DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a communication node configured to” in claim 1.
Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Funk et al. US 2005/0187649 (“Funk”).
Funk discloses:
An electronic device manufacturing system, comprising:
a process tool (e.g., Fig. 1 #110, 120);
an evaluation system (e.g., Fig. 1 #160); and
a communication node (e.g., Fig. 1 #150) configured to:
obtain one or more attributes from the evaluation system (e.g., [0043]-[0048]);
identify a data collection plan that is based on the one or more attributes (e.g., [0043]-[0048]);
register with the process tool to receive data according to the data collection plan (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not known) which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110 and which can provide event information, context information, and start-stop timing commands used to synchronize data acquisition with the tool process”);
receive, from the process tool, data according to the data collection plan (e.g., [0026], [0036], [0043]-[0044]: “data collection plan”); and
send the received data to the evaluation system (e.g., [0076]: “collecting data and then feeding that data into a software algorithm that models the behavior of a particular tool, process module, and/or sensor”).
2. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node communicates with the evaluation system and the process tool using Remote Procedure Calls (e.g., [0030]).
3. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node is further configured to:
receive feedback data from the evaluation system, wherein the feedback data is generated based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
cause the process tool to perform a corrective action based on the feedback data (e.g., [0076]: “fed forward or back to keep tool performance within the specified limits”, [0156]).
4. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 3, wherein the feedback data comprises at least one of predictive data, diagnostic data, corrective data, optimization data, efficiency data, or health data (e.g., [0055]).
5. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the communication node is further configured to:
receive feedback data from the evaluation system, wherein the feedback data is generated based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
send the feedback data to a client device (e.g., Fig. 1 #170, [0053], [0061]).
6. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the one or more attributes comprise at least one of an input used by the process tool, an output generated from the process tool, a control mode, a recipe set-point to be monitored, or an equipment constant to be monitored (e.g., [0043]-[0048]).
7. The electronic device manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the evaluation system comprises at least one of a machine learning model, an inference engine, a heuristics model, a physics-based engine, or an algorithm (e.g., [0055]: “performs multivariate analysis of summary data using models based upon historical data”, [0076]-[0077]).
8. A method, comprising:
obtaining, by a processing device, one or more attributes from an evaluation system (e.g., [0043]-[0048]);
identifying a data collection plan that is based on the one or more attributes (e.g., [0043]-[0048]);
registering with a process tool to receive data according to the data collection plan (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not known) which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110 and which can provide event information, context information, and start-stop timing commands used to synchronize data acquisition with the tool process”);
receiving, from the process tool, data according to the data collection plan (e.g., [0026], [0036], [0043]-[0044]: “data collection plan”); and
sending the received data to the evaluation system (e.g., [0076]: “collecting data and then feeding that data into a software algorithm that models the behavior of a particular tool, process module, and/or sensor”).
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the processing device communicates with the evaluation system and the process tool using Remote Procedure Calls (e.g., [0030]).
10. The method of claim 8, further comprising:
receive feedback data from the evaluation system, wherein the feedback data is generated based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
cause the process tool to perform a corrective action based on the feedback data (e.g., [0076]: “fed forward or back to keep tool performance within the specified limits”, [0156]).
11. The method of claim 10, wherein the feedback data comprises at least one of predictive data, diagnostic data, corrective data, optimization data, efficiency data, or health data (e.g., [0055]).
12. The method of claim 8, further comprising:
receive feedback data from the evaluation system, wherein the feedback data is generated based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
send the feedback data to a client device (e.g., Fig. 1 #170, [0053], [0061]).
13. The method of claim 8, wherein the one or more attributes comprise at least one of an input used by the process tool, an output generated from the process tool, a control mode, a recipe set-point to be monitored, or an equipment constant to be monitored (e.g., [0043]-[0048]).
14. The method of claim 8, wherein the processing device is coupled to an evaluation system that comprises at least one of a machine learning model, an inference engine, a heuristics model, a physics-based engine, or an algorithm (e.g., [0055]: “performs multivariate analysis of summary data using models based upon historical data”, [0076]-[0077]).
15. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processing device operatively coupled to a memory, performs operations comprising:
obtaining one or more attributes from an evaluation system (e.g., [0043]-[0048]);
identifying a data collection plan that is based on the one or more attributes (e.g., [0043]-[0048]);
registering with a process tool to receive data according to the data collection plan (e.g., [0026]: “processing tool 110 can comprise a tool agent (not known) which can be a software process that runs on a tool 110 and which can provide event information, context information, and start-stop timing commands used to synchronize data acquisition with the tool process”);
receiving, from the process tool, data according to the data collection plan (e.g., [0026], [0036], [0043]-[0044]: “data collection plan”); and
sending the received data to the evaluation system (e.g., [0076]: “collecting data and then feeding that data into a software algorithm that models the behavior of a particular tool, process module, and/or sensor”).
16. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the processing device communicates with the evaluation system and the process tool using Remote Procedure Calls (e.g., [0030]).
17. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise:
receiving feedback data from the evaluation system, wherein the feedback data is generated based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
causing the process tool to perform a corrective action based on the feedback data (e.g., [0076]: “fed forward or back to keep tool performance within the specified limits”, [0156]).
18. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17, wherein the feedback data comprises at least one of predictive data, diagnostic data, corrective data, optimization data, efficiency data, or health data (e.g., [0055]).
19. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise:
receiving feedback data from the evaluation system, wherein the feedback data is generated based on the received data (e.g., [0076]: “The APC system outputs process parametric adaptations that are then either fed forward or back”); and
sending the feedback data to a client device (e.g., Fig. 1 #170, [0053], [0061]).
20. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more attributes comprise at least one of an input used by the process tool, an output generated from the process tool, a control mode, a recipe set-point to be monitored, or an equipment constant to be monitored (e.g., [0043]-[0048]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Toprac et al. US 6,622,059 discloses a method for manufacturing, the method comprising processing a workpiece, measuring a parameter characteristic of the processing, and forming an output signal corresponding to the characteristic parameter measured by using the characteristic parameter measured as an input to a transistor model. The method also comprises predicting a wafer electrical test (WET) resulting value based on the output signal, detecting faulty processing based on the predicted WET resulting value, and correcting the faulty processing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-3742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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 A JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
08/27/26
Prosecution Insights