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) 1 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Buitron (7,600,359). Buitron discloses a process carrier (10; Figs. 5-10; Figs. 20-31) comprising a first side wall (92) including a first plurality of teeth (96), a second side wall (92) including a second plurality of teeth (96), the second side wall opposite the first side wall; and adjacent teeth of the first plurality of teeth are separated by a gap (102) at an inner surface (108; Fig. 28) of the first side wall, and adjacent teeth of the second plurality of teeth are separated by the gap (102) at an inner surface (108; Fig. 28) of the second side wall. Buitron further discloses the first plurality of teeth and corresponding teeth of the second plurality of teeth define a plurality of slots (102; Fig. 30) with each slot of the plurality of slots configured to receive at least a substrate (D) and each of the slots having a slot angle of 60° (the angle between two sidewalls 100, 100; Fig. 28 & 30) which is equivalent to a slot angle in a range from 47° to 76° as claimed.
As to claim 3, Buitron further discloses a thickness of the gap is at least a thickness of the substrate (Fig. 30).
As to claim 4, Buitron discloses the teeth of each of the first plurality of teeth and the second plurality of teeth each includes a first side (100; Fig. 28), a second side (100), and a tip (104) between the first side and the second side.
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) 2 and 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buitron in view of Nishikiori et al. (5,704,494; hereinafter Nishikiori) and/or Kudlich et al. (4,160,504; hereinafter Kudlich).
As to claims 2 and 6, Buitron discloses the process carrier as above having most of the limitations of the claims except for the first plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the first side wall by half or less of the height direction of the first side wall and the second plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the second side wall by half or less of the height direction of the second side wall. Nishikiori teaches a process carrier (10) comprising a first side wall (16) including a first plurality of teeth (16h), and a second side wall (18) including a second plurality of teeth (18h), the second side wall opposite the first side wall. Nishikiori further discloses the first plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the first side wall by half or less of the height direction of the first side wall and the second plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the second side wall by half or less of the height direction of the second side wall (Figs. 1 & 5). Kudlich discloses a process carrier comprising a first side wall (1a) including a first plurality of teeth (3), and a second side wall (1a) including a second plurality of teeth (3), the second side wall opposite the first side wall. Kudlich further discloses the first plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the first side wall by half or less of the height direction of the first side wall and the second plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the second side wall by half or less of the height direction of the second side wall (Figs. 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Nishikiori and/or Kudlich to modify the process carrier of Buitron so the process carrier is constructed with a first side wall and a second side wall, and the first plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the first side wall by half or less of the height direction of the first side wall and the second plurality of teeth extends along a height direction of the second side wall by half or less of the height direction of the second side wall for better protecting the substrates by reducing the contact surface between the substrate and the first and second plurality of teeth and also because the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
As to claims 5 and 8, Kudlich further teaches each of a plurality slots comprises a slot angle in a range from 45° to 75° which is equivalent to 50° to 54° as claimed.
As to claim 7, see claim 1 above.
As to claim 9, Buitron further discloses a thickness of the gap is at least a thickness of the substrate (Fig. 30).
As to claim 10, Buitron discloses the teeth of each of the first plurality of teeth and the second plurality of teeth each includes a first side (100; Fig. 28), a second side (100), and a tip (104) between the first side and the second side.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all rejected claims have been considered but are deemed to be moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAN K BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4552. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F, 7-4.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached on 571-270-5531 or orlando.aviles-bosques@uspto.gov. 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.
/LUAN K BUI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights