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 .
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: vision in claim(s) 1 (first instance).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The vision will be interpreted as a camera as described in par. 0074 of applicant’s specification as published, or equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/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 it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-9, 11-16 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.
Regarding Claim 1, the claim recites the limitation "a first teaching operation of acquiring a first image by photographing, by a vision chamber provided on the transfer robot transferring a substrate, a mark plate attached to a chamber or a frame around the chamber".
It is unclear whether or not the “vision chamber” and the later introduced “chamber or frame around the chamber” refer to the same chamber or not. This also creates antecedent basis in later instances of the vision as later in the claims it is referred to simply as a “vision”. For examining purposes, this will be treated as a typographical error intended to claim a “vision” throughout acquiring an image of a mark plate attached to a chamber/frame around the chamber.
Claims 2-9 are rejected for being dependent on Claim 1, and failing to cure the deficiencies.
Regarding Claim 11, the claim recites the limitation "wherein the teaching program performs generating an instruction for primarily adjusting the position of the transfer hand of the transfer robot in at least one direction among a Z direction, which is an up-down direction, a Y direction, which is a horizontal direction perpendicular to the Z direction, and a theta direction, which is a circumferential direction centered on the Z direction, based on the calculated error.".
It is unclear whether or not “primarily” adjusting in a certain direction means 1) the adjustment takes place in multiple directions simultaneously but mostly in the primary direction (for example 50+% “primarily” in Z direction and smaller percentages in X or Y directions), or 2) that the adjustment in one direction takes place in time chronologically before other adjustments in other directions. For examining purposes, this will be interpreted to have meaning 2).
Claims 12-16 are rejected for being dependent on Claim 11, and failing to cure the deficiencies.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (KR 20200075395, hereinafter Lee, see attached English translation) in view of Choi et al (KR 20210027647, hereinafter Choi, see attached English translation).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee teaches:
1. A teaching method of a transfer robot including a transfer hand (see at least "teaching method" on page 2) , the teaching method comprising:
a first teaching operation of acquiring a first image by photographing, by a vision chamber provided on the transfer robot transferring a substrate, a mark plate attached to a chamber or a frame around the chamber (see at least "The transfer robot 220 has a hand 221 that unloads the substrate W. In addition, an imaging unit 223 for imaging the teaching mark 17 formed on the container 10 and acquiring image data may be installed on the transport robot 220." On page 10) , and
adjusting a teaching point of the transfer robot based on the first image (see at least "The control unit 250 may perform teaching in the front-rear direction of the hand 221 using the size change of the teaching mark 17 in the image data. That is, when the hand 221 moves toward the container 10, since the teaching mark 17 gradually increases in the image data, the control unit 250 performs the hand 221 according to the change in the size of the teach mark 17 It can perform teaching in the front-rear direction. For example, when the teaching mark 17 is provided in a circular shape, the control unit 250 detects whether the diameter of the teaching mark in the image data is within a predetermined range and performs teaching in the front-rear direction of the hand 221. Can. In addition, the control unit 250 may perform teaching in the left and right directions of the hand 221 by using the position change of the teaching mark 17 in the image data. For example, the control unit 250 may detect whether the teaching mark 17 is located within a predetermined range from the image data and perform teaching in the left and right directions of the hand 221. As another example, the control unit 250 may adjust the inclination in the left and right directions of the hand 221 by using the shape change of the teaching mark 17 in the image data." in page 8) ; and
Lee does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Choi does teach:
a second teaching operation of acquiring a second image by photographing, by a substrate-type sensor including an image photographing unit placed on a hand of the transfer robot, a structure in the chamber, and adjusting a teaching point of the transfer robot based on the second image. (see at least "Referring to FIG. 3, the imaging unit 700 may include a base plate 710, an imaging member 720, a control unit 730, and a communication unit 740… . The control unit 730 may teach the position of the hand 610 using an image of a component captured by the imaging member 720 while the hand 610 supports the base plate 710. Here, the component may be a lift pin 1216. Hereinafter, it is assumed that the part is the lift pin 1216. When the image of the lift pin 1216 is captured by the imaging member 720, the control unit 730 compares the image of the lift pin 1216 with a pre-stored reference image to determine the degree of displacement of the base plate 710. have. Specifically, the control unit 730 may perform teaching by moving the hand 610 by a distance difference between the image of the lift pin 1216 captured by the imaging member 720 and the reference image. As an example, the control unit 730 may determine a distance difference between the center of the image of the lift pin 1216 captured by the imaging member 720 and the center of the reference image as a degree of displacement from the original position of the hand 610." On page 7 and “Subsequently, the transport position of the hand is taught based on the obtained part image (S620). As an example, the degree of displacement of the base plate may be determined by comparing the obtained image of the lift pin with a pre-stored reference image.” On page 8)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Lee to incorporate the teachings of Choi wherein the robot hand position is taught by carrying a circular imaging unit into a chamber and using the position of a chamber component to correct the hand position. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Choi would be to improve the accuracy of the calibration (see page 8).
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (KR 20200075395, hereinafter Lee, see attached English translation) in view of Graciano et al (US 20220059383, hereinafter Graciano).
Regarding Claim 10, Lee teaches:
a teaching program stored in a storage medium for deriving a teaching point of a transfer robot included in a substrate processing apparatus, the teaching program (see at least “control unit” on page 8 and "The transfer robot 220 has a hand 221 that unloads the substrate W. In addition, an imaging unit 223 for imaging the teaching mark 17 formed on the container 10 and acquiring image data may be installed on the transport robot 220." On page 10 )performing:
generating an instruction for acquiring, by a vision provided on the transfer robot, a first image by photographing a mark plate attached to a chamber or a frame around the chamber, (see at least "The transfer robot 220 has a hand 221 that unloads the substrate W. In addition, an imaging unit 223 for imaging the teaching mark 17 formed on the container 10 and acquiring image data may be installed on the transport robot 220." On page 10)
Lee does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Graciano does teach:
wherein the mark plate is marked with a plurality of teaching marks (see at least "The at least one movable imaging sensor 750-752 has at least one movable imaging sensor 750-752 mounted to the frame 710 so as to be disposed on the end effector 420A, 420B, 502 with the frame 710 carried by the end effector 420A, 420B, 502, in a predetermined position with respect to the predetermined end effector reference location 479. The at least one movable imaging sensor 750-752 comprises more than one movable imaging sensors 750-752, each with a different predetermined pose so that an image sensor plane (see FIGS. 8A-8F) of each respective movable imaging sensor 750-752 corresponds to different respective holding station reference plane (e.g., the X(or θ)-Z plane, the R(or Y)-X(or θ) plane, and the Z-Y(or R) plane), and the at least one station target 871, 1120, 1201, 1202 has an orientation corresponding to each respective movable imaging sensor 750-752 so that each movable imaging sensor forms with a respective station target different couples corresponding to and comprising the respective fixed image sensor 750-752 and the respective station target 871, 1120, 1201, 1202. " in par. 0073) ;
deriving at least one of a direction in which the teaching marks are arranged (see at least " In one aspect, the baseline position of the sensor 581 at the load port module is not the same as the actual position of the sensor 581 at the load port module 11005 where the target 800 (referring not the generic target of FIG. 10 for illustrative purposes) is offset from a center of the field of view (see fields of view FOV1, FOV2) in one or more of the Z and X directions (noting that FIG. 10 is a generic illustration that represents the fields of view FOV, FOV1, FOV2 in the X-Z (θ-Z) plane, the Z-Y (Z-R) plane, and the X-Y (θ-R) plane). Based on the sensed image of the target 800 the controller 11091 determines the distance offset(s) ΔZ and/or ΔX (Δθ) of the target 800 from the center (see center of FOV1 and FOV2) in one or more of the Z and X (or θ) directions based on the pixel-to-millimeter (or inch) reference. The controller 11091 commands the transport robot 11013 to move to adjust the position of the target 800 so that the target 800 is located in the center of the field of view (see center FOV) to obtain an initial teach location of the load port module 11005 relative to the transport robot 11013 in the X (or θ) and/or Z directions. " in par. 0081) ,
a length of the mark plate, and
a first offset between the mark plate and a center point of the first image from the first image (see at least " In one aspect, the baseline position of the sensor 581 at the load port module is not the same as the actual position of the sensor 581 at the load port module 11005 where the target 800 (referring not the generic target of FIG. 10 for illustrative purposes) is offset from a center of the field of view (see fields of view FOV1, FOV2) in one or more of the Z and X directions (noting that FIG. 10 is a generic illustration that represents the fields of view FOV, FOV1, FOV2 in the X-Z (θ-Z) plane, the Z-Y (Z-R) plane, and the X-Y (θ-R) plane). Based on the sensed image of the target 800 the controller 11091 determines the distance offset(s) ΔZ and/or ΔX (Δθ) of the target 800 from the center (see center of FOV1 and FOV2) in one or more of the Z and X (or θ) directions based on the pixel-to-millimeter (or inch) reference. The controller 11091 commands the transport robot 11013 to move to adjust the position of the target 800 so that the target 800 is located in the center of the field of view (see center FOV) to obtain an initial teach location of the load port module 11005 relative to the transport robot 11013 in the X (or θ) and/or Z directions.” in par. 0081) ; and
calculating an error in a teaching position of a hand of the transfer robot through at least one of the direction in which the teaching marks are arranged, the length of the mark plate, and the first offset. (see at least " In one aspect, the baseline position of the sensor 581 at the load port module is not the same as the actual position of the sensor 581 at the load port module 11005 where the target 800 (referring not the generic target of FIG. 10 for illustrative purposes) is offset from a center of the field of view (see fields of view FOV1, FOV2) in one or more of the Z and X directions (noting that FIG. 10 is a generic illustration that represents the fields of view FOV, FOV1, FOV2 in the X-Z (θ-Z) plane, the Z-Y (Z-R) plane, and the X-Y (θ-R) plane). Based on the sensed image of the target 800 the controller 11091 determines the distance offset(s) ΔZ and/or ΔX (Δθ) of the target 800 from the center (see center of FOV1 and FOV2) in one or more of the Z and X (or θ) directions based on the pixel-to-millimeter (or inch) reference. The controller 11091 commands the transport robot 11013 to move to adjust the position of the target 800 so that the target 800 is located in the center of the field of view (see center FOV) to obtain an initial teach location of the load port module 11005 relative to the transport robot 11013 in the X (or θ) and/or Z directions.” in par. 0081)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Lee to incorporate the teachings of Graciano wherein the robot end effector camera captures images of targets with multiple marks and uses the direction and offset from the center of the image to determine how to correct the end effector position. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Graciano would be to increase positional accuracy after calibration (see par. 0105)
Regarding Claim 11, Lee as modified by Graciano teaches:
the teaching program of claim 10,
Lee does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Graciano does teach:
wherein the teaching program performs generating an instruction for primarily adjusting the position of the transfer hand of the transfer robot in at least one direction among a Z direction, which is an up-down direction, a Y direction, which is a horizontal direction perpendicular to the Z direction, and a theta direction, which is a circumferential direction centered on the Z direction, based on the calculated error. (see at least " For example, the forward facing sensors are paired with respective targets and are configured to provide an initial alignment of the end effector along the X (or θ) and Z axes relative to the load port module (e.g., cassette holding location) or substrate holding station. The initial alignment along the X (or θ) and Z axes may increase the positional accuracy in subsequent sensing operations along the Y (or R) and Z axes. The vertically facing sensors are paired with respective targets and are configured to verify the initially taught X (or θ) axis position of the load port module and/or substrate holding location as well as provide an initial alignment of the end effector along the Y (or R) axis relative to the load port module and/or substrate holding location." in par. 0034)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Lee to incorporate the teachings of Graciano wherein the robot end effector cameras correspond to targets that will be in the direction of their field of view and the teaching position correction is performed one axis at a time. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Graciano would be to increase accuracy in subsequent teaching movements (see par. 0034)
Regarding Claim 12, Lee as modified by Graciano teaches:
12. (Original) The teaching program of claim 11,
Lee does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Graciano does teach:
wherein the teaching program performs, after primarily adjusting the position of the transfer hand, storing coordinates of the transfer hand as a primary teaching point. (see at least " For example, the forward facing sensors are paired with respective targets and are configured to provide an initial alignment of the end effector along the X (or θ) and Z axes relative to the load port module (e.g., cassette holding location) or substrate holding station. The initial alignment along the X (or θ) and Z axes may increase the positional accuracy in subsequent sensing operations along the Y (or R) and Z axes. The vertically facing sensors are paired with respective targets and are configured to verify the initially taught X (or θ) axis position of the load port module and/or substrate holding location as well as provide an initial alignment of the end effector along the Y (or R) axis relative to the load port module and/or substrate holding location. The initial alignment along the Y (or R) axis may further increase the positional accuracy in subsequent sensing operations along the Z axis. The laterally facing sensors are paired with respective targets and are configured to verify the initially taught Y (or R) axis position of the load port module and/or substrate holding location as well as provide alignment of and verify the initially taught position of the end effector along the Z axis." in par. 0034)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Lee to incorporate the teachings of Graciano wherein the robot end effector cameras correspond to targets that will be in the direction of their field of view and the teaching position correction is performed one axis at a time and saved after each step to be later verified. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Graciano would be to increase accuracy in subsequent teaching movements (see par. 0034)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9, 13-16 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. (note the 112(b) issues would need to be overcome as well)
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
For Claims 2 and dependents, the closest prior art comes from Lee and Choi but the prior art does not appear to teach “on the mark plate, a plurality of teaching marks is marked side by side along the Y direction.” in combination with the second teaching operation and all of the other limitations in the claims.
For Claims 6 and dependents, the closest prior art comes from Lee and Choi but the prior art does not appear to teach “a port photographing operation of photographing, by the substrate-type sensor loaded into the processing space by the transfer hand, a circular fluid port to acquire the second image.” in combination with all of the other limitations in the claims.
For Claims 13 and dependents, the closest prior art comes from Lee and Graciano but the prior art does not appear to teach “generating an instruction for the substrate-type sensor to photograph a fluid port of the chamber to acquire a second image.” in combination with all of the other limitations in the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DYLAN M KATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2776. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs. 8:00-6:00.
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, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. 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.
/DYLAN M KATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657