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 .
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first Office Action on the merits of Application 18/975,928 filed on 12/10/24. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/10/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5
Line 2: “the first direction” should be amended as -- a first direction --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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, 9, 10 & 12 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.
Claim 2
Lines 1 & 2: “between about °5 and about °30”
It is unclear if the range is between °5 and °30 or close to °5 and close to °30. The term “about” renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 9
Lines 1 & 2: “between about 0.8 cm and about 1cm”
It is unclear if the range is between 0.8 cm and 1 cm or close to 0.8 cm and close to 1 cm. The term “about” renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 10
Lines 1 & 2: “between about Ra 0.4 and about Ra 3.2”
It is unclear if the range is between Ra 0.4 and Ra 3.2 or close to Ra 0.4 and close to Ra 3.2. The term “about” renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 12
Lines 1 & 2: “between about Ф8 and about Ф10”
It is unclear if the range is between Ф8 and Ф 10 or close to Ф8 to Ф 10. The term “about” renders the claim indefinite.
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, 3, 5, 15-17 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 10,354,899 to Fukushima et al.
Claim 1
Fukushima teaches in Figs 1-12,
A substrate transfer arm to mount a substrate (e.g. 10) comprising: a body unit (e.g. 51); and a plurality of substrate mounting units (see Fig 4) coupled to the body unit, the substrate mounting units configured to load the substrate, wherein each of the substrate mounting unit comprises a stopping unit (e.g. 54) and a pad unit (e.g. 52) coupled to the body unit, and the pad unit is tilted (e.g. 521, Fig 5) with respect to the body unit.
Claim 3
The substrate transfer arm of claim 1, wherein the pad unit is tilted toward a first direction (e.g. towards RP, Fig 5).
Claim 5
The substrate transfer arm of claim 1, wherein the pad unit is tilted toward a second direction (e.g. towards RP, Fig 5) different from the first direction.
Claim 15
The substrate transfer arm of claim 1, wherein the stopping unit comprises a first portion and a second portion (Fig. 6, non-sloped and sloped portion [e.g. 541]).
Claim 16
The substrate transfer arm of claim 15, wherein an inner side of the second portion is tilted more than an inner side of the first portion with respected to the body unit (e.g. see Fig 6, 541 has slope and other portion does not).
Claim 17
The substrate transfer arm of claim 16, wherein the stopping unit further comprises a point (e.g. at vertical portion, where no slope is present) in which the first portion and the second portion meet is located at a height of an upper surface of the pad unit or below (e.g. height is lower, see Fig 6 vs Fig 5).
Claim 19
The substrate transfer arm of claim 1, further comprising a clamp unit (e.g. 56) to clamp the substrate.
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.
Claims 2 &14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 10,354,899 to Fukushima et al.
Claim 2
Fukushima discloses a substrate transfer arm with a body unit, plurality of substrate mounting units. The substrate mounting unit comprising a stopping unit and a pad unit which is tilted with respect to the body unit. Fukushima however does not explicitly disclose that the pad unit tilt is between about 5°and about 30° with respect to the body unit. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the claims were effectively filed to choose the tilt to be between about 5°and about 30° with respect to the body unit, since it has been held that where the general working conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill int eh art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 14
Fukushima does not explicitly disclose that an upper surface of the stopping unit is higher than an upper surface of the pad unit. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the claims were effectively filed to choose an upper surface of the stopping unit is higher than an upper surface of the pad unit, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0180448 to Sakaue et al (applicant cited reference) in view of U.S. Patent 10,354,899 to Fukushima et al.
Claim 20
Sakaue discloses in Figs 1-23,
A substrate processing cluster tool comprising: a substrate handling chamber (e.g. 5), the substrate handling chamber comprises a substrate handling device (e.g. 12); a reaction chamber (e.g. F/S); a load lock chamber (e.g. 6 & 7); a transport chamber (e.g. 8), the transport chamber comprises a substrate transport device (e.g. 16) ; and a substrate storage stage (e.g. 1-4), wherein the substrate transport device comprises a substrate transfer arm (e.g. 41 or 42) and the substrate transfer arm comprises a body unit (e.g. 41c or 42 c), a pad unit (see Fig 2), a stopping unit (see Fig 2) and a clamp unit (e.g. 90),
Sakaue however does not explicitly disclose that the pad unit is tilted with respect to the body unit. Fukushima teaches the pad unit being tilted with respect to the body unit (e.g. 521, Fig 5). Therefore it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the claims were effectively filed to modify the pad unit of Sakaue to be tilted with respect to the body unit as taught by Fukushima, for the benefit securing the substrate to the transfer arm by not allowing it to slip out as easily with the pad tilted.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6-13 & 18 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 HUAN LE whose telephone number is (571)270-3122. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm PST.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached on 571-270-3415. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUAN LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights