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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 521. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 521. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “each of said one or a plurality of first compartments, each of said one or a plurality of conduits” in lines 8-9 and “hold a workpiece” in the last line should be corrected as --each of said one or [[a]]the plurality of first compartments, each of said one or [[a]]the plurality of conduits-- and --hold [[a]]should be corrected as --hold [[a]]the workpiece-- respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “hold a workpiece” in line 4 should be corrected as --hold [[a]]the workpiece--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 objected to because of the following informalities: “said one or a plurality of first compartments comprises a plurality of first compartments” should be corrected as --said one or [[a]]the plurality of first compartments comprises [[a]]the plurality of first compartments--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “said one or a plurality of conduits” should be corrected as --said one or [[a]]the plurality of conduits--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “said one or a plurality of first compartments” in lines 6-7 and “hold a workpiece” in the last line should be corrected as --said one or [[a]]the plurality of first compartments-- and --hold [[a]]the workpiece-- respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “said one or a plurality of vacuum generators” should be corrected as --said one or [[a]]the plurality of vacuum generators--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: “each of the one or a plurality of Venturi vacuum generators” should be corrected as --each of the one or [[a]]the plurality of Venturi vacuum generators--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: “said one or a plurality of Venturi vacuum generators” should be corrected as --said one or [[a]]the plurality of Venturi vacuum generators--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the one or a plurality of vacuum generators” should be corrected as --the one or [[a]]the plurality of vacuum generators--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 4: Claim 4 recites “the controller” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that claim 2 recites “a controller” in line 1. For examination purposes, claim 4 is interpreted to depend on claim 2 instead of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Levin et al (US 6,644,703 B1).
Regarding claim 16, Levin et al (‘703) discloses a chuck (abstract) for acquiring and holding a workpiece, the chuck comprising: a housing (fig11) comprising: one or a plurality of first compartments 54 (col.25 line54), each defining a first space (interior space, “reservoir”) and having a wall (top wall) that forms a chuck surface 56 (col.26 line1) having a plurality of vacuum ports 55 (col.25 lines59-60) that are distributed on the chuck surface (fig11); one or a plurality of vacuum generators (Venturi type of vacuum-pump, col.25 lines50-51) for affecting suction in said one or the plurality of first compartments 54 to cause suction at the plurality of vacuum ports 55 on the chuck surface to acquire and hold the workpiece 50 (col.25 lines48-50).
Regarding claim 17¸ Levin et al discloses the chuck according to claim 16, wherein said one or the plurality of vacuum generators comprises one or a plurality of Venturi vacuum generators (“Venturi” type of vacuum-pump, col.25 lines50-51).
Regarding claim 18¸ Levin et al discloses the chuck according to claim 17, wherein an exhaust port (a connection) of each of the one or the plurality of Venturi vacuum generators is connected to a vacuum source 51.
Regarding claim 19¸ Levin et al discloses the chuck according to claim 17, further comprising a controller 53 (automatic “control” valve, col.25 lines52-53) for controlling a blow of high-pressure through said one or the plurality of Venturi vacuum generators.
Regarding claim 20¸ Levin et al discloses the chuck according to claim 19, wherein the controller is further configured to control the operation of the one or the plurality of vacuum generators (col.25 lines51-54).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao et al (US 2022/0319903 A1) in view of Lee (5,857,667).
Regarding claim 1, Liao et al (‘903) discloses a chuck (fig1) for acquiring and holding a workpiece 20’ (para[0030]), the chuck comprising: one or a plurality of first compartments 1122 (para[0024], fig2), each defining a first space (fig2) and having a wall (figs1-2, a top plate) that forms a chuck surface 110a (para[0024]) having a plurality of vacuum ports 1121 (para[0024]) that are distributed on the chuck surface 110a (figs1-2); a valve (para[0035], “valves”) which when opened allows flow through and when closed prevents flow through (para[0035]); wherein when a vacuum source (para[0024]) is fluidically connected to the first compartments 1122, when the valve is opened, the vacuum affects suction at the plurality of vacuum ports 1121 on the chuck surface 110a to acquire and hold the workpiece (para[0024],[0035]). However, Liao et al does not explicitly disclose a use of a second compartment and one or a plurality of conduits fluidically connecting between the second compartment and each of said one or the plurality of first compartments, and that the one of the plurality of conduits having the valve.
