CTNF 18/691,713 CTNF 78702 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-30-03-h AIA CLAIM INTERPRETATION 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a processing shape prediction unit configured to predict” in claim 1 “a first abnormality detection unit configured to detect” in claim 1 “a prediction explanation unit configured to calculate a degree of contribution of each independent variable” in claim 2 “a second abnormality detection unit configured to detect” in claim 2 “integration determination unit configured to integrate an abnormality detection result of the first abnormality detection unit” in claim 2 “a knowledge linkage unit configured to…match an observation parameter” in claim 8 Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kosugi JP H10-125660-A . Kosugi discloses: 1. An abnormality detection apparatus for determining whether there is an abnormality in a processing result obtained by processing a sample by a processing apparatus, the abnormality detection apparatus comprising: a processing shape prediction unit configured to predict, using a processing result prediction model in which a control parameter value of the processing apparatus and an observation parameter value obtained by observing a phenomenon occurring in the processing apparatus during the processing by the processing apparatus are set as an independent variable and an evaluation value of the processing by the processing apparatus is set as a dependent variable, the evaluation value of the processing by the processing apparatus (e.g., [0030], [0034]: “the voltage, current, impedance, phase, and self-bias voltage are measured under preset etching processing conditions such as high frequency power, gas pressure, and gas flow rate,” [0069]-[0072]); and a first abnormality detection unit configured to detect, based on a difference between an evaluation value of determination target processing and a prediction evaluation value of the determination target processing predicted by inputting a control parameter value used in the determination target processing and an observation parameter value observed in the determination target processing to the processing result prediction model, an abnormality in the processing result of the processing apparatus (e.g., [0031], [0064]: “The difference between the predicted value and the actually measured value of the etching characteristics thus obtained is calculated…if the difference exceeds a preset range, the alarm means 52 displays or issues a warning to notify the operator, and the etching process is stopped”). 11. An abnormality detection method using an abnormality detection apparatus for determining whether there is an abnormality in a processing result obtained by processing a sample by a processing apparatus, the abnormality detection apparatus including a processing shape prediction unit and a first abnormality detection unit, the method comprising: causing the processing shape prediction unit to predict, using a processing result prediction model in which a control parameter value of the processing apparatus and an observation parameter value obtained by observing a phenomenon occurring in the processing apparatus during the processing by the processing apparatus are set as an independent variable and an evaluation value of the processing by the processing apparatus is set as a dependent variable, the evaluation value of the processing by the processing apparatus (e.g., [0030], [0034]: “the voltage, current, impedance, phase, and self-bias voltage are measured under preset etching processing conditions such as high frequency power, gas pressure, and gas flow rate,” [0069]-[0072]); and causing the first abnormality detection unit to detect, based on a difference between an evaluation value of determination target processing and a prediction evaluation value of the determination target processing predicted by inputting a control parameter value used in the determination target processing and an observation parameter value observed in the determination target processing to the processing result prediction model, an abnormality in the processing result of the processing apparatus (e.g., [0031], [0064]: “The difference between the predicted value and the actually measured value of the etching characteristics thus obtained is calculated…if the difference exceeds a preset range, the alarm means 52 displays or issues a warning to notify the operator, and the etching process is stopped”) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 2-10 and 12-15 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 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ariyama et al. US 2019/0383641 discloses an abnormality determination device configured to calculate a scatter degree of differences between prediction information on an observation target and observation information on the observation target, the prediction information being an information generated in accordance with a scenario that represents an aspect of state change of the observation target, the observation information generated by an inspection target; and determine whether or not the inspection target is abnormal based on the calculated degree. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-3742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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. /RYAN A JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116 04/21/26 Application/Control Number: 18/691,713 Page 2 Art Unit: 2116
Prosecution Insights