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
This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 1-12 are currently pending and addressed below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/15/2024 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/26/2024 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/09/2024 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “wherein in said step (B), deviation” should read “wherein in said step (B), a deviation” or similar.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “comparing a deviation amount” should read “comparing the deviation amount” or similar.
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.
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.
Claim 2 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. It is unclear what the "set position" is. Is this the current position of the transfer device? What portion of the transfer device? Is it an expected position for the device to contact the transfer object? Is it a position input by a user for the device to contact the transfer object? Is it the expected position of the transfer object? Clarification on the record is earnestly solicited. For the purpose of compact prosecution, this limitation will be interpreted as a position at which the transfer device desired relative position of the target object with respect to the end effector/fork.
Claim 3 depends from claim 2 and is therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) by virtue of dependencies.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amikura et al. (US 20220277981 A1), hereinafter Amikura in view of Claussen et al. (US 20200262064 A1), hereinafter Claussen.
Regarding claim 1, Amikura teaches:
1. A transfer teaching method for teaching a transfer position of a transfer device to transfer a transfer object using the transfer device, the method comprising:
(A) … and detecting the transfer object using a sensor of the transfer device; (Paragraph 0006, "wherein at least any one of the end effector and the transfer target object has at least any one of a sensor and a camera" as well as Paragraph 0053, "The optical sensor detects an edge of the substrate while the substrate rotates. The optical sensor detects a misalignment amount of an angular position of a notch (or another marker) of the substrate with respect to a reference angular position, and a misalignment amount of a central position of the substrate with respect to the reference position, from a detected result of the edge.")
(B) calculating a position of the transfer object based on the detected transfer object; (Paragraph 0006, "the controller calculates a relative position between the end effector and the transfer target object based on at least any one of a detected result of the sensor and a captured result of the camera") and
(C) setting the transfer position based on the calculated position of the transfer object. (Paragraph 0088, "Further, it is preferable to perform rough teaching before the alignment method of the embodiment is performed. In the rough teaching, transfer position coordinates for the fork of the transfer robot are tentatively determined with respect to the transfer location of the transfer target object. The rough teaching is performed to prevent the transfer target object held by the fork from coming into contact with a member or the like in the processing system, and the transfer position coordinates are tentatively determined with a coarse accuracy.")
Amikura does not specifically discuss moving the device relative to the object in order to gather information for performing an operation. However, Claussen, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… moving the transfer device with respect to the transfer object placed on a placing location (Paragraph 0025, "As may be appreciated in FIG. 2, subsequent to a start step 30, as shown in block 32, during motion along a given trajectory of robotic manipulator 12, imaging sensor 14 (FIG. 1) may be arranged to capture images providing different views of one or more objects of the objects 20 in the environment of the robotic manipulator. As noted above, without limitation such images could be 3-D images (e.g., RGB-D images), or appropriately configured 2-D images (e.g., RGB images or depth images). As shown in block 34, a processor 18 (FIG. 1) may be configured to find, based on the different views provided by the captured images, candidate grasp locations to perform a grasp of a respective object of the one or more objects of the objects 20 in the environment of the robotic manipulator.") …
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transfer system as taught by Amikura with the ability to move the robot in order to gather object information as taught by Claussen. Incorporating the ability to capture a plurality of images of the object while moving the arm as taught by Claussen would allow the system to accurately determine characteristics of the object and control the movement of the robot more effectively to perform the desired operation.
Regarding claim 2, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
2. The transfer teaching method of claim 1, wherein in said step (B), deviation between the calculated position of the transfer object and a set position is calculated, (Paragraph 0217, "The end effector 100 of the transfer device 170 according to the first configuration example of the embodiment can detect the misalignment of the substrate W with respect to the end effector 100. Detecting the misalignment of the substrate W with respect to the end effector 100 and correcting the position of the substrate W may improve positional accuracy with respect to the end effector 100 when the substrate W is transferred. When the positional accuracy of the substrate W is improved with respect to the end effector 100, the transfer accuracy may be improved, and the performance of the transfer device may be improved.") and
the position of the transfer device is corrected based on the calculated deviation, (Paragraphs 0218-0219, "Further, according to the end effector 100 of the transfer device 170 in the first configuration example of the embodiment, a mounting position of the substrate W can be corrected in real time. Therefore, the reliability of the transfer device can be improved.
Further, according to the end effector 100 of the transfer device 170 in the first configuration example of the embodiment, when a plurality of substrates W are processed, the mounting position of each substrate W can be corrected by measuring of the misalignment. Therefore, performance of the transfer device can be improved.") and the position of the transfer object is recalculated by performing said step (A) and said step (B) again after the correction. (Paragraph 0334, "Meanwhile, when the misalignment amount is less than the second threshold value in step S230 (NO in step S230), the controller CU determines that the misalignment of the substrate W can be corrected and performs the misalignment correction processing (step S250). The controller CU places the substrate W on the end effector FK again, and corrects the position of the end effector FK, for example, to correct the misalignment amount. The substrate W is placed again in the process module PM. Next, the process returns to step S210 to repeat the processing again." This demonstrates the process for correcting the position of the end effector is repeated if the deviation/misalignment is within a range.)
Regarding claim 3, where all the limitations of claim 2 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
3. The transfer teaching method of claim 2, further comprising, after said step (B), comparing a deviation amount of the transfer object with a threshold,
wherein if the deviation amount is greater than or equal to the threshold, the position of the transfer device is corrected based on the calculated deviation, and the position of the transfer object is recalculated by performing said step (A) and said step (B) again after the correction, (Paragraph 0334, "Meanwhile, when the misalignment amount is less than the second threshold value in step S230 (NO in step S230), the controller CU determines that the misalignment of the substrate W can be corrected and performs the misalignment correction processing (step S250). The controller CU places the substrate W on the end effector FK again, and corrects the position of the end effector FK, for example, to correct the misalignment amount. The substrate W is placed again in the process module PM. Next, the process returns to step S210 to repeat the processing again." This demonstrates the process for correcting the position of the end effector is repeated if the deviation/misalignment is within a range.) and
if the deviation amount is less than the threshold, said step (C) is performed. (Paragraph 0332, "The controller CU calculates the misalignment amount between the position of the substrate W and the position of the placement location (step S215). The controller CU determines whether the calculated misalignment amount is equal to or larger than the first threshold value (step S220). When the calculated misalignment amount is equal to or larger than the first threshold value (YES in step S220), the controller CU determines whether the calculated misalignment amount is equal to or larger than the second threshold value which is larger than the first threshold value (step S230)." Please see Figure 32)
Regarding claim 4, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
4. The transfer teaching method of claim 1, wherein in said step (A), an outer edge of the transfer object is detected by the sensor, (Paragraph 0053, "The optical sensor detects an edge of the substrate while the substrate rotates. The optical sensor detects a misalignment amount of an angular position of a notch (or another marker) of the substrate with respect to a reference angular position, and a misalignment amount of a central position of the substrate with respect to the reference position, from a detected result of the edge. The optical sensor outputs a misalignment amount of the angular position of the notch and a misalignment amount of the central position of the substrate to the controller CU which will be described later. The controller CU calculates a rotation amount of a rotation support stand to correct the angular position of the notch to the reference angular position based on the misalignment amount of the angular position of the notch. The controller CU controls the driving device (not illustrated) to rotate the rotation support stand by the rotation amount. Accordingly, the angular position of the notch can be corrected to the reference angular position. Further, the controller CU controls a position of the fork FK31 of the atmospheric transfer robot TR3 when the substrate is received from the aligner AN, based on the misalignment amount of the central position of the substrate, so that the central position of the substrate coincides with a given position on the fork FK31 of the atmospheric transfer robot TR3.") and
in said step (B), a center position of the transfer object is calculated as the position of the transfer object based on the detected outer edge of the transfer object. (Paragraph 0237, "For example, the control device 250 may obtain the central position of the substrate W from the information on end points of the substrate W, detected by each of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223. Four end points in total of the substrate W, which are detected by the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223, are obtained by the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223. For example, center coordinates of the substrate W may be obtained by the least squares method based on the coordinates of the four end points, or when three end points may be extracted from the four end points, the center coordinates of a circle passing through the three end points may be set as the center coordinates of the substrate W. A method for obtaining the center coordinates is not limited to the above, and a known method may be applied.")
Regarding claim 5, where all the limitations of claim 4 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
5. The transfer teaching method of claim 4, wherein in said step (A), a plurality of locations on the outer edge of the transfer object placed on the placing location are detected by the sensor …
in said step (B), the center position of the transfer object is calculated from the plurality of detected locations on the outer edge of the transfer object. (Paragraph 0237, "For example, the control device 250 may obtain the central position of the substrate W from the information on end points of the substrate W, detected by each of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223. Four end points in total of the substrate W, which are detected by the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223, are obtained by the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223. For example, center coordinates of the substrate W may be obtained by the least squares method based on the coordinates of the four end points, or when three end points may be extracted from the four end points, the center coordinates of a circle passing through the three end points may be set as the center coordinates of the substrate W. A method for obtaining the center coordinates is not limited to the above, and a known method may be applied.")
