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 § 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 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brovold – US 20180195941 in view of Applicant’s admitted prior art of US 20250079208 (hereinafter “AAPA”).
As per claim 1, Brovold teaches an inspection system 102 for inspecting at least one specimen 116 (fig.2A), comprising: a pushing member 108 for applying a predetermined force to said specimen ([0027]: the apparatus 102 is designed to apply a load via a load head 108 to the specimen 116; the applied load corresponds to “a predetermined force”; thus “a pushing member 108 for applying a predetermined force to said specimen”); a driving module 104 connecting to said pushing member 108 for driving said pushing member 108 to move toward said specimen 116 ([0027]: the load is applied by an actuator 104 (e.g., hydraulic actuator) which can drive the load head 108 along a load column 110 onto the specimen 116; thus “a driving module connecting to said pushing member for driving said pushing member to move toward said specimen”), thereby applying said predetermined force to said specimen 106; and an offset sensor disposed on one side of said specimen for detecting an offset amount of said specimen as applied by said predetermined force ([0056]: a single clip-on displacement (COD) gauge (which corresponds to “offset sensor”) mounted on the specimen to control and measure the rate of displacement at the specimen's crack mouth; thus “applying said predetermined force to said specimen 106; and an offset sensor disposed on one side of said specimen for detecting an offset amount of said specimen as applied by said predetermined force”).
Brovold does not explicitly teach supporting beam of a substrate carrier.
AAPA teaches central beam structure includes multiple carbon rods that are arranged at equal intervals and used as supports for the semiconductor substrates respectively. In practical use, before such a large substrate carrier can be used to accommodate the substrates, the carbon rods need to be measured to determine whether any of the cardon rods are tilted or deviated from a central line ([0003-0004]: inspecting at least one supporting beam/rod of a substrate carrier).
It would thus have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify specimen of Brovold with inspecting at least one supporting beam/rod of a substrate carrier of AAPA to include an inspection system for inspecting at least one supporting beam of a substrate carrier, comprising: a pushing member for applying a predetermined force to said supporting beam; a driving module connecting to said pushing member for driving said pushing member to move toward said supporting beam, thereby applying said predetermined force to said supporting beam; and an offset sensor disposed on one side of said supporting beam for detecting an offset amount of said supporting beam as applied by said predetermined force, to inspect supporting beam/rod to determine whether any of the rods is tilted or deviated from a central line ([0004]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10 are allowable.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As per claim 2, claim 2 includes a lifting module connecting to a base which said pushing member, said driving module, and said offset sensor are disposed thereon, when in combination with the remaining limitations in the claim 2 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
Claim 3 is also allowable because they are dependent on claim 2 as set forth above.
As per claim 4, claim 4 includes said control module sets a lateral surface of an uppermost one or a lowermost one of said supporting beams as a reference point for detecting said offset amount, when in combination with the remaining limitations in the claim 4 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
Claim 5 is also allowable because they are dependent on claim 4 as set forth above.
As per claim 6, claim 6 includes said supporting beam has a connecting end for connecting to a backbone, a middle section, and a suspension end in opposite to said connecting end, when in combination with the remaining limitations in the claim 6 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
As per claim 7, claim 7 includes setting a lateral surface of one of a plurality of said supporting beams as a reference point for detecting an offset amount, said supporting beams being arranged in parallel, when in combination with the remaining limitations in the claim 7 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
Claims 8-10 are also allowable because they are dependent on claim 7 as set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUONG D PHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8883. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, John Breene can be reached on 571-272-4107. 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.
/TRUONG D PHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights