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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 8, 9 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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 3, 11 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Yamartino et al. US 2006/0155410 (hereinafter Yamartino).
Regarding claim 1, Yamartino teaches: a substrate processing apparatus management system including an assistance device that assists a maintenance work for a substrate processing apparatus including a plurality of chambers that process substrates, and an information analysis device, wherein
the information analysis device includes a model generator that generates a representative model representing correlations in regard to a plurality of processing information pieces, with each of the plurality of processing information pieces representing an operation or a state relating to a substrate process in a predetermined representative chamber among the plurality of chambers (Fig. 1A, [0044] - - form a chamber model using model data; [0048] - - model data is variables during operation, thus model data is processing information), and
the assistance device includes a processing information collector that acquires a plurality of processing information pieces for each of the plurality of chambers ([0048] - - data acquisition), and
an assistance information generator that, based on comparison information in which another chamber different from the representative chamber is compared with the representative chamber about correlations in regard to a plurality of processing information pieces, generates assistance information relating to a maintenance work for the another chamber (Fig. 5, #540 - - comparing the chamber model with a subject chamber; then adjusting the subject chamber).
Regarding claim 2, Yamartino teaches:
assistance device that assists a maintenance work for a substrate processing apparatus including a plurality of chambers that process substrates, comprising:
a processing information collector that acquires a plurality of processing information pieces representing operations or states relating to a substrate process in each of the plurality of chambers ([0048] - - data acquisition); and
an assistance information generator, based on comparison information in which correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces for a predetermined representative chamber among the plurality of chambers are compared with correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces for another chamber, generates assistance information about a maintenance work for the another chamber (Fig. 1A, [0044] - - form a chamber model using model data; [0048] - - model data is variables during operation, thus model data is processing information; Fig. 5, #540 - - comparing the chamber model with a subject chamber; then adjusting the subject chamber).
Claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons and rationale as above.
Claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons and rationale as above.
Claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons and rationale as above.
Regarding claim 3, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: the comparison information is information obtained when respective correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces are weighted and compared to one another ([0076] - - weighted values).
Regarding claim 11, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: each of the plurality of chambers includes a discharge valve that discharges liquid, and a flow-rate measurer that measures a flow rate of liquid discharged from the discharge valve, and
each of the plurality of processing information pieces includes an open signal representing an opening amount input to the discharge valve for control of an opening amount of the discharge valve and a flow rate measured by the flow-rate measurer ([0048] - - gas flow rate, pressure control valve positions).
Regarding claim 12, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: each of the plurality of chambers includes a discharge valve that discharges liquid, and
a concentration measurer that measures a concentration of liquid, and
each of the plurality of processing information pieces includes an open signal representing an opening amount input to the discharge valve for control of an opening amount of the discharge valve and a concentration measured by the concentration measurer ([0048] - - total and individual gas flows, pressure control valve positions).
Regarding claim 13, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: each of the plurality of chambers includes a concentration measurer that measures a concentration of liquid, and
a chamber-temperature measurer that measures a temperature in a chamber, and
each of the plurality of processing information pieces includes a concentration measured by the concentration measurer and a temperature measured by the chamber-temperature measurer ([0048] - - total and individual gas flows, temperature).
Regarding claim 14, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: each of the plurality of chambers includes a concentration measurer that measures a concentration of liquid, and
a liquid-temperature measurer that measures a temperature of liquid, and
each of the plurality of processing information pieces includes a concentration measured by the concentration measurer and a temperature measured by the liquid-temperature measurer ([0048] - - total and individual gas flows, chamber temperature).
Regarding claim 15, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: a deviation-degree acquirer that acquires, as the comparison information, deviation-degree information representing respective degrees of deviation between a plurality of respective predicted values that are respectively predicted based on the plurality of processing information pieces for the another chamber using correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces for the representative chamber, and the plurality of respective processing information pieces for the another chamber ([0107] - - the subject chamber is deviating from the chamber model; [0087] - - overlying the score trace for a run of the subject chamber over the score trace of the chamber model).
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.
Claims 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamartino et al. US 2006/0155410 (hereinafter Yamartino) in view of LEI et al. US 2019/0385047 (hereinafter LEI).
Regarding claim 6, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But Yamartino does not explicitly teach: wherein the assistance information generator, after executing a logarithmic operation process on at least one subject processing information piece among the plurality of processing information pieces, calculates correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces.
However, LEI teaches: wherein the assistance information generator, after executing a logarithmic operation process on at least one subject processing information piece among the plurality of processing information pieces, calculates correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces (Abstract- - apply logarithms of the inputs).
Yamartino and LEI are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to data analysis.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above method, as taught by Yamartino, and incorporating logarithmic operation, as taught by LEI.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to perform pre-processing on data, as suggested by LEI ([0033]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Yamartino and LEI teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Yamartino further teaches: the comparison information is obtained when correlations in regard to the plurality of processing information pieces are weighted and compared to one another ([0076] - - weighted values).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamartino et al. US 2006/0155410 (hereinafter Yamartino) in view of RIJPSTRA et al. US 2021/0080837 (hereinafter RIJPSTRA).
Regarding claim 10, Yamartino teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But Yamartino does not explicitly teach: a representative chamber determiner that determines one chamber having correlations closest to correlations in regard to averages of the plurality of processing information pieces for each of the plurality of chambers among the plurality of chambers as the representative chamber.
However, RIJPSTRA teaches: a representative chamber determiner that determines one chamber having correlations closest to correlations in regard to averages of the plurality of processing information pieces for each of the plurality of chambers among the plurality of chambers as the representative chamber ([0257] - - selecting a parameter map that is closest to the average parameter map as the representative map).
Yamartino and RIJPSTRA are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They all relate to data analysis.
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above method, as taught by Yamartino, and incorporating selecting a parameter map that is closest to the average as a representative, as taught by RIJPSTRA.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to improve adjustment to the semiconductor process, as suggested by RIJPSTRA ([0006]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUHUI R PAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9872. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM EST.
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.
/YUHUI R PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights