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
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on May 1st, 2024, and January 2nd, 2026, has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the second linear stator and third stator pole with third wire and second head must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 7, L1 “A magnetic levitation actuator assembly, comprising, comprising:” should be “A magnetic levitation actuator assembly, comprising:” 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.
Claim 3 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 3 is rendered indefinite for reciting “each first stator.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is also unclear how the first head is “below an end of each first stator” when claim 1 recites that the first head is “attached to the second end of the second stator pole.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3, and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamamoto (US 20230035514).
With regards to claim 1, Yamamoto discloses a magnetic levitation actuator assembly (transport system 1), comprising: a first linear stator (201a) including a plurality of first stator poles and a plurality of first wires (Not labeled separately in Fig. 3), each first stator pole includes a first longitudinal axis, and wherein a current through each first wire generates a first (P0059) magnetic field that extends in a first direction (generally indicated by the arrow in fig. 1); a side actuator (201b, same structure as 201a, P041, L7-9), comprising: a second stator pole including a first end and a second end, wherein the second stator pole includes a second longitudinal axis; a second wire wound around the second stator pole; (Annotated Fig. 3); and a first head (Annotated Fig. 3) configured to direct a second magnetic field generated by a current through the second wire in a second direction (P078; a controller modifies current to control X, Y and Z direction movements), wherein the first head is attached to the second end of the second stator pole (second end not labeled but opposite First end in Annotated Fig. 3), and wherein a third longitudinal axis of the first head is disposed at an angle relative to the second longitudinal axis (Annotated Fig. 3).
With regards to claim 3, Yamamoto discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the first head is disposed below an end of the second stator pole (Annotated Fig. 3).
With regards to claim 5, Yamamoto discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the angle is 90 degrees (Annotated Fig. 3; makes “T” shape).
With regards to claim 6, Yamamoto discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses the side actuator further comprising: a third stator pole (Annotated Fig. 3) including a first end and a second end (not labeled for clarity of image), wherein the third stator pole includes a fourth longitudinal axis (not labeled for clarity of image); a third wire wound around the third stator pole (Annotated Fig. 3); and a second head configured to direct a third magnetic field generated by a current through the third wire in the second direction (Annotated Fig. 3, P077), wherein the second head is attached to the second end of the third stator pole (Annotated Fig. 3), and wherein a fifth longitudinal axis of the second head is disposed at an angle relative to the fourth longitudinal axis of the third stator pole (Annotated Fig. 3, makes “T” shape).
PNG
media_image1.png
794
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto.
With regards to claim 2, Yamamoto discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Yamamoto does not disclose a second linear stator, wherein the side actuator is disposed between the first linear stator and the second linear stator. However, this is a simple duplication of parts that is rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention depending on the travel distance needed (MPEP 2144.04.VI. B).
With regards to claim 4, Yamamoto discloses all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Yamamoto does not directly disclose wherein the first head and the second stator pole are arranged in an “L” shape. However, this is a simple change in shape that is rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention depending on space constraints (MPEP2144.04.IV.B).
Claim(s) 7-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto further in view of Kim (KR 20120102435).
With regards to claim 7, Yamamoto discloses a magnetic levitation actuator assembly (transport system 1), comprising, a plurality of first linear stators (201a) configured to convey a carrier in a first direction; a side actuator coupled to the plurality of first linear stators (201b), the side actuator configured to convey the carrier in a second direction (P077, controls current values for adjustment in 3 directions), the side actuator comprising: a first stator pole including a first end portion(Annotated Fig. 3) including a first head interface surface (Not labeled for clarity of image), second end portion (opposite first end in Annotated Fig. 3), and a middle portion (generally indicated by Second wire in Annotated Fig. 3) extending between the first end portion and the second end portion including and a second head interface surface (not labeled for clarity of image) and a second head (labeled as first head in Fig. 3),attached to the second head interface surface; a wire (second wire in Annotated Fig. 3) wound around the middle portion; and wherein a portion of the magnetic field generated by a current through the wire is directed in the second direction by the first head (P077). Yamamoto does not disclose a first head attached to the first head interface surface
However, Kim discloses a stator with a first head, second head and middle portion with a wire on the middle portion (Annotated Fig. 3B). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add another head as disclosed by Kim to the side actuator as disclosed by Yamamoto in order to increase magnetic field strength depending on the weight of the components being moved.
With regards to claim 8, Yamamoto and Kim disclose all the elements of claim 7 as outlined above. Yamamoto and Kim do not directly disclose wherein the first stator pole, the first head, and the second head are each formed from electrical steel. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that using electric steel for stator components is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to achieve a desired magnetic field strength.
With regards to claim 10, Yamamoto and Kim disclose all the elements of claim 7 as outlined above. Yamamoto does not disclose wherein the first head and second head extend past the wire wound around the middle portion. However, Kim discloses wherein the first head and second head extend past the wire wound around the middle portion (Annotated Fig. 3B).
PNG
media_image2.png
377
424
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto and Kim as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Klesen (WO 2016162288)
With regards to claim 9, Yamamoto and Kim disclose all the elements of claim 7 as outlined above. Yamato and Kim do not disclose wherein the plurality of first linear stators and the side actuator are coupled to a frame member.
However, Klesen discloses a plurality of stators (magnetic bearings 10) are coupled to a frame member (base 20). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to couple the plurality of first linear stators and the side actuator disclosed by Yamamoto and Kim to a frame member as disclosed by Klesen in order to keep the first linear stators and side actuator from moving ensuring a constant magnetic field.
Claim(s) 11-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto further in view of Heymanns et al. (US 20210328146), hereafter Heymanns
With regards to claim 11, Yamamoto discloses a method of operating a process station (Abstract), comprising: conveying a carrier (mover 101) in a transportation direction (generally indicated by arrow in Fig. 1) to a first position in a transport region of a process station (P0043), using a plurality of linear stators (201a) separated from the transport region by a membrane (structure 100); determining a lateral position of the carrier using one or more side position sensors (linear encoder 204, Y-sensor 205, Z-sensor 206). Yamamoto does not disclose determining a location of a center of an object disposed on the carrier using one or more location center finder sensors; and adjusting the lateral position of the carrier in the transport region to align the center of the object with a center of a substrate support of the process station using a side actuator of the process station.
However, Heymanns discloses adjusting the lateral position of the carrier in the transport region to align the object with a substrate support of the process station using a side actuator of the process station (P045, P0062). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to align the substrate in the manner disclosed by Heymanns, in order to not damage the substrate. Heymanns does not disclose that the alignment is done by determining a location of a center of an object disposed on the carrier using one or more location center finder sensors. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that this is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention depending on the processing being performed.
With regards to claim 12, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Yamamoto does not disclose conveying the carrier in the transportation direction from the first position to a second position with the plurality of linear stators to place the center of the object above the center of the substrate support after adjusting the lateral position of the carrier. . However, the examiner takes Official Notice that this is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention depending on the processing being performed.
With regards to claim 13, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Yamamoto and Heymanns do not disclose wherein the adjusting the lateral position to align the center of the object with the center of the substrate support includes placing the center of the object above the center of the substrate support. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that this is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate substrate position based on the type of processing being performed.
With regards to claim 14, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the side actuator is disposed in a housing wherein the side actuator is separated from the transport region by the housing (P066; structure 100 used to separate different processing chambers, walls not shown). Yamamoto and Heymanns do not directly disclose that the sensors are in the housing and the housing is located underneath the membrane. However, this is a simple rearrangement of parts that is rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to keep the magnetic field from the linear stator from interfering with the sensors or side actuator (MPEP 2144.04.VI.C)
With regards to claim 15, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 14 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the side actuator is a linear stator including a plurality of stator poles (Annotated Fig. 3, 201b, same as 201a, P041, L7-9), a separate wire is wound around each of the plurality of stator poles (Annotated Fig. 3), Yamamoto and Heymanns do not directly disclose wherein the side actuator is horizontally oriented in the housing such that an end of each stator pole faces the transport region to interact with a side carrier through the housing. However, this is a simple rearrangement of parts and is therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to have an appropriate amount of magnetic field affect the carrier.
With regards to claim 16, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the side actuator is separated from the transport region by the membrane (Fig. 1). Yamamoto and Heymanns do not directly disclose one or more side sensors are separated from the transport region by the membrane. However, this is a simple rearrangement of parts and is therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to keep the magnetic field from the linear stator from interfering with the sensors.
With regards to claim 17, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 16 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the side actuator comprises: a plurality of stator poles including a first end and a second end (Annotated Fig. 3), wherein each stator pole includes a longitudinal axis (not labeled for clarity of image); a plurality of wires, wherein each wire is wound around a corresponding stator pole (Annotated Fig. 3); wherein each head is configured to direct a magnetic field generated by a current through the corresponding wire through the membrane toward the carrier to change the lateral position of the carrier (P077).
With regards to claim 19, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the object is a substrate (workpiece 102). Inclusion of the material or worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims (MPEP 2115).
With regards to claim 20, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Yamamoto and Heymanns do not directly disclose wherein the side actuator is positioned across from the center of the substrate support. However, this is a simple rearrangement of parts and is therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to keep the magnetic field created by the side actuator from interfering with the processing of the substrate (MPEP 2144.04.VI.C).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto and Heymanns as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Kim
With regards to claim 18, Yamamoto and Heymanns disclose all the elements of claim 16 as outlined above. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the side actuator comprises: a stator pole (second stator pole in Annotated Fig. 3) including a first stator pole including a first end portion(Annotated Fig. 3) including a first head interface surface (Not labeled for clarity of image), second end portion (opposite first end in Annotated Fig. 3), and a middle portion (generally indicated by Second wire in Annotated Fig. 3) extending between the first end portion and the second end portion including and a second head interface surface (not labeled for clarity of image) and a second head (labeled as first head in Fig. 3),attached to the second head interface surface; a wire (second wire in Annotated Fig. 3) wound around the middle portion; Yamamoto does not disclose a first head attached to the first head interface.
However, Kim discloses a stator with a first head, second head and middle portion with a wire on the middle portion (Annotated Fig. 3B). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add another head as disclosed by Kim to the side actuator as disclosed by Yamamoto in order to increase magnetic field strength depending on the weight of the components being moved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LYNN BURKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5824. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am to 6:00pm EST.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571)272-7805. 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.
/J.L.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653
