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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species A (claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 09/21/20026 is acknowledged.
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) 1-4, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Sang Hyun (KR 20200055639A) (hereinafter Hyun) in view of Do Dae Young (KR 20070120763 A) (hereinafter Young).
Hyun discloses a substrate processing apparatus comprising: an loading stage (29) configured to receive first and second substrates (11 and 41) (¶0045). Hyun discloses coating stage (27) configured to sequentially receive the first substrate and the second substrate from the loading stage, the coating stage including a first discharge nozzle (17) for discharging a first chemical solution onto the first substrate and a second discharge nozzle (19) for discharging a second chemical solution onto the second substrate (Fig. 2, ¶0039); and unloading stage configured to sequentially unload the first substrate and the second substrate from the coating stage (Fig. 2, RC 29).
The examiner would like to point out that the first and second substrate are considered as material worked upon by the apparatus as opposed to apparatus itself. Hyun is capable of working on two different substrate. Hyun further discloses the use of aligning tool to align substrate (¶0076). However, Hyun is silent about first substrate alignment portion and second substrate alignment portion.
Young also discloses a substrate processing apparatus. The apparatus discloses the use of alignment assembly (200) for substrate processing apparatus (10). The alignment assembly (200) includes a pair of alignment pin array 220 arranged side by side on both sides of the substrate and the alignment pin driver (250) driving the alignment pin array (220) substantially horizontally. The alignment pin array (220) is composed of a plurality of alignment pins (210), the plurality of alignment pins (210) are formed on the first support (230) (corresponding to first substrate alignment portion) and the second support (240) (corresponding to second substrate alignment portion). The alignment pin driver (250) may be a cylinder or the like. The alignment pin driver (250) is formed on both sides of the first support part (230) and the second support part (240) to drive the first support part (230) and the second support part (240) substantially horizontally. As a result, when the substrate (500) is introduced into the first substrate transfer device (100), the first support part (230) and the second support part (240) are moved by the alignment pin driver (250), so that the alignment pin array (220) is moved. Contact both sides of the substrate. As a result, the size of the substrate can be determined, and the substrate can be arranged by size.
Given the wealth of knowledge, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize an alignment portions as taught by Young within the substrate processing apparatus as taught by Hyun. The benefit of doing so would have been to determine and arrange the substrate based on size.
Regarding claim 2, Hyun discloses a transfer device (31) configured to sequentially transfer the first and second substrates to the loading stage (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Hyun discloses wherein the transfer device further comprises a plurality of rollers (31) that are aligned on one side of the loading stage and rotate to move the first and second substrates (Fig. 1, RC 31).
Regarding claim 4, Hyun disclose the use of transfer unit (15, 13) which grips one side of the substrate and transfer it along the first direction (¶0079). The transfer unit are considered as robot arm. Young discloses the use of support pin for determining the and arranging to panels based on size. It would have been obvious to place the support pins on loading stage to assur the panels are arranged accordingly prior to coating stage.
Regarding claim 9, Hyun discloses wherein when one of the first discharge nozzle and the second discharge nozzles is driven, another one of the first discharge nozzle and the second discharge nozzle stops driving (¶0039).
Regarding claim 10, Hyung discloses wherein the first discharge (17) nozzle is provided adjacent to the loading stage (entry stage), and the second discharge nozzle is provided adjacent to the unloading stage (discharge stage).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL I PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-7660. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/VISHAL I PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights