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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Amendments overcome 112 rejections made in the prior Office Action.
Applicant disagrees the obviousness to combine the spring of Worden with the apparatus of Kim due to the dimensions of the slots of Kim to fit a wider range of thicknesses. This is not a persuasive argument to the Examiner; on the contrary, this argument strengthens the combination to combine as the springs would yield an even greater chance of success over the slots of the Kim reference. Though not used in a pin-spring assembly, cited but not relied for the rejection prior art Gu (US-20150041435-A1) illustrates spring 143 as means to space the glass sheets in the same field of endeavor [0050].
Applicant further argues that the Office Action provides no details as to how Worden is combined with Kim. The Examiner disagrees. The Worden reference explicitly uses the spring as part of the base of the holder similar to the instant invention to hold quartz wafers for batch processing: similar to glass sheets being held for batch processing in a molten salt bath as required by the Kim reference. The Examiner concedes that Worden does not expressly teach a pin to couple the spring to the base, wherein the Hatch reference successfully teaches how a pin can be used to couple the spring with the holes already present in the Kim apparatus. "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). The combination not being limited to Kim and Worden; in this instance, the combination of familiar elements is based on the elements of Kim further in view of Worden and Hatch to achieve a reasonable pursuit of anticipated success.
Applicant argues that the Hatch reference is not applicable because the Hatch reference organizes multi-shaped articles. Hatch is clear that substantially planar articles are organized. Though Hatch organizes, the layperson would agree that both the Kim and Worden reference organize substantially planar articles for processing. The fact that Hatch does not include further processing does not render the reference is irrelevant and is merely an attorney argument. The further processing is already met by the Kim reference (and Worden), and organizing the articles to be processed would be relevant to any skilled artisan interested in efficiency of the process.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR-20140104088-A, English translation provided by Espacenet) and further in view of Worden (US-3610613-A) and Hatch (US-7083057-B1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches an ion exchange apparatus for use during a glass strengthening chemical process (Line 13-14), the ion exchange apparatus comprising base configured to support glass (Line 220-221; support plate 114), the base including a plurality of holes in at least an upper surface thereof (Line 222-223; Fig. 4); a bath access component coupled to the base having an upright orientation (under broadest reasonable interpretation connection portion 116 is coupled to the base/support plate 114 via fixing plate 113 and one of the plurality of frames 115, see Fig. 4).
Kim teaches of slots 118 as means to receive and retain each of the one or more glass sheets (Line 216-218). Kim does not expressly teach of a spring with a plurality of coils. In related apparatus for handling substrate art, Worden teaches of a spring having a plurality of coils configured to receive and retain one or more wafers (Col. 2 Line 30-41). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a spring with a plurality of coils as known means to hold wafers/sheets to be processed to hold and support wafers/sheets of different thicknesses to the base of the apparatus which has the additional benefit of considerably less contact area of the spring touching the glass sheets during processing (Col. 1 Line 31-43).
Worden teaches of securing the spring to the apparatus by rods 30/32/36/38/40/42 (Fig. 3; Col. 2 Line 43-61). Worden does not expressly teach of a pin-spring assembly that uses the plurality of holes similar to that of Kim. In related apparatus for handling substantially planar articles (Col. 2 Line 15-22), Hatch teaches of a pin-spring assembly (extension coil 20 and post 31) wherein the spring is positioned between two pins and coupled to each pin (Col. 5 Line 8-9) wherein the pin-spring assembly is attached to the base (base member 11) such that the first pin is positioned in a first hole and the second pin is positioned in a second hole (tunnel 16, Fig. 2). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the pin-spring assembly of Hatch to the plurality of holes of Kim and holding spring of Worden as a known apparatus arrangement to handle substantially planar articles.
"A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). It is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim, see MPEP 2115. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). The manner or method in which a machine is to be utilized is not germane to the issue of patentability of the machine itself, In re Casey 152 USPQ 235.
Regarding claim 2, depending from claim 1, Kim teaches the holes are positioned on the base in an orthogonal grid configuration (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, depending from claim 4, Kim teaches the holes extend through the base from the upper surface to a lower surface thereof (Line 222-223).
Regarding claim 4, depending from claim 1, Hatch teaches each pin includes a head coupled to a shaft (post shoe 50, Fig. 2) and the shaft is coupled to the spring (Fig. 2). Hatch illustrates the individual components that are all removable (Fig. 2). Kim teaches a plurality of holes (see support plate 114 in Fig. 4).
Per MPEP 2144.04(V)(C), In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (The claimed structure, a lipstick holder with a removable cap, was fully met by the prior art except that in the prior art the cap is "press fitted" and therefore not manually removable. Per MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C), In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the separable parts of Hatch and the plurality of holes of Kim to removably position the shaft and pin through any of the holes of Kim.
Regarding claim 5, depending from claim 1, Kim teaches that the bath access component includes a pole having a generally elongated cylindrical shape (connecting portion 116, Fig. 4) and an opening in an upper end thereof (fastening means 117, Fig. 3; Line 233-236).
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches an ion exchange apparatus for use during a glass strengthening chemical process (Line 13-14), the ion exchange apparatus comprising base having a circular disc shape (support plate 114, Fig. 4) configured to support glass (Line 220-221), the base including a plurality of through holes positioned in an orthogonal grid configuration (Line 222-223; Fig. 4); a pole coupled to the base having an upright orientation (under broadest reasonable interpretation connection portion 116 is coupled to the base/support plate 114 via fixing plate 113 and one of the plurality of frames 115, see Fig. 4) having an opening in an upper end thereof (fastening means 117, Fig. 3; Line 233-236).
Kim teaches of slots 118 as means to receive and retain each of the one or more glass sheets (Line 216-218). Kim does not expressly teach of a spring with a plurality of coils. In related apparatus for handling substrate art, Worden teaches of a spring having a plurality of coils configured to receive and retain one or more wafers (Col. 2 Line 30-41). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a spring with a plurality of coils as known means to hold wafers/sheets to be processed to hold and support wafers/sheets of different thicknesses to the base of the apparatus which has the additional benefit of considerably less contact area of the spring touching the glass sheets during processing (Col. 1 Line 31-43). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a spring with a plurality of coils as known means to hold wafers/sheets to be processed to hold and support wafers/sheets of different thicknesses to the base of the apparatus which has the additional benefit of considerably less contact area of the spring touching the glass sheets during processing (Col. 1 Line 31-43).
Worden teaches of securing the spring to the apparatus by rods 30/32/36/38/40/42 (Fig. 3; Col. 2 Line 43-61). Worden does not expressly teach of a pin-spring assembly that uses the plurality of holes similar to that of Kim. In related apparatus for handling substantially planar articles (Col. 2 Line 15-22), Hatch teaches of a pin-spring assembly (extension coil 20 and post 31) including a first pin and a spaced-apart second pin (Fig. 2, post 31 left and post 31 right), each pin including a head (post shoes 50) and a shaft (post 31), and a spring having a plurality of coils (coil member 20/helical structure 22) , the spring being positioned between the two pins and coupled to each pin (Fig. 2) wherein the pin-spring assembly is attached to the base (base member 11) such that the first pin is positioned in a first through hole and the second pin is positioned in a second through hole (tunnel 16, Fig. 2). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the pin-spring assembly of Hatch to the plurality of holes of Kim and holding spring of Worden as a known apparatus arrangement to handle substantially planar articles.
Hatch teaches each pin includes a head coupled to a shaft (post shoe 50, Fig. 2) and the shaft is coupled to the spring (Fig. 2). Hatch illustrates the individual components that are all removable (Fig. 2). Kim teaches a plurality of holes (see support plate 114 in Fig. 4). Per MPEP 2144.04(V)(C), In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (The claimed structure, a lipstick holder with a removable cap, was fully met by the prior art except that in the prior art the cap is "press fitted" and therefore not manually removable. Per MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C), In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the separable parts of Hatch and the plurality of holes of Kim to removably position the shaft and pin through any of the holes of Kim.
"A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). It is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim, see MPEP 2115. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). The manner or method in which a machine is to be utilized is not germane to the issue of patentability of the machine itself, In re Casey 152 USPQ 235.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20150041435-A1, US-5236094-A, CN-107651448-A teaches of using a spring and each coil is a discrete spacing mean for holding glass sheets
US-20160039587-A1, US-20160039588-A1 teach of a base with plurality of holes and spring to constrain the articles to be processed
US-20180040761-A1 teaches a similar apparatus though the plurality of holes is vertically arranged, omitting the pin
CN-115148646-A teaches an apparatus that can rotate the articles to be held in a horizontal and vertical arrangement
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 STEVEN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2645. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm Mon-Thurs.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/STEVEN S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ERIN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741