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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “convex portion” of the shaft and isolation wall (claims 2-4 and 8) must be shown/identified or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). It should be noted that the specification and drawings lacks sufficient explanation or a reference numeral to properly identify said portion. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2-4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The “convex portion” of the shaft and isolation wall have not been described or illustrated in a way that the portions can be understood, identified and/or precisely oriented/located. First, no reference numerals have been designated to said portions. Furthermore, the specification contains vague and contradictory statements that obscure the nature/orientation/location of the portions. For example, the specification states: “connector 156B has a convex portion protruding from the shaft 155B” [Par 0014]. It also states “connector 159B has a shape protruding from the isolation wall 157C and has a shape that protrudes in a convex shape in the direction approaching the cover 154D” [Par 0023]. At the same time, it states “connector 159B has a convex portion protruding from the shaft 155C” [Par 0023]. Lastly, it is not understood how these convex features would reduce friction and/or reduce contamination. Therefore, the disclosure raises questions of whether the applicant had possession of the apparatus with convex portions at the time of filing.
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.
Claims 2-4 and 8 are 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.
The scope of the claims referencing the convex portions is unascertainable for the reasons set forth above (see Drawings Objection and Rejection under 35 USC 112(a). For examination purposes, it is understood that it refers to the tip of the plunger/shaft that comes in contact with the substrate.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2005051188 A.
PNG
media_image1.png
314
457
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 1, JP discloses a substrate transfer apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising: an end effector (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7) comprising: a hand (Q2/V3) that grips a substrate; and a plunger (Q2/V3) that comes into contact with the substrate and performs alignment of the substrate comprising: a contact portion (Q3/V4) that comes into contact with the substrate; a shaft (G7/L8) that moves the contact portion to contact the substrate; and an isolation wall (housing A3) that isolates an internal region from an outside, the internal region comprising a driver (G6/L12) that drives the shaft , wherein the isolation wall comprises a shaft hole (defined by G3) through which the shaft extends into the internal region, and the shaft comprises a cover (V8) in which a first end is connected to the shaft and a second end is connected to the isolation wall (Note: The rotational and axial motion of the prior art teach the alignment function).
Re claim 2, as best understood, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the shaft comprises a circular pad (Q3/V4) with a convex portion that protrude vertically from a surface of the shaft.
Re claim 3, as best understood, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the cover is connected via elements Q2/V3 to the convex portion.
Re claim 4, as best understood, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the cover comprises a plate (flange associated with screws 72) that sandwiches the cover with the convex portion, and the plate is connected via Q2/V3 to the convex portion.
Re claim 5, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cover comprises a material that expands and contracts (caused by the relative motion between Q2 and V3).
Re claim 6, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cover has an accordion structure (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7).
Re claim 7, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 6, wherein there is a space between the cover and the shaft (Fig. 7).
Re claim 8, as best understood, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cover has a cylindrical shape (Fig 6) and covers a periphery of the shaft (L8) between a convex portion (Q3/V4) to the isolation wall.
Re claim 9, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cover is connected to the shaft at the first end sealed from an external environment, and the second end is connected to the isolation wall sealed from the external environment (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7).
Re claim 10, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the driver that drives the shaft is arranged in the internal region (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7).
Re claim 13, JP discloses a substrate transfer apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising: an end effector (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7) comprising: a hand (Q2/V3) gripping a substrate; and a plunger (Q2/V3) that comes into contact with the substrate and performs alignment of the substrate comprising: a contact portion (Q3/V4) that comes into contact with the substrate; and an isolation wall (housing A3) that isolates an internal region from an outside, the internal region comprising a driver (G6/L12) that drives a shaft (G7/L8), wherein the isolation wall comprises a shaft hole (defined by G3) through which the contact portion extends into the internal region, and the contact portion comprises a cover (V8) in which a first end is connected to the contact portion and a second end is connected to the isolation wall.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2005051188 A in view of Yoshida et al. US 20200246985 A1.
Re claim 11, JP discloses the substrate transfer apparatus according to claim 10, wherein a sensor is arranged in the external region.
JP does not teach a sensor in the internal region.
Yoshida et al., on the other hand, discloses a substrate transfer apparatus (Fig. 1) with a plunger (68). It also teaches that it’s well known to house sensors (90a, 90) within an internal region of the pushing mechanism (60).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to place JP’s sensor in an internal region per the teaching of Yoshida et al. to protect the sensor from external factors (e.g., EMF, contaminants, etc.).
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2005051188 A in view of JP 2019197799 A
Re claim 12, JP ‘188 does not teach wherein the substrate transfer apparatus is used in a process using a liquid.
JP ‘799, on the other hand, teaches that it is known to use substrate transfer apparatuses can be used in wet environments (wet unit 17; rinsing, and cleaning).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the transfer apparatus of JP ‘188 on a process using liquid to improve the versatility of the device allowing it to be used in rinsing/cleaning environments.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
References D, E, and F teach a substrate transfer apparatus with a pushing mechanism. References G and H teach a shaft cover.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAUL J RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7097. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:00.
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, Joseph Thomas can be reached at 571-272-8004. 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.
SAUL J. RODRIGUEZ
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3652
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights