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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (claims 1-5) in the reply filed on 04/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
The action is in reply to the Application filed on 03/21/2024. Claims 1-8 are currently pending. Claims 6-8 are withdrawn by applicant. Claims 1-5 are being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/21/2024 and 09/17/2025 have been received and considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 is currently amended having the claim dependency of both claims 1 or 2 strikethrough. Thus, in the interest of compact prosecution, the examiner is to examine claim 3 as being dependent according to claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hanawa (JP 2015170639).
Regarding claim 1, Hanawa discloses: a substrate processing apparatus (Figures 1-4 and see also paragraph 0028) comprising:
a substrate holder (element 2 and see also paragraph 0031 where the prior art discloses element 2 comprises elements 21/22/23/24) that holds an outer peripheral end (see figure 3 annotated below Detail A) of a substrate (element 9);
a processor (element 3 and see also paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 3 comprises elements 30/31/32/33) that processes a front surface (see figure 3 annotated below Detail B) or a back surface of the substrate (see paragraph 0035); and
a holding controller (element 10 and see also paragraph 0039 where the prior art discloses element 10 as a “control unit”) that controls the substrate holder (see paragraphs 0039-0040 and 0043) such that a center portion of the substrate is displaced in an upward direction or a downward direction in a period during which the substrate is processed by the processor (see 3 annotated below showing a center portion (Detail C) of the substrate (element 9) displaced in an upward direction while being processed (see element 30 being sprayed onto the upper (i.e. front) surface of element 9) by a portion (element 31) of the processor (element 3)).
PNG
media_image1.png
861
1184
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Hanawa discloses: the substrate processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the substrate holder has two pressers (see figure 3 annotated above Detail D) that are arranged to be opposite to each other with the substrate interposed between the two pressers (see figure 3 annotated above), and the holding controller adjusts a distance between the two pressers (see paragraphs 0039/0043/0047-0048).
Regarding claim 4, Hanawa discloses: a substrate processing apparatus (Figures 1-4 and see also paragraph 0028) comprising:
a substrate holder (element 2 and see also paragraph 0031 where the prior art discloses element 2 comprises elements 21/22/23/24) that holds an outer peripheral end (see figure 3 annotated below Detail A) of a substrate (element 9);
a processor (element 3 and see also paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 3 comprises elements 30/31/32/33) that processes a front surface or a back surface (Examiner is reinterpreting the reference as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, and now interpreting Detail B as shown in figure 3 annotated below as the back surface of element 9)of the substrate (see paragraph 0035); and
a holding controller (element 10 and see also paragraph 0039 where the prior art discloses element 10 as a “control unit”) that controls the substrate holder (see paragraphs 0039-0040 and 0043) such that a center portion of the substrate is displaced in an upward direction or a downward direction in a period during which the substrate is processed by the processor (see 3 annotated below showing a center portion (Detail C) of the substrate (element 9) displaced in an upward direction while being processed (see element 30 being sprayed onto the upper (i.e. front) surface of element 9) by a portion (element 31) of the processor (element 3))
wherein the processor includes a cleaner (elements 31/30) that comes into contact with a lower surface (see figure 3 annotated below Detail D) of the substrate to clean the lower surface of the substrate (see figure 3 annotated below and see also paragraphs 0051-0052), and the holding controller controls the substrate holder such that the center portion of the substrate is displaced in the upward direction or the downward direction in a period during which the cleaner cleans a lower-surface center portion of the substrate (Examiner indicates that the orientation of Hanawa has been interpreted differently as applied above, understanding that no orientation requirements were recited that precluded such an interpretation, thus as best shown in figure 3 annotated below a center portion (Detail C) of the substrate (element 9) displaced in an upward direction while being the cleaner (see element 30 being sprayed via element 31 onto the lower-surface center portion of element 9 (substrate)).
PNG
media_image2.png
861
1184
media_image2.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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanawa (JP 2015170639) in view of Camm (US Pub. No. 2004/0178553).
Regarding claim 3, Hanawa discloses: the substrate processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the substrate holder has two grippers (see figure 3 annotated below Detail A) that are arranged to be opposite to each other with the substrate interposed between the two grippers (see figure 3 annotated below).
PNG
media_image3.png
756
1371
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Hanawa appears to be silent wherein each of the two grippers includes an upper gripper that abuts against the front surface of the substrate and a lower gripper that abuts against the back surface of the substrate and the holding controller adjusts a force to be applied to the front surface of the substrate by the upper gripper and a force to be applied to the back surface of the substrate by the lower gripper.
Camm teaches it was known in the art to have an apparatus (Figures 6 and 13-14 and see also paragraph 0172) comprising a substrate holder (element 402) that holds an outer peripheral end (see figure 3 annotated below Detail A) of a substrate (element 24), a holding controller (element 420 and see also paragraph 0173) that controls the substrate holder (see paragraphs 0173-0174), and the substrate holder having . Camm further teaches wherein the substrate holder has a gripper (element 402) and wherein the gripper includes an upper gripper (element 414) that abuts against the front surface (element 26) of the substrate and a lower gripper (element 404) that abuts against the back surface (element 28) of the substrate and the holding controller adjusts a force to be applied to the front surface of the substrate by the upper gripper (see paragraph 00173)and a force to be applied to the back surface of the substrate by the lower gripper (see paragraph 00173).
PNG
media_image4.png
568
603
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hanawa to incorporate the teachings of Camm to provide wherein each of the two grippers includes an upper gripper that abuts against the front surface of the substrate and a lower gripper that abuts against the back surface of the substrate and the holding controller adjusts a force to be applied to the front surface of the substrate by the upper gripper and a force to be applied to the back surface of the substrate by the lower gripper. The resultant combination would have the upper and lower grippers of Camm now on each of the two grippers of Hanawa. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the two grippers in the form of an upper/lower gripper with the addition of the controller being capable of adjusting a forced applied on the respective surfaces that the gripper abuts would necessarily allow the user to control the amount of force being applied to the workpiece in order to control the securement of the substrate and prevent too much force from being applied and damaging the substrate.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanawa (JP 2015170639) in view of Hanashima (JP 2020102573).
Regarding claim 5, Hanawa discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent further comprising a displacement sensor that detects displacement of the substrate, wherein the holding controller controls the substrate holder such that displacement of the substrate falls within a predetermined range.
Hanashima teaches it was known in the art to have an apparatus (Figures 1-8 and see also paragraph 0013) comprising a substrate holder (element 10 and see also figure 7) holds an outer peripheral end of a substrate (element 200) and a holding controller (element 160) that controls the substrate holder (see paragraph 0045-0046). Hanashima further teaches the apparatus further comprising a displacement sensor (element 72) that detects displacement of the substrate (see paragraph 0042), wherein the holding controller controls the substrate holder such that displacement of the substrate falls within a predetermined range (see paragraphs 0059-0060).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hanawa to incorporate the teachings of Hanashima to provide a displacement sensor that detects displacement of the substrate, wherein the holding controller controls the substrate holder such that displacement of the substrate falls within a predetermined range. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a displacement sensor on the apparatus would necessarily indicate to the user how much displacement is occurring with the substrate, thus preventing allowing the user to make any necessary adjustments on the substrate holder in order to prevent the substrate from over displacing and being damaged during operations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERTO SAENZ whose telephone number is (313)446-6610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30PM 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights