The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fosnight (US 5,980,183, previously cited).
Fosnight shows a distribution storage system, comprising:
a wall 114 protruding from a floor in a vertical direction and extending in a first horizontal direction;
a plurality of shelves 106/260 positioned adjacent to a side of the wall and having a space in which carriers 108 are accommodated;
an interface port 104 positioned adjacent to a lowermost shelf among the plurality of shelves;
a first rail 252a (Fig. 13 embodiment) positioned near a ceiling to face the interface port in the vertical direction and extending in the first horizontal direction;
a crane 250 configured to move along the first rail;
a transfer robot 262 coupled to the crane, the transfer robot configured to be driven in the vertical direction, and further configured to grip and release the carriers; and
columns 258 (only one column is shown in Fig. 13 but col. 12:29-31 discloses that a plurality of such columns may be provided in a horizontally spaced arrangement along the bay wall) on both a first side of the wall perpendicular to the floor in the first horizontal direction and a second side of the wall perpendicular to the floor in the first horizontal direction, the columns extending in a second horizontal direction and protruding beyond the wall in the second horizontal direction,
wherein the plurality of shelves are all arranged on one plane.
Re claim 2, Fosnight further discloses a second rail 256a spaced apart from the wall in the second horizontal direction with the first rail therebetween and extending in the first horizontal direction, and an overhead hoist 254 transfer device moving along the second rail.
Re claim 3, the carriers are configured to accommodate wafers (col. 1:5-11).
Re claim 4, the crane is connected to the transfer robot by a hoist, and the transfer robot is driven in the vertical direction by the hoist (col. 9:34 to col. 10:8, col. 12:36-39).
Re claim 5, Fosnight further discloses a lower support configured to support the plurality of shelves, wherein an empty space is provided inside the lower support (Figs. 4, 6, col. 7:28-30).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fosnight.
Fosnight discloses that the empty space extends from the floor to a first height in the vertical direction, but the first height is approximately 1500 mm (col. 7:40-48) rather than in a range of about 2 m to about 2.5 m.
However, both applicant and Fosnight indicate that the first height enables accommodation of other components (infrastructure) of the wafer fabrication facility.
As such, it would have been obvious, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the apparatus of Fosnight such that the first height was in a range of about 2 m to about 2.5 m, to better accommodate more and/or taller infrastructure components, as it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are met, discovering the optimal or workable range involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233), especially since there is no indication that the claimed range is critically important.
Claims 8-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 12-20 are allowed.
Applicant's arguments filed 8/17/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that claim 1 as amended defines over Fosnight in light of examiner’s tentative agreement in the 7/13/26 interview that such amendment would overcome the rejection of record. This is not persuasive. First, specific language was not agreed upon in the interview. More importantly, according to the examiner’s interview summary, the language which was tentatively agreed upon involved specifying that the wall was positioned within the dimension of the columns in a second horizontal direction and/or that the columns were positioned beyond the ends of the wall in the first horizontal direction. The amended language does not include either of these limitations, nor does it even define the second direction. Applicant’s amendment introduces a second horizontal direction but merely specifies that the columns protrude beyond the wall in the second direction. This limitation does not preclude what Fosnight shows in Fig. 13, because it does not require the column to be within the dimension of the wall. Furthermore, the second horizontal direction as recited is not necessarily distinct from the first horizontal direction, much less perpendicular thereto.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 James Keenan whose telephone number is (571)272-6925. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. The examiner’s supervisor, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
/James Keenan/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3652
8/25/26
Prosecution Insights