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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/03/2026, 10/14/2025 and 03/11/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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) 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 11-13, 15-16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofmeister (US 20150214086 A1) in view of Tanaka (US 20060178009 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hofmeister teaches an apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor (Fig 1, para 0035); and
at least one non-transitory memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor (Fig 1 para 0035), cause the apparatus at least to:
actuate three vertical actuators to control first, second, and third degrees of freedom related to a vertical position of a traversing platform of a robot (0038 wherein three vertical actuators are provided for the traversing platform; “In this example, four horizontal actuators between the two spaced rails may be provided to control two degrees of freedom and three pairs of opposing vertical actuators may be provided to control an additional three degrees of freedom”);
actuate three horizontal actuators to control fourth and fifth degrees of freedom related to a horizontal position of the traversing platform of the robot (0038 wherein at least three horizontal actuators are provided for the traversing platform “In this example, four horizontal actuators between the two spaced rails may be provided to control two degrees of freedom and three pairs of opposing vertical actuators may be provided to control an additional three degrees of freedom”); and
However, Hofmeister fails to teach to actuate a linear actuator to control a sixth degree of freedom related to a linear movement of the traversing platform of the robot.
Tanaka teaches to actuate a linear actuator to control a sixth degree of freedom related to a linear movement of a traversing platform of the robot (0028 wherein “[0028] The fine-movement table 15 also undergoes fine movement in the X direction and Y direction by means of XY-actuators 23. Three or more XY-actuators 23 (each of which comprising, for example, a respective voice-coil motor) are positioned between the fine-movement table 15 and the coarse-movement stage 13. The fine-movement table 15 also is capable of rotation about the X-axis, the Y-axis, and the Z-axis. That is, the fine-movement table 15 can be driven with six degrees of freedom (X, Y, Z, .theta..sub.x, _74 .sub.y, .theta..sub.z)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Hofmeister’s teachings of having actuators to control the traversing platform in various degrees of freedom to incorporate Tanaka’s teachings of actuate a linear actuator to control a sixth degree of freedom related to a linear movement of a traversing platform in order to more precisely control the positioning of the substrate handling mechanism as needed.
Regarding claim 2, Hofmeister teaches wherein causing the apparatus to actuate the three vertical actuators to control the first, second, and third degrees of freedom comprises controlling a z-axis coordinate, a pitch angle, and a roll angle of the traversing platform (“[0056] For instance, three magnetic circuits may be employed to affect lift, pitch and roll of the system”).
Regarding claim 3, Hofmeister fails to explicitly teach the pitch angle of the traversing platform is changed to adjust the vertical position of the traversing platform.
However, Hofmeister teach the pitch angle of the traversing platform is changed (para 0038, 0056 wherein “[0056] For instance, three magnetic circuits may be employed to affect lift, pitch and roll of the system”). Examiner notes with the change in pitch of a component, part of the component rises or declines thus changing the vertical position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Hofmeister’s teachings of having a traversing platform to incorporate Hofmeister’s teachings of the pitch angle of the traversing platform is changed in order to have the pitch angle of the traversing platform is changed to adjust the vertical position of the traversing platform. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 5, Hofmeister teaches causing the apparatus to actuate the three horizontal actuators to control the fourth and fifth degrees of freedom (0038 wherein at least three horizontal actuators are provided for the traversing platform “In this example, four horizontal actuators between the two spaced rails may be provided to control two degrees of freedom and three pairs of opposing vertical actuators may be provided to control an additional three degrees of freedom”).
However, Hofmeister fails to explicitly teach controlling a y-axis coordinate and a yaw angle of the traversing platform using the actuators.
Tanaka further teaches controlling a y-axis coordinate and a yaw angle of the traversing platform using the actuators (0028 wherein “[0028] The fine-movement table 15 also undergoes fine movement in the X direction and Y direction by means of XY-actuators 23. Three or more XY-actuators 23 (each of which comprising, for example, a respective voice-coil motor) are positioned between the fine-movement table 15 and the coarse-movement stage 13. The fine-movement table 15 also is capable of rotation about the X-axis, the Y-axis, and the Z-axis. That is, the fine-movement table 15 can be driven with six degrees of freedom (X, Y, Z, .theta..sub.x, _74 .sub.y, .theta..sub.z)”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified Hofmeister’s teachings of causing the apparatus to actuate the three horizontal actuators to control the fourth and fifth degrees of freedom to incorporate Tanaka’s teachings of controlling a y-axis coordinate and a yaw angle of the traversing platform using the actuators. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 6, Hofmeister teaches all the limitations of claim 5. However, Hofmeister fails to explicitly teach the yaw angle of the traversing platform is changed to adjust the horizontal position of the traversing platform.
However, modified Hofmeister teach the yaw angle of the traversing platform is changed (Tanaka, para 0028 and Hofmeister para 0038, 0056 as modified previously). Examiner notes with the change in yaw of a component, part of the component moves left or right thus changing the horizontal position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Hofmeister’s teachings of having a traversing platform to incorporate Hofmeister’s teachings of the yaw angle of the traversing platform is changed in order to have the yaw angle of the traversing platform is changed to adjust the horizontal position of the traversing platform. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 8, Hofmeister teaches wherein causing the apparatus to actuate the linear actuator to control the sixth degree of freedom comprises controlling an x-axis coordinate of the traversing platform (Tanaka 0028, Hofmeister 0038, 0056; As modified in claim 1, wherein the x axis movement is controlled by the actuator; Tanaka 0028 wherein “[0028] The fine-movement table 15 also undergoes fine movement in the X direction and Y direction by means of XY-actuators 23”).
Regarding claim 9, Hofmeister fails to explicitly teach the roll angle of the traversing platform is changed to adjust a position of the traversing platform along a z-axis.
However, Hofmeister teach the roll angle of the traversing platform is changed (para 0038, 0056 wherein “[0056] For instance, three magnetic circuits may be employed to affect lift, pitch and roll of the system”). Examiner notes with the change in roll of a component, part of the component rises or declines thus changing the position along z axis.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Hofmeister’s teachings of having a traversing platform to incorporate Hofmeister’s teachings of the roll angle of the traversing platform is changed in order to have the roll angle of the traversing platform is changed to adjust a position of the traversing platform along z axis. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 11, it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 1
mutandis mutatis.
Regarding claim 12, it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 2
mutandis mutatis.
Regarding claim 13, it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 3
mutandis mutatis.
Regarding claim 15, it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 5
mutandis mutatis.
Regarding claim 16, it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 6
mutandis mutatis.
Regarding claim 18, it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 8
mutandis mutatis.
Claim(s) 4, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofmeister (US 20150214086 A1) and Tanaka (US 20060178009 A1) in view of Park (US 20200348335 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Hofmeister teaches the pitch angle of the traversing platform is changed (para 0038, 0056 wherein “[0056] For instance, three magnetic circuits may be employed to affect lift, pitch and roll of the system”).
However, Hofmeister fails to explