DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on November 24, 2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on November 24, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no undue search burden.
This is not found persuasive because a plethora of inventions are set forth as evidenced by the classification of inventions and the search area(s) would not necessarily overlap such that the myriad of search areas and coverage thereto would place an undue burden on the Examiner already limited in search/examination time.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claims 11-13 are 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 regards to claims 11-13, the phrase of “an identifier configured to identify specific information of the operator” is deemed vague and indefinite because it is unclear as to what would constitute specific information of the operator.
It is unclear if the specific information merely the presence of the operator, the operator wearing one of the specific protective gear as recited in previous claims, the operator wearing specific protective gear not recited in previous claims, or is the specific information related to if the operator authorized to be around the housing of the substrate processing apparatus.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4, 7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko (US 2021/0143033) in view of Knopf (US 2009/0040014).
In regards to claim 1, Kaneko teaches a coating and developing treatment apparatus (10, substrate processing apparatus) comprising:
a housing (2) comprising an accommodation space (S) that accommodates at least a treatment section (13), a thermal treatment section (15) and a solution treatment section (16) which are used to process a wafer/substrate (fig. 1-2; para. 17-20);
a locking mechanism (31a, switch) is provided on a door (31) of the housing and allows access to the accommodation space (fig. 1-2; para. 19, 29-30, 35-36);
laser sensors (41-43, detector) and imaging devices (41a-43a) is provided around the housing to detect person/object (fig. 1-2; para. 19-26);
a controller (100) controls the locking mechanism and communicates with the laser sensors and the imaging devices to detect person/object and control the environment of the accommodation space and corresponding control the locking mechanism between open or closed state (fig. 1-2; para. 21, 24-27, 29, 32-33, 35-36).
Kaneko does not explicitly teach the detect a protective gear worn by an operator.
However, Knopf teaches a system (100, 300) that monitors individual employees and grant or restrict access to certain equipment or locations (fig. 1-2, 6-8; para. 64-67). Knopf teaches the system comprises a RFID sensor/reader (106, detector) which detects a RFID tag (104) on personal protective equipment/PPE (102) (protective gear worn by an operator) and where a management system (108) controls access to job site (fig. 1-2, 6-8; para. 30-44).
Knopf teaches the RFID sensor/reader is provided on a piece of equipment (304), where the management system controls a locking mechanism (308) on a door (306) on the equipment. Knopf teaches access is controlled based on at least the level of personal protective equipment being worn (fig. 1, 6-8; para. 64-66).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention, to incorporate the system comprising the RFID sensor/reader, RFID tag(s) on personal protective equipment/PPE and management system of Knopf onto the controller and housing of Kaneko because Knopf teaches it will reduce the risk of workers not wear proper PPE (para. 28-29).
In regards to claim 2, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, where Kaneko teaches the thermal treatment section (15, heat treatment apparatus) that performs thermal treatment on the wafer (fig. 1-2; para. 17) and Knopf teaches the use of insulated (capable of being heat resistant) glove with the RFID tag (para. 5, 30-31, 33).
In regards to claim 4, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, where Kaneko teaches the solution treatment section that performs solution treatment on the wafer (fig. 1-2; para. 17) and Knopf teaches the used of a face shield to protect the employees face/eyes (para. 30, 38), where the use of liquid eye protective google represents a known answer to protect eyes.
In regards to claim 7, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, where Kaneko teaches the space comprises a predetermined gas atmosphere (para. 41, 45) and Knopf teaches the use of the appropriate protective equipment for the working environment and job task (para. 2-4, 20), where the use of face/gas mask or oxygen supply mask or respirator or other breathing apparatus is known in the field.
In regards to claims 11-13, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, where Kaneko teaches the imaging devices (41a-43a) is provided around the housing to detect person/object (fig. 1-2; para. 19-26) and Knopf teaches the use of insulated (capable of being heat resistant) glove with the RFID tag (para. 5, 30-31, 33) along with the management system connected to a display (110) (fig. 1, 6-8; para. 42, 54, 64).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko and Knopf as applied to claims 1-2, 4, 7 and 11-13 above, and further in view of Ito (US 2018/0077754).
In regards to claim 6, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, but do not explicitly teach a processing container of a light irradiation apparatus that irradiates the substrate with light, and the corresponding protective gear includes light protective goggles that protects eyes of the operator against the light.
However, Ito teaches a heating unit (4) comprising a light irradiation unit perform thermal treatment of the wafer, where the treatment is controlled to provide uniform temperature (fig. 1; para. 24-25, 49, 51, 64, 73).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention, to incorporate the heating unit of Ito onto the thermal treatment section of Kaneko and Knopf because Ito teaches it will provide uniform heating of wafer (para. 51).
Kaneko, Knopf and Ito as discussed ,where the use of light intensity or UV protective goggles is known in the field.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko and Knopf as applied to claims 1-2, 4, 7 and 11-13 above, and further in view of Song (US 2019/0371615).
In regards to claim, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, but do not explicitly teach
a container where a reservoir is placed to store a processing liquid supplied to the substrate, and
the corresponding protective gear includes liquid protective goggles that protects eyes of the operator from the processing liquid
However, Song teaches a chemical cabinet (115 container with reservoir) that is connected to a solution bath (110), where the solution bath comprises a mix of chemical to process a wafer (fig. 1, 5; para. 23, 34-35, 52-54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention, to incorporate the chemical cabinet of Song onto the treatment apparatus of Kaneko and Knopf because Song teaches it will allow a change in tech rate (para. 14).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko and Knopf as applied to claims 1-2, 4, 7 and 11-13 above, and further in view of Kalenian (US 2006/0035563).
In regards to claim 10, Kaneko and Knopf as discussed, where Kaneko teaches the use of the laser sensors and the imaging devices that represents an electric components, where it is known that an electric cabinet is connected to at least the laser sensors and the imaging devices along with the thermal treatment section and the solution treatment section.
However, Kalenian teaches an electrical cabinets (228) that is provided with a front-end module (124) of a system (120) (fig. 2-3; para. 52, 59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention, to incorporate the electrical cabinets of Kalenian onto the system of Kaneko and Knopf because Kalenian teaches it will provide alternate enhancements and allow for customized processing (para. 61).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5 and 8 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Binu Thomas whose telephone number is (571)270-7684. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 8:00AM-5:00PM PT.
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.
/Binu Thomas/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717