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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “The substrate processing apparatus method” is read as “The substrate processing apparatus”. 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 20 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.
In claim 20, lines 4-5, the phrases “the liquid treatment chamber”, “the heat treatment chamber” and “the main transfer robot”; line 7, the phrase “the main transfer robot”; line 8, the phrase “the edge exposure chamber”; line 24, the phrase “the interface module”; and line 30, the phrase “the interface robot” lack proper antecedent basis.
For the purpose of examination, the phrase “A substrate processing apparatus” on line 1 is replaced with “The substrate processing apparatus according to claim 1”.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20190053340A in view of Kong et al (US 2020/0105571A1).
As to claim 1, KR’340 discloses a substrate processing apparatus (see Figs 1, 3-4) comprising: an index module (20); a buffer module (not shown, see English Translation on pages 27-28 for a front end buffer provided between the index module and the front end conveyance chamber 3402); a treatment module (30a); and an interface module (40), the buffer module is provided with a buffer in which the substrate is placed (see English Translation on page 12 for a substrate placed in the buffer), the treatment module (30a) includes: a liquid treatment chamber (3602) for liquid treating the substrate loaded from the buffer module; a heat treatment chamber (3602) for heat treating the substrate received from the buffer module; and a transfer chamber (3402, 3404) disposed between the liquid treatment chamber (3602) and the heat treatment chamber (3202, 3204), and provided with a main transfer robot (3422, 3424) for transferring substrates to the buffer module, the liquid treatment chamber (3602), and the heat treatment chamber(3202, 3204), respectively, the interface module (40) includes: an interface frame (see Fig 4) positioned between the treatment module (30a) and an external exposure device (50); an edge exposure chamber (4200, see English Translation on page 32) disposed within the interface frame and performing edge exposure processing on the substrate; and an interface robot (4606) disposed within the interface frame and transferring the substrate, and each of the main transfer robot (4602,4604) and the interface robot (4606) loads or unloads the substrate into or from the edge exposure chamber (4200). Although KR’340 teaches an index module (20); a buffer module (not shown, see English Translation on pages 27-28 for a front-end buffer provided between the index module and the front-end conveyance chamber 3402), a buffer module and an index frame between the container placed in the load port and the buffer module is not specifically taught in KR’340. In any event, Kong et al teaches the index module including a load port (12) in which a container (carrier 16) receiving a substrate is placed; and an index frame (see Fig 1) provided with an index robot (100) for transferring the substrate between the container placed in the load port and the buffer module (30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a buffer module and an index frame between the container placed in the load port and the buffer module in KR’340 to temporally stand by a substrate as taught by Kong et al (see para [0062]).
As to claim 2, KR’340 teaches (see Fig 3 and English Translation on page 28) the main transfer robot (4602,4604) is provided to load the substrate into the edge exposure chamber (50), and the interface robot (4606) is provided to unload the substrate loaded into the edge exposure chamber.
Regarding claim 3, KR’340 teaches the main transfer robot (4602,4604) is provided not to unload the substrate within the edge exposure chamber (see English Translation on page 28).
As to claim 4, KR’340 teaches (see Figs 3-4) the treatment module (30) further includes: an application module (30a) for performing an application process on the substrate; and a development module (30b) for performing a developing process on the substrate, the application module (3602, 3604) and the development module each include the liquid treatment chamber (3600), the heat treatment chamber (3202), and the main transfer robot, the application module (30a) and the development module (30b) are provided to be stacked (see Fig 1), and the main transfer robot (3424) provided in the application module (30a) is provided to transfer the substrate to the edge exposure chamber (4200).
Regarding claim 7, KR’340 teaches (see English Translation on page 27) wherein the interface module further includes an interface buffer (4400) for loading the substrate unloaded from the edge exposure chamber by the interface robot, and the interface buffer is disposed in an upper space or a lower space of the edge exposure chamber.
As to claim 8, KR’340 teaches wherein the outlet of the edge exposure chamber and an entrance port of the interface buffer (4400) have the same direction in which the substrate enters and exits (see English Translation on page 23 for the input and outlet).
Regarding claim 9, KR’340 teaches the interface buffer (4400) includes: an interface first buffer provided for loading a substrate unloaded from the edge exposure chamber (4200); and an interface second buffer (see English Translation on page 20 for multiple interface buffers 4400) provided for loading, by the interface robot, the substrate exposed by an exposure device.
As to claim 13, in KR’340 the main transfer robot (3422, 3424) is provided to be movable along a longitudinal direction of the transfer chamber, one end in the longitudinal direction of the transfer chamber (3400, 3402, 3404) is adjacent to the buffer module (an intermediate buffer and a rear end buffer, see English Translation on page 27, not shown), the other end in the longitudinal direction of the transfer chamber is adjacent to the interface module (40), and the edge exposure chamber (4200) is positioned adjacent the other end of the transfer chamber.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20190053340A in view of Kong et al (US 2020/0105571A1) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of JP2010171266 and Hamada (US 2010/0177870A1).
KR340 teaches (see Fig 3) the edge exposure chamber (4200) presumably including: an edge exposure housing having a treatment space; an edge exposure support unit disposed within the treatment space of the edge exposure housing capable of supporting the substrate (see English Translation on page 9). In any event, KR’340 lacks teaching edge exposure source irradiating an edge of the substrate with light, and the edge exposure housing further includes an inlet provided as a passageway for the main transfer robot. JP’266 teaches (see Fig 2) an edge exposure support unit (EEW1, EEW2) disposed within the treatment space of the edge exposure housing supporting the substrate an exposure source disposed within the treatment space of the edge exposure housing and irradiating an edge of the substrate with light (with a spin chuck 52 and a light irradiator 53) . Hamada also teaches (see Figs 1 and 4) an edge exposure housing (16) further includes an inlet (16a) provided as a passageway for the main transfer robot to be moved into the treatment space, and an outlet (16b) provided as a passageway for the interface robot to be moved into the treatment space. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include edge exposure source irradiating an edge of the substrate with light in KR’340 to treat or etch the substrate. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include edge exposure housing further includes an inlet provided as a passageway for the main transfer robot in KR’340 to deliver the substrate into and out of the exposure unit.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20190053340A in view of Kong et al (US 2020/0105571A1), JP2010171266 and Hamada (US 2010/0177870A1) as applied to claim 5 and further in view of Shiga et al (US 2005/0061242 A1).
KR’340 lacks teaching a defect inspection unit which is installed in a path for loading the substrate from the transfer chamber to a side of the edge exposure chamber. However, Shiga et al teaches (see Figs 2 and 3) the interface module further includes a defect inspection unit (90) which is installed in a path for loading the substrate from the transfer chamber to a side of the edge exposure chamber (EEW), and inspects a defect of the substrate loaded into the edge exposure chamber. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include to include a defect inspection unit installed as claimed to improve the transport efficiency, to thereby achieve a higher throughput as taught by Shiga et al (see para [0010]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 10-11 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.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claims 6 and 20, Hamada also teaches (see Figs 1 and 4) an edge exposure housing (16) further includes an inlet (16a) provided as a passageway for the main transfer robot to be moved into the treatment space, and an outlet (16b) provided as a passageway for the interface robot to be moved into the treatment space. However, perpendicularly disposed wall bodies in which the inlet and the outlet are formed are not taught in Hamada, KR’430 or other cited arts. Prior art of record does not disclose or suggest an index module, a buffer module, a treatment module, and an interface module with an edge exposure chamber, the edge exposure chamber having an edge exposure housing, wherein the edge exposure housing including an inlet provided as a passageway for the main transfer robot to be moved into the treatment space, and an outlet provided as a passageway for the interface robot to be moved into the treatment space (as claimed in claims 1 and 5), wherein a wall body in which the outlet wherein a wall body in which the inlet is formed and a wall body in which the outlet is formed are disposed perpendicularly to each other.
As to claims 10-11 and 20, KR20230010149 teaches (see Fig 11) an interface buffer 530, interface robots 540, and an exposure transfer unit 590 disposed inside the interface frame 510, wherein the interface robots including a first interface robot 540a that transports substrates to the exposure transport unit 590 and a second interface robot 540b that brings substrates from the exposure transport unit 590. In KR’149 the second interface robot is disposed opposite the first interface robot. However, KR’149 lacks a second interface robot provided for loading substrate exposed by the exposure device to the interface second buffer. Prior art of record does not disclose or suggest an index module, a buffer module, a treatment module, and an interface module with an edge exposure chamber, the edge exposure chamber having an edge exposure housing, wherein the edge exposure housing including an inlet provided as a passageway for the main transfer robot to be moved into the treatment space, and an outlet provided as a passageway for the interface robot to be moved into the treatment space (as claimed in claims 1 and 5), wherein the interface robot further includes: a first interface robot for unloading the substrate edge-exposed in the edge exposure chamber and loading the substrate into the interface first buffer, and for transferring the substrate loaded in the interface first buffer to the exposure device; and a second interface robot disposed opposite the first interface robot with the edge exposure chamber interposed therebetween, and provided for loading substrate exposed by the exposure device to the interface second buffer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEWEBDAR T TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1238. The examiner can normally be reached 7.00-3:30 PM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
YEWEBDAR T. TADESSE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
/YEWEBDAR T TADESSE/
Prosecution Insights