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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 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) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being Anticipated by Cho (KR 20060078948 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Cho discloses:
A substrate processing apparatus comprising:
a load lock chamber (1) comprising:
an opening (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3) through which a substrate (2) among a plurality of substrates (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3) is capable of being loaded into or unloaded from the load lock chamber [15 & 19]; and
an upper region and a lower region with the opening interposed therebetween (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3);
a substrate support (10) provided in the load lock chamber (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3) and capable of supporting the plurality of substrates in a multistage manner at predetermined intervals (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3) [15 & 18];
an elevator (30) capable of elevating and lowering the substrate support [14];
a plurality of sensors (100 & 110 & 120) respectively provided on outer peripheral portions of the upper region and the lower region in the load lock chamber and configured to check a state of the substrate supported by the substrate support [18 & 19]; and
a controller (400) comprising an abnormality determinator and configured to be capable of controlling the abnormality determinator configured to perform an abnormality determination on the substrate based on data respectively sent from the plurality of sensors and a predetermined threshold value [14 & 18 & 20].
Regarding Claim 2, Cho discloses:
each of the plurality of sensors comprises a transmission type optical sensor [18 & 19].
Regarding Claim 3, Cho discloses:
each of the plurality of sensors comprises a transmitter (110) and a receiver (120) provided on the outer peripheral portions of the load lock chamber at mutually opposing positions in a radial direction of the substrate supported by the substrate support (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 4, Cho discloses:
each of the plurality of sensors is arranged so as to divide the substrate support into an upper range corresponding to the upper region and a lower range corresponding to the lower region (Fig. 3), and to check the state of the substrate supported by the substrate support (Fig. 3) [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 5, Cho discloses:
the plurality of sensors comprise a first sensor located in the upper region (Fig. 3), and
the elevator is configured to elevate and lower the substrate support such that a detection position by the first sensor is located at a first measurement position where the state of the substrate accommodated in the upper region is capable of being checked (Fig. 3) [15 & 18 & 19].
Regarding Claim 6, Cho discloses:
the elevator is configured to lower the substrate support such that the detection position by the first sensor is changed from the first measurement position to a second measurement position where the substrate supported at an upper end of the substrate support is capable of being checked (Fig. 3) [15 & 18 & 19].
Regarding Claim 7, Cho discloses:
the abnormality determinator is configured to perform the abnormality determination on the substrate supported by the substrate support located within a range from the first measurement position to the second measurement position based on the data sent from the first sensor (Fig. 3) [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 8, Cho discloses:
the plurality of sensors comprise a second sensor located in the lower region (Fig. 3), and
the elevator is configured to elevate and lower the substrate support such that a detection position by the second sensor is located at a third measurement position where the state of the substrate accommodated in the lower region is capable of being checked and where the substrate supported at a lower end of the substrate support is capable of being measured (Fig. 3) [15 & 18 & 19].
Regarding Claim 9, Cho discloses:
the elevator is configured to lower the substrate support such that the detection position by the second sensor is changed from the third measurement position to a fourth measurement position where the substrate supported above the third measurement position is capable of being measured (Fig. 3) [15 & 18 & 19].
Regarding Claim 10, Cho discloses:
the abnormality determinator is configured to perform the abnormality determination on the substrate supported by the substrate support located within a range from the third measurement position to the fourth measurement position based on the data sent from the second sensor (Fig. 3) [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 11, Cho discloses:
the plurality of sensors comprise a first sensor located in the upper region (Fig. 3), and
the second sensor is configured to be capable of checking the state of the substrate located at a support position where the state of the substrate is incapable of being checked by the first sensor even when the first sensor is operating within an operation range of the elevator (Fig. 3) [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 12, Cho discloses:
the controller is configured to be capable of controlling a checking of the state of the substrate supported by the substrate support without duplication [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 13, Cho discloses:
the abnormality determinator is configured to be capable of checking a presence or absence of the substrate based on a change in an amount of a light from each sensor according to a movement of the substrate due to an elevating and lowering operation of the elevator [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 14, Cho discloses:
a manipulator (70) configured to be capable of presenting the state of the substrate [15 & 16 & 19],
wherein, when it is determined that there is an abnormality in the substrate based on a determination result from the abnormality determinator, the controller notifies the manipulator of the abnormality [15 & 16 & 19].
Regarding Claim 15, Cho discloses:
the controller is configured to be capable of controlling a checking of the state of the substrate in the lower region after checking the state of the substrate in the upper region [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 16, Cho discloses:
A substrate checking method comprising:
(a) supporting a plurality of substrates (2) by a substrate support (10), wherein the substrate support is provided in a load lock chamber (1) and is capable of supporting the plurality of substrates in a multistage manner at predetermined intervals substrate (Fig. 3), and wherein the load lock chamber comprises an opening through which a substrate among the plurality of substrates is capable of being loaded into or unloaded from the load lock chamber and an upper region and a lower region with the opening interposed therebetween (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3);
(b) elevating and lowering the substrate support [15 & 16 & 18];
(c) checking a state of the substrate supported by the substrate support by a plurality of sensors (100 & 110 & 120) respectively provided on outer peripheral portions of the upper region and the lower region in the load lock chamber [14 & 18 & 19 & 20]; and
(d) performing an abnormality determination on the substrate based on data respectively sent from the plurality of sensors and a predetermined threshold value [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Regarding Claim 17, Cho discloses:
A method of manufacturing a semiconductor device [14], comprising the substrate checking method of claim 16 [see rejection of Claim 16 above].
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 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 of this title, 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) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho (KR 20060078948 A).
Regarding Claim 18, Cho teaches:
A controller (400) that causes a substrate processing apparatus, by a computer, to perform:
(a) supporting a plurality of substrates (2) by a substrate support (10), wherein the substrate support is provided in a load lock chamber (1) and is capable of supporting the plurality of substrates in a multistage manner at predetermined intervals substrate (Fig. 3), and wherein the load lock chamber comprises an opening through which a substrate among the plurality of substrates is capable of being loaded into or unloaded from the load lock chamber and an upper region and a lower region with the opening interposed therebetween (Fig. 1 & Fig. 3 & Fig. 4);
(b) elevating and lowering the substrate support [15 & 16 & 18];
(c) checking a state of the substrate supported by the substrate support by a plurality of sensors (100 & 110 & 120) respectively provided on outer peripheral portions of the upper region and the lower region in the load lock chamber [14 & 18 & 19 & 20]; and
(d) performing an abnormality determination on the substrate based on data respectively sent from the plurality of sensors and a predetermined threshold value [14 & 18 & 19 & 20].
Cho does not teach:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes a substrate processing apparatus, by a computer, to perform a process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes a substrate processing apparatus, by a computer, to perform a process in order to provide the necessary instructions for carrying out a task which can be exchanged for adjusted instructions in order to increase the utility of the system by allowing it to be adjusted based on the task since the Examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes a substrate processing apparatus, by a computer, to perform a process were well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Patent publications US 5030057 A, US 5131799 A, US 20080127467 A1, US 20190057890 A1, US 20230260810 A1, US 12068182 B2, and US 20230386871 A1 have been cited by the examiner as pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure because they teach: substrate transfer systems having substrate condition sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENDAN P TIGHE whose telephone number is 571-272-4872. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 7:00-5:30 EST
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SAUL RODRIGUEZ can be reached on 571-272-7097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRENDAN P TIGHE/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652