Lee (‘667) teaches a use of a second compartment 43 (col.3 line51) defining a second space (“vacuum chamber”) for internally temporarily accumulating vacuum, one or a plurality of conduits 35 (col.3 lines45-46, 48-52, fig4) fluidically connecting between the second compartment 43 and one or a plurality of first compartments 31 (col.3 lines49-50), each of said one or the plurality of conduits 35 having a valve 41 (col.3 line51) which when opened allows flow through that conduit 35 and when closed prevents flow through that conduit 35; and wherein when a vacuum source 44 (col.3 line52) is fluidically connected to the second compartment 43 and when the valve 41 of each of said one or more conduits 35 is closed vacuum is temporarily accumulated in the second compartment 43 (“vacuum chamber”), such that when the valve 41 of each of said one or more conduits 35 is opened, the accumulated vacuum affects suction at a plurality of vacuum ports 31 (col.3 line36) on a chuck surface (fig3b) to acquire and hold the workpiece (col.3 lines52-63). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liao et al to use a second compartment and one or a plurality of conduits, as taught by Lee, to receive and collect vacuum from the vacuum source and distribute the vacuum to each conduits.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1, further comprising a controller (Liao et al, para[0035], “a control unit”; Lee, col.3 lines57-63), configured to close the valve (para[0035]) of each of said one or more conduits (taught by Lee), to cause vacuum to temporarily accumulate in the second compartment (Lee, col.3 lines57-63), and to open the valve of each of said one or more conduits to acquire and hold the workpiece on the chuck surface (Liao et al, para[0035], “a control unit”; Lee, col.3 lines57-63).
Regarding claim 3¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1. Alternate embodiment of Liao et al discloses a use of the plurality of first compartments 1122A,1122B,1122C (para[0041], figs8-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Liao et al to use a plurality of the first compartments, as taught by alternate embodiment of Liao et al, to divide a chuck surface into multiple zones which can be individually controlled (para[0041],[0042]).
Regarding claim 4¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to separately control the valves of the plurality of first compartments (Lee, col.3 lines60-63).
Regarding claim 5¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 3. Liao et al further teaches wherein the plurality of first compartments 1122A,1122B,1122C are arranged concentrically (figs8-9, having different diameters).
Regarding claim 6¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 5. Liao et al further teaches wherein the vacuum ports 1121C,1121B,1121C of the first compartments 1122A,1122B,1122C are arranged in concentric strips (figs8-9, fig1, it is noted that the arrangement of the vacuum ports on the chuck surface in both embodiments are the same).
Regarding claim 7¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 6. Liao et al further teaches wherein at least one of the concentric strips are adjacent to one another (fig1).
Regarding claim 8¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 6. Liao et al further teaches wherein at least some of the concentric strips are separated by a gap on the chuck surface (fig1).
Regarding claim 9¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1. Liao et al teaches a use of a vacuum connection port (“inlet” para[0024]) for connecting to an external vacuum source (“a vacuum source”, para[0024]).
Regarding claim 10¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1. Liao et al further discloses wherein the plurality of vacuum ports 1121 is distributed on a peripheral zone of the chuck surface (fig1, both peripheral zone and center areas).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1. Liao et al further discloses wherein the plurality of vacuum ports 1121 is distributed on the chuck surface in one or a plurality of distribution patterns (fig1, circular).
Regarding claim 12¸ the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1. Liao et al further discloses wherein said one or a plurality of first compartments comprises a single compartment 1122.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1. Liao et al further discloses one or a plurality of protrusions124 (fig1, para[0028]) on the chuck surface (fig1) to prevent direct contact between the workpiece and the chuck surface (fig4, before the vacuum is applied).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Liao et al (US 2022/0319903 A1) and Lee (5,857,667) in further view of Chen et al (US 6,170,496 B1).
Regarding claims 13-14, the combination of Liao et al and Lee teaches the chuck according to claim 1, however, does not explicitly teach a use of three-way valve. Chen et al (‘496) teaches a use of a three-way valve (col.3 lines35-44) which has a first valve opening connected to the first conduit, a second valve opening connected to the second conduit and a third valve opening connected to a gas supply (col.3 lines35-44), the three-way valve connected to a pressure source to affect pressure force (col.4 lines5-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liao et al to use a three-way valve, as further taught by Chen et al, so that a damaged conduit out of a plurality of conduits can be replaced without breaking the vacuum flow (col.3 lines35-47).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kurokawa (US 2003/0102682 A1), Piper (6,024,631), and Daly (4,183,545) teach similar chucks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723