Amikura does not specifically discuss moving the device relative to the object in order to gather information for performing an operation. However, Claussen, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… while moving the transfer device linearly at a position vertically above the transfer object, … (Paragraph 0025, "As may be appreciated in FIG. 2, subsequent to a start step 30, as shown in block 32, during motion along a given trajectory of robotic manipulator 12, imaging sensor 14 (FIG. 1) may be arranged to capture images providing different views of one or more objects of the objects 20 in the environment of the robotic manipulator. As noted above, without limitation such images could be 3-D images (e.g., RGB-D images), or appropriately configured 2-D images (e.g., RGB images or depth images). As shown in block 34, a processor 18 (FIG. 1) may be configured to find, based on the different views provided by the captured images, candidate grasp locations to perform a grasp of a respective object of the one or more objects of the objects 20 in the environment of the robotic manipulator." This demonstrates moving a manipulator along a given trajectory in order to capture information on a target object.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the robotic transfer system as taught by Amikura with the ability to capture information on the target object while moving along a predetermined trajectory as taught by Claussen. Incorporating the ability to capture a plurality of images of the object while moving the arm along a desired trajectory as taught by Claussen would allow the system to accurately determine characteristics of the object and control the movement of the robot more effectively to perform the desired operation. Moving along a given trajectory would ensure that the system has a plurality of images of the object from known angles/positions which would allow for efficient calculation of the desired points on the object.
Regarding claim 6, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
6. The transfer teaching method of claim 1, wherein said steps (A) to (C) are performed in a vacuum transfer module including a transfer chamber that is depressurizable to a vacuum atmosphere, and the transfer device disposed in the transfer chamber and configured to transfer the transfer object. (Paragraph 0044-0045, "The vacuum transfer modules TM1 and TM2 each have a substantially rectangular shape in a plan view. The process modules PM1 to PM6 are connected to two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM1. The load-lock modules LL1 and LL2 are connected to one side surface of the other two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM1, and a path (not illustrated) for connecting to the vacuum transfer module TM2 is connected to the other side surface of the vacuum transfer module TM1. The side surfaces, to which the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2 are connected, of the vacuum transfer module TM1 are angled according to the two load-lock modules LL1 and LL2. The process modules PM7 to PM12 are connected to two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM2. A path (not illustrated) for connecting to the vacuum transfer module TM1 is connected to one side surface of the other two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM2. The vacuum transfer modules TM1 and TM2 have vacuum chambers in a vacuum atmosphere, and vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are disposed therein, respectively.
The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are configured to be rotatable, extensible, and vertically movable. The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 transfer a transfer target object based on an operation instruction output from a controller CU which will be described later. For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR1 holds the transfer target object with forks FK11 and FK12 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2, the process modules PM1 to PM6, and the path (not illustrated). For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR2 holds the transfer target object with forks FK21 and FK22 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the process modules PM7 to PM12 and the path (not illustrated). The fork is also referred to as a pick or an end effector." Please also see Paragraphs 0047 and 0048 which discuss depressurizing the vacuum transfer module.)
Regarding claim 7, where all the limitations of claim 6 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
7. The transfer teaching method of claim 6, wherein the transfer chamber includes a plurality of the transfer devices and a path region where the transfer object is temporarily placed between the plurality of transfer devices, (Paragraph 0044-0045, "The vacuum transfer modules TM1 and TM2 each have a substantially rectangular shape in a plan view. The process modules PM1 to PM6 are connected to two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM1. The load-lock modules LL1 and LL2 are connected to one side surface of the other two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM1, and a path (not illustrated) for connecting to the vacuum transfer module TM2 is connected to the other side surface of the vacuum transfer module TM1. The side surfaces, to which the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2 are connected, of the vacuum transfer module TM1 are angled according to the two load-lock modules LL1 and LL2. The process modules PM7 to PM12 are connected to two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM2. A path (not illustrated) for connecting to the vacuum transfer module TM1 is connected to one side surface of the other two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM2. The vacuum transfer modules TM1 and TM2 have vacuum chambers in a vacuum atmosphere, and vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are disposed therein, respectively.
The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are configured to be rotatable, extensible, and vertically movable. The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 transfer a transfer target object based on an operation instruction output from a controller CU which will be described later. For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR1 holds the transfer target object with forks FK11 and FK12 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2, the process modules PM1 to PM6, and the path (not illustrated). For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR2 holds the transfer target object with forks FK21 and FK22 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the process modules PM7 to PM12 and the path (not illustrated). The fork is also referred to as a pick or an end effector.") and
said steps (A) to (C) are performed for at least one of the plurality of transfer devices. (Paragraph 0006, "According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a transfer system comprising a transfer robot configured to transfer a transfer target object by an end effector based on an operation instruction, and a controller configured to output the operation instruction to the transfer robot, wherein at least any one of the end effector and the transfer target object has at least any one of a sensor and a camera, the controller calculates a relative position between the end effector and the transfer target object based on at least any one of a detected result of the sensor and a captured result of the camera, and the controller determines a teaching position of the end effector with respect to the transfer target object based on the relative position, and outputs the operation instruction to the transfer robot such that the end effector is disposed at the teaching position.")
Regarding claim 8, where all the limitations of claim 7 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
8. The transfer teaching method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of transfer devices include a first transfer device for loading the transfer object from a load-lock module into the transfer chamber, and a second transfer device that is more distant from the load-lock module than the first transfer device and the path region, (Paragraph 0045, "The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are configured to be rotatable, extensible, and vertically movable. The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 transfer a transfer target object based on an operation instruction output from a controller CU which will be described later. For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR1 holds the transfer target object with forks FK11 and FK12 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2, the process modules PM1 to PM6, and the path (not illustrated). For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR2 holds the transfer target object with forks FK21 and FK22 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the process modules PM7 to PM12 and the path (not illustrated). The fork is also referred to as a pick or an end effector." Please also see Figure 1.) and
said steps (A) to (C) are performed when a transfer position of the second transfer device with respect to the transfer object, which is placed in the path region by the first transfer device, is set. (Paragraph 0006, "According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a transfer system comprising a transfer robot configured to transfer a transfer target object by an end effector based on an operation instruction, and a controller configured to output the operation instruction to the transfer robot, wherein at least any one of the end effector and the transfer target object has at least any one of a sensor and a camera, the controller calculates a relative position between the end effector and the transfer target object based on at least any one of a detected result of the sensor and a captured result of the camera, and the controller determines a teaching position of the end effector with respect to the transfer target object based on the relative position, and outputs the operation instruction to the transfer robot such that the end effector is disposed at the teaching position.")
Regarding claim 9, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
9. The transfer teaching method of claim 1, wherein the transfer object is a substrate that is transferred by the transfer device and then subjected to substrate processing. (Paragraph 0042, "An example of a processing system of an embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. 1. As illustrated in FIG. 1, a processing system PS is a system capable of performing various types of processing, such as plasma processing, on a substrate.")
Regarding claim 10, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
10. The transfer teaching method of claim 1, wherein the transfer device includes a fork on which the transfer object is placed, and a plurality of arms configured to move the fork, (Paragraph 0170, "The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are configured to be rotatable, extensible, and vertically movable. The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 transfer a transfer target object based on an operation instruction output from a controller CU which will be described later. For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR1 holds a transfer target object by the end effectors FK11 and FK12 disposed at tips of arms AR11 and AR12, respectively, and transfers the transfer target object between the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2, the process modules PM1 to PM6, and the path (not illustrated). For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR2 holds the transfer target object with the end effectors FK21 and FK22 disposed at tips of arms AR21 and AR22, respectively, and transfers the transfer target object between the process modules PM7 to PM12 and the path (not illustrated). The end effector is also referred to as a fork or a pick.") and
the sensor is a displacement sensor that is disposed at the fork and measures a distance to the transfer object opposed thereto. (Paragraph 0229, "Further, each of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223 is, for example, a distance sensor. The respective optical sensor 222 and optical sensor 223 serving as the distance sensor measure a distance to an object positioned on the respective upper sides of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223. The control device 250 determines whether or not the substrate W is present on the respective upper sides of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223 based on the measured distance." See Figure 20.)
Regarding claim 11, where all the limitations of claim 10 are discussed above, Amikura further teaches:
11. The transfer teaching method of claim 10, wherein a pair of the sensors are disposed at a tip end of the fork, and are arranged at an interval smaller than an outer shape of the transfer object. (Paragraph 0229, "Further, each of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223 is, for example, a distance sensor. The respective optical sensor 222 and optical sensor 223 serving as the distance sensor measure a distance to an object positioned on the respective upper sides of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223. The control device 250 determines whether or not the substrate W is present on the respective upper sides of the optical sensor 222 and the optical sensor 223 based on the measured distance." See Figure 21 which demonstrates the relative positioning of the sensors and the target object.)
Regarding claim 12, Amikura further teaches:
12. A substrate processing system comprising:
a transfer chamber;
a transfer device disposed in the transfer chamber and configured to transfer a transfer object; (Paragraph 0044-0045, "The vacuum transfer modules TM1 and TM2 each have a substantially rectangular shape in a plan view. The process modules PM1 to PM6 are connected to two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM1. The load-lock modules LL1 and LL2 are connected to one side surface of the other two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM1, and a path (not illustrated) for connecting to the vacuum transfer module TM2 is connected to the other side surface of the vacuum transfer module TM1. The side surfaces, to which the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2 are connected, of the vacuum transfer module TM1 are angled according to the two load-lock modules LL1 and LL2. The process modules PM7 to PM12 are connected to two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM2. A path (not illustrated) for connecting to the vacuum transfer module TM1 is connected to one side surface of the other two opposite side surfaces of the vacuum transfer module TM2. The vacuum transfer modules TM1 and TM2 have vacuum chambers in a vacuum atmosphere, and vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are disposed therein, respectively.
The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 are configured to be rotatable, extensible, and vertically movable. The vacuum transfer robots TR1 and TR2 transfer a transfer target object based on an operation instruction output from a controller CU which will be described later. For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR1 holds the transfer target object with forks FK11 and FK12 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the load-lock modules LL1 and LL2, the process modules PM1 to PM6, and the path (not illustrated). For example, the vacuum transfer robot TR2 holds the transfer target object with forks FK21 and FK22 disposed at tips thereof, and transfers the transfer target object between the process modules PM7 to PM12 and the path (not illustrated). The fork is also referred to as a pick or an end effector.") and
a controller configured to control an operation of the transfer device, (Paragraph 0006, “a controller configured to output the operation instruction to the transfer robot”)
wherein the controller controls, in a transfer teaching method for teaching a transfer position of the transfer device:
(A) … and detecting the transfer object using a sensor of the transfer device; (Paragraph 0006, "wherein at least any one of the end effector and the transfer target object has at least any one of a sensor and a camera" as well as Paragraph 0053, "The optical sensor detects an edge of the substrate while the substrate rotates. The optical sensor detects a misalignment amount of an angular position of a notch (or another marker) of the substrate with respect to a reference angular position, and a misalignment amount of a central position of the substrate with respect to the reference position, from a detected result of the edge.")
(B) calculating a position of the transfer object based on the detected transfer object; (Paragraph 0006, "the controller calculates a relative position between the end effector and the transfer target object based on at least any one of a detected result of the sensor and a captured result of the camera") and
(C) setting the transfer position based on the calculated position of the transfer object. (Paragraph 0088, "Further, it is preferable to perform rough teaching before the alignment method of the embodiment is performed. In the rough teaching, transfer position coordinates for the fork of the transfer robot are tentatively determined with respect to the transfer location of the transfer target object. The rough teaching is performed to prevent the transfer target object held by the fork from coming into contact with a member or the like in the processing system, and the transfer position coordinates are tentatively determined with a coarse accuracy.")
Amikura does not specifically discuss moving the device relative to the object in order to gather information for performing an operation. However, Claussen, in the same field of endeavor of robotics, teaches:
… moving the transfer device with respect to the transfer object placed on a placing location (Paragraph 0025, "As may be appreciated in FIG. 2, subsequent to a start step 30, as shown in block 32, during motion along a given trajectory of robotic manipulator 12, imaging sensor 14 (FIG. 1) may be arranged to capture images providing different views of one or more objects of the objects 20 in the environment of the robotic manipulator. As noted above, without limitation such images could be 3-D images (e.g., RGB-D images), or appropriately configured 2-D images (e.g., RGB images or depth images). As shown in block 34, a processor 18 (FIG. 1) may be configured to find, based on the different views provided by the captured images, candidate grasp locations to perform a grasp of a respective object of the one or more objects of the objects 20 in the environment of the robotic manipulator.") …
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transfer system as taught by Amikura with the ability to move the robot in order to gather object information as taught by Claussen. Incorporating the ability to capture a plurality of images of the object while moving the arm as taught by Claussen would allow the system to accurately determine characteristics of the object and control the movement of the robot more effectively to perform the desired operation.
Conclusion
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the referencesapplied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations arerepresentative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed Invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEATHER KENIRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5468. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571) 270-5376. 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.
/H.J.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights