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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fenske (US 2012/0255794 A1) in view of Ohsawa (US 5,645,391)
Regarding claim 1, Fenske teaches, A substrate holder for receiving a substrate from a transfer arm (13) and holding the substrate ([0022] – substrate holder cassette receives wafer from robotic arm), comprising:
a stage (31) configured to be raised and lowered in a vertical direction and configured to place the substrate (2) thereon (fig. 11 – stage and substrate holder (11) can be raised and lowered with linear actuator (35));
a measurer (33 – weight sensor) configured to measure at least one of a weight, a pressure, and a displacement of the stage ([0067] – weight sensor (33) measures weight of cassette);
Fenske fails to teach,
a controller configured to predict a state of the transfer arm based on measurement results of the measurer.
However, Ohsawa teaches,
a controller (63) configured to predict a state of the transfer arm based on measurement results of the measurer (Col 7 – line 55 – Col 8 - line 10 – state of arm (59a) is determined based on data gathered by measurer).
Fenske and Ohsawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the wafer processing and handling. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fenske’s substrate holder, measurer and transfer arm to be used with the controller and prediction controls taught by Ohsawa. Fenske explicitly teaches, measuring the weight of the carrier during transfer operations, and as disclosed by Ohsawa (Col 8 – lines 25-30) for the use of collected sensor data to monitor the state of a transfer arm can prevent failures and damage to the transfer apparatuses.
Regarding claim 2, Fenske teaches, the substrate holder of claim 1,
wherein the measurer (33) is configured to support the stage and measure the weight of the stage (fig. 11 – measurer supports stage and wafer cassette).
Regarding claim 5, Fenske teaches, the substrate holder of claim 2,
Measuring a change in the weight measured by the measurer (33) when the transfer arm advances to the stage.
Fenske fails to explicitly teach,
wherein the controller is configured to predict a state of the substrate on the transfer arm based on a change in the weight measured by the measurer when the transfer arm advances to the stage.
However, Ohsawa teaches,
wherein the controller is configured to predict a state of the substrate on the transfer arm based on sensor data collected by the measurer when the transfer arm advances to the stage (Col 7 – line 55 – Col 8 - line 10 – state of arm (59a) is determined based on data gathered by measurer).
Fenske and Ohsawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the wafer processing and handling. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fenske’s substrate holder, measurer and transfer arm to be used with the controller and prediction controls taught by Ohsawa. Fenske explicitly teaches, measuring the weight of the carrier during transfer operations, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the measurement data collected by Fenske’s measurer to be used with the prediction mechanism taught by Ohsawa, as disclosed by Ohsawa (Col 8 – lines 25-30) the use of collected sensor data to monitor the state of a transfer arm can prevent failures and damage to the transfer apparatuses.
Regarding claim 6, Fenske fails to teach, The substrate holder of claim 3,
wherein the controller is configured to output an alarm when the change in the weight exceeds a threshold value.
However, Ohsawa teaches, The substrate holder of claim 3,
wherein the controller (63) is configured to output an alarm (101) when the change in the weight exceeds a threshold value (alarm generator (101) creates alarm when error is detected).
Fenske and Ohsawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the wafer processing and handling. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fenske’s substrate holder, measurer and transfer arm to be used with the controller and prediction controls and alarm generator taught by Ohsawa. Fenske explicitly teaches, measuring the weight of the carrier during transfer operations, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the measurement data collected by Fenske’s measurer to be used with alarm generator taught by Ohsawa, as disclosed by Ohsawa (Col 8 – lines 5-15) the use of an alarm generator helps prevent failures during the transfer process.
Regarding claim 7, Fenske teaches, the substrate holder of claim 2,
wherein the stage includes:
a plurality of support columns (fig below);
placement members (fig below) provided on the plurality of support columns and configured to place an outer periphery of the substrate thereon;
and a bottom plate (fig below) configured to support lower ends of the plurality of support columns, and wherein the measurer is configured to support the bottom plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
680
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Fenske teaches, A substrate transfer method of transferring a substrate from a transfer arm to a substrate holder such that the substrate holder holds the substrate,
the substrate transfer method comprising:
advancing the transfer arm (13) for holding the substrate, toward a stage (31) configured to be raised and lowered (35 – linear actuator lowers and raises stage) in a vertical direction in the substrate holder;
moving the transfer arm and the substrate holder relative to each other in the vertical direction to deliver the substrate from the transfer arm to the stage ([0009] – wafer (2) is removed from cassette (22) by robotic arm (13), and can be raised by linear actuator (33);
measuring, by a measurer (33) of the substrate holder, at least one of a weight, a pressure, and a displacement of the stage ([0067] – weight sensor measures weight of stage);
Fenske fails to teach,
and predicting a state of the transfer arm based on measurement results of the measurer
However, Ohsawa teaches,
and predicting a state of the transfer arm based on measurement results of the measurer (Col 7 – line 55 – Col 8 - line 10 – state of arm (59a) is determined based on data gathered by measurer).
Fenske and Ohsawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the wafer processing and handling. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fenske’s substrate holder, measurer and transfer arm to be used with the controller and prediction controls taught by Ohsawa (Col 8 – lines 25-30) for the use of collected sensor data to monitor the state of a transfer arm can prevent failures and damage to the transfer apparatuses.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fenske (US 2012/0255794 A1) in view of Ohsawa (US 5,645,391) and further in view of Kobayashi (US 2019/0181031 A1). Fenske and Ohsawa disclose all the limitations of the claims as discussed above.
Regarding claim 8, Fenske and Ohsawa fail to teach, a substrate processing apparatus, comprising: the substrate holder of claim 1,
wherein the transfer arm is configured to suction-hold and transfer the substrate in an atmospheric environment,
and wherein the substrate processing apparatus is configured to process the substrate held by the substrate holder in the atmospheric environment.
However, Kobayashi teaches,
a substrate processing apparatus (1), comprising: the substrate holder of claim 1,
wherein the transfer arm (34) is configured to suction-hold (34E/34C – suction holders) and transfer the substrate in an atmospheric environment ([0026] – transfer device is disposed in an atmospheric environment),
and wherein the substrate processing apparatus is configured to process the substrate held by the substrate holder in the atmospheric environment ([0026] – loader module is disposed in an atmospheric environment).
Fenske, Ohsawa and Kobayashi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the wafer processing and handling industry. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fenske and Ohsawa’s substrate holder to be used within Kobayashi’s substrate processing apparatus with a suction holding robotic arm and atmospheric pressure substrate processing. Doing so provides a way to measure weight of wafers being transferred during processing and detect errors during processing as disclosed above by Fenske and Ohsawa.
Regarding claim 9, Fenske and Ohsawa fail to teach, A substrate processing apparatus, comprising:
the substrate holder of claim 1,
wherein the transfer arm includes a first transfer arm and a second transfer arm,
wherein the first transfer arm is configured to suction-hold and transfer the substrate in an atmospheric environment,
wherein the second transfer arm is configured to hold and transfer the substrate in a vacuum atmosphere,
and wherein the substrate processing apparatus is configured to be switchable between the atmospheric environment and the vacuum atmosphere in a state in which the substrate is held by the substrate holder.
However, Kobayashi teaches,
A substrate processing apparatus (1), comprising:
the substrate holder of claim 1,
wherein the transfer arm includes a first transfer arm (31) and a second transfer arm (12),
wherein the first transfer arm (31) is configured to suction-hold (34E/34C – suction holders) and transfer the substrate in an atmospheric environment ([0026 – transfer device is located in loader module at atmospheric pressure),
wherein the second transfer arm (12) is configured to hold and transfer the substrate in a vacuum atmosphere ([0024] – transfer device (11) and arms (12) located inside vacuum environment),
and wherein the substrate processing apparatus is configured to be switchable between the atmospheric environment and the vacuum atmosphere in a state in which the substrate is held by the substrate holder ([0030] – load lock module (40) has cylindrical stage for wafers and can be switched between vacuum and atmospheric environment).
Fenske, Ohsawa and Kobayashi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the wafer processing and handling industry. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fenske and Ohsawa’s substrate holder to be used within Kobayashi’s substrate processing apparatus with two robotic arms one with suction holding, and atmospheric and vacuum pressure substrate processing, wherein the substrate processing apparatus can be changed between atmospheric and vacuum states for the reasons disclosed above in claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, the prior art fails to disclose:
wherein the transfer arm includes a plurality of holding pads configured to hold the substrate, and wherein the controller is configured to predict a state of the plurality of holding pads based on a change in the weight measured by the measurer when the substrate is placed on the stage from the transfer arm.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art fails to disclose:
wherein the transfer arm includes a plurality of holding pads configured to hold the substrate,
and wherein the controller is configured to predict a state of the plurality of holding pads based on a change in the weight measured by the measurer when the transfer arm is retreated from the stage.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Matsuura (US 20120258414 A1) – teaches a substrate holder with support columns and a stage
Hanawa (US 20060238953 A1) – teaches a substrate holder with a measurer
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN SALVADOR MOSCOSO whose telephone number is (571)272-8604. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/Gerald McClain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/J.S.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights