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 1-4 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) , 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 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 hav e been obvious because shape memory mat erials 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 . Shufflebotham teaches lift pins , line shaped members, made of shape memory alloy (pg. 5-6) . It also teaches operating the members 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” . Therefore it teaches “ 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 ” . 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 , 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) . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KR 2000-0050290 to Kwon published August 2000, see accompanying translation. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JOHN J BRAYTON whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3084 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT James Lin can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT JOHN J. BRAYTON Primary Examiner Art Unit 1794 /JOHN J BRAYTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794