DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
Claim(s) 1–3, 13, and 15–19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumagai et al. (KR 20050086778 A), hereinafter referred to as Kumagai.
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Kumagai teaches, “A sample measuring apparatus (claim 17: method) comprising: a measuring device (Fig. 1, ref. # 30) that measures a sample (DW/W); a conveyance device (22) that conveys the sample (DW/W) being measured to a measurement section (26/28) of the measuring device along a conveyance path (see pg. 9 of English translation; “the dummy substrate DW is supported by the operator's manual work at an appropriate position on the picks Al and A2 using the display of the dummy substrate DW. Subsequently, each dummy substrate is automatically conveyed to the orienter 26 based on the tentatively determined conveyance position coordinates, and automatically mounted and transported to the rotary table 28”; thus, along 24 shown in Fig. 1); and a position assurance section (38a/38b) into which a position assurance sample (DW), which is different (W different from DW) from the sample being measured by the measuring device is held by the conveyance device (22, A1/A2, B1/B2 moving DW/W to 12a-12d) is fitted by automatic driving (see pg. 6 of English translation, “In addition, the mounting of the object to be transported to the normal position may be carried out by manual operation or by mounting conveyance by another conveyance mechanism.”) of the conveyance device (see pg. 10 of English translation; “the dummy substrate DW is supported at an appropriate position of one pick B2 (by means of position alignment by the operator's manual operation using the display of the dummy substrate DW), and the dummy substrate DW is shown. As shown by arrow X1 in 2 (A), the dummy substrate DW is conveyed to the mounting table 38A of the first load lock chamber 8A by a moving operation involving manual adjustment, and the dummy substrate DW is approximately Mounted at the center position (conveying position alignment may be performed without actually mounting). And the conveyance position coordinate corresponding to this mounting position is determined as a final conveyance position coordinate. Thereby, the conveyance position coordinate with respect to the mounting base 38A of the 1st load lock chamber 8A of the pick B2 is determined. In addition, the conveying position coordinate determined here is sufficient if the positional accuracy of the conveyance operation | movement does not interfere, and high positional precision of the degree to which the geometric center of the mounting base 38A and the dummy board | substrate DW exactly matches is not necessary. not. At this time, depending on the determined conveyance position coordinates, the dummy substrate DW may be mounted on the mounting table 38A in a position shifted position to some extent.”).”
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Kumagai teaches, “an alignment section in which the position assurance sample is aligned in a predetermined position and posture, wherein the conveyance device fits the position assurance sample aligned in the alignment section into the position assurance section (interpreted as DW/W conveyed from 28/30 and aligned by a moving operation as described, into 8A/38A via 22; see English translation, pages 9–10, “the optical sensor 30 measures the eccentricity of the dummy substrate DW in relation to the rotation angle, and the position of the dummy substrate DW based on the measurement result. Calculate the amount of deviation. Based on this calculated position shift amount, the conveyance position coordinates determined for each pick are corrected so as to cancel this position shift amount, and the corrected transport position coordinates are determined as final transport position coordinates (S2). . This 2nd process is performed separately with respect to the said both pick A1 and A2, and determines the conveyance position coordinate with respect to the orient 26 of both pick Al and A2. Accordingly, when the dummy substrate DW supported at the proper position on each pick A1 or A2 is automatically conveyed to the orienter 26 and automatically mounted and transported thereon, the dummy substrate DW has its center at the swivel table 28. It is mounted in the state coinciding with the center.” … “the dummy substrate DW is supported at an appropriate position of one pick B2 (by means of position alignment by the operator's manual operation using the display of the dummy substrate DW), and the dummy substrate DW is shown. As shown by arrow X1 in 2 (A), the dummy substrate DW is conveyed to the mounting table 38A of the first load lock chamber 8A by a moving operation involving manual adjustment, and the dummy substrate DW is approximately Mounted at the center position (conveying position alignment may be performed without actually mounting). And the conveyance position coordinate corresponding to this mounting position is determined as a final conveyance position coordinate. Thereby, the conveyance position coordinate with respect to the mounting base 38A of the 1st load lock chamber 8A of the pick B2 is determined.”.”
Regarding claim 3, Kumagai teaches, “wherein the position assurance sample is fitted into the position assurance section in two perpendicular directions set for the position assurance sample (see Fig. 1, DW/W fitted into 38A, 38B, in at least an X-Y direction, which are “two perpendicular directions”).
Regarding claim 13, Kumagai teaches, “a controller (40) that controls the conveyance device (22), wherein the controller causes the position assurance sample to be fitted into the position assurance section before (DW/W moved into 38A after 30 measures DW/W; see English translation, pg. 8 and 9) or after a job of measurement of the sample being measured by the measuring device is started or every time measurement of a predetermined number of samples being measured is performed.”
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Kumagai teaches, “wherein the measuring device measures a surface condition of the sample being measured by the measuring device; wherein the surface condition of the sample is at least one of color, surface properties, and glossiness of the sample being measured by the measuring device (30 measures eccentricity of DW, which is a surface condition/property; see English translation, page. 9).”
Regarding claim 19, Kumagai teaches, “wherein the controller conveys the aligned position assurance sample to the measuring device and then fits the position assurance sample into the position assurance section (Abstract; feedback loop of correcting aligned position of object held (here, DW/W), until corrected, then logically transferred to 38A).”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai (KR 20050086778 A).
Regarding claim 14, Kumagai teaches, “wherein the conveyance device includes a hand portion that holds the sample being measured by the measuring device and the position assurance sample (DW/W held by A1/A2 of 22)
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Kumagai’s invention for at least the purpose of finely controlling (holding/releasing) the object with less moving parts, using the well-known force of suction. Here the examiner takes Official notice.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states, “Kumagai et al describes a wafer transfer system with an alignment feature that includes an initial manual placement of a dummy substrate on a pick, see, e.g., "the operator allows the wafer to be mounted on the pick by a manual operation" (col. 8, line 66 to col. 9, line 3), following by automatic transferring of the dummy substrate to an orienter 26 and then transporting it to a rotatable table 28 in an automated manner (col. 9, lines 43-51). The Examiner considers the dummy substrate to correspond to the position assurance sample of the invention (Office Action, pages 2-3), which while present on the rotatable table 28 is analyzed by an optical sensor 30.
However, it is an essential element in the Kumagai et al system that the dummy substrate must first be manually mounted at a precisely determined proper position. This initial manual step is the foundation of the entire alignment method of Kumagai et al.
Kumagai et al therefore differs from the presently claimed invention as set forth in amended clams 1 and 17 in several ways. For example, in the presently claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, there is a conveyance device that conveys a sample being measured to a measurement section of the measuring device along a conveyance path and also is driven to fit a position assurance sample that it holds into a position assurance section.
By contrast, in Kumagai et al, there is no conveyance device which both conveys a sample being measured to a measurement section of a measuring device and also is driven to fit a position assurance sample that it holds into a position assurance section.
Furthermore, in Kumagai et al, the dummy substrate is not automatically
conveyed by such a conveyance device to a rotatable table to be measured but rather requires as an initial step, a manual placement.
Lacking a conveyance device having the structure as set forth in claim 1 and function as set forth in claim 17, Kumagai et al does not disclose, teach or suggest a sample measuring apparatus including all of the features of independent claim 1 or a sample measuring method including all of the features of claim 17. “ The Office disagrees with applicant’s conclusion.
As shown in the rejection of claims 1 and 17 above, Kumagai discloses manual or automatic conveying of the object/dummy wafer (see pg. 6 of English translation, “In addition, the mounting of the object to be transported to the normal position may be carried out by manual operation or by mounting conveyance by another conveyance mechanism.”). See also pg. 8 of Kumagai, (“The dummy substrate for position alignment used in the conveying position alignment method is made of a transparent plate having the same diameter and roughly the same thickness as the semiconductor wafer as the object to be processed (the conveyed object).”). Thus, the claims stand rejected as anticipated by Kumagai as shown above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4–5, and 6–12 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. (see OA dated 5/18/2026)
Claim 20 is allowed. (incorporates allowable subject matter from original claim 6 into independent form, as indicated in the 5/18/2026 OA)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2726. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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 D WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights