of Atsumi with the shape member alloy of Shufflebotham would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Lastly selection of materials has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the three line shaped members of Atsumi by providing the three line-shaped members are made of a shape-memory alloy, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow the shape of the member to be recovered using heat energy increasing machine uptime and reducing maintenance costs (pg.2 of Shufflebotham) and would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Atsumi does not explicitly teach a temperature of the substrate holding member during attaching or detaching of the substrate onto or from a substrate holder configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner is controlled to be maintained in a range of a shape recover temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recover of the shape member alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy.
The Examiner takes the position that “ a temperature of the substrate holding member during attaching or detaching of the substrate onto or from a substrate holder configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner is controlled to be maintained in a range of a shape recover temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recover of the shape member alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy” is intended use of the apparatus of claim 5 because it isn’t linked to any structure of the apparatus. Intended use does not receive patentable weight in an apparatus claim.
If it is found this recitation is instead functional language, see MPEP 2114 and 2115, the Examiner takes the position that the apparatus of the prior art set out above is inherently capable of performing this function because Shufflebotham teaches a shape memory alloy that is able to recover its design shape at ambient temperature. It also teaches the alloy used at temperatures corresponding to its recover temperature (pg. 7,ln. 10).
Shufflebotham is directed to processing substrates loaded with a robot. It teaches lift pins comprising line-shaped members made of a shape-memory alloy because it would allow a bent lift pin to be recovered to a memorized shape using heat without removal and replacement. This would decrease maintenance cost and increased system up time (pg. 2). Shufflebotham teaches lift pins (6) made of shape memory alloy and are provided in the load lock (12), processing chamber (14) and exit load lock (16). It maintains the environment of its shape memory lift pins at a temperature in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape memory alloy (pg. 7, ln. 10). Therefore Shufflebotham teaches “is controlled to be maintained in a range of a shape recover temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recover of the shape member alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy”.
The Examiner looks to Applicant’s specification to determine the breadth of interpretation for “controlled to be maintained in a range of a shape recovery temperature”. In paragraph [0059] of Applicant’s specification as filed, control of the temperature is performed by the loading chamber, unloading chamber in which the substrate robot exists. Shufflebotham teaches control of temperature within these chambers because it teaches that they are maintained at ambient temperature (pg. 4, ln. 14-26).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify temperature of the substrate holding member during attaching or detaching of the substrate onto or from a substrate holder configured to hold the substrate in a detachably attachable manner of Atsumi by providing the temperature is controlled to be maintained in a range of a shape recover temperature of the shape memory alloy to cause both deformation and shape recover of the shape member alloy during the attaching or detaching of the substrate in a range of a shape recovery temperature of the shape-memory alloy, as taught by Shufflebotham, because it would allow the shape of the member to be recovered using heat energy increasing machine uptime and reducing maintenance costs (pg.2 of Shufflebotham) and would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 18, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues Atsumi does not teach the line members contact an inner wall surface.
The Examiner does not agree because “in a state of being in contact” is broader than direct physical contact argued by Applicant. The recitation can include electrical contact or thermal contact or indirect contact. The Applicant is directed to the new grounds of rejection set out above.
Regarding claim 3, Applicant argues that the preferred embodiment of Shufflebotham on pg. 7, ln. 10 isn’t enough to provide a teaching of “ a state of controlling the temperature of the substrate holding member to be maintained in the range of the shape recovery temperature to cause both deformation and shape recovery of the shape member alloy”. The Examiner does not agree because Shufflebotham controls an ambient temperature within its apparatus to provide the lift pins in the temperature range required by Applicant. Modification of Atsumi’s attaching and detaching is analogous to the transferring of substrate 2 using lift pins 6 in either load lock (14, or 16) of Shufflebotham leading the skilled artisan to expect nothing more than predictable results.
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 JOHN J BRAYTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3084. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571 272 8902. 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.
/JOHN J BRAYTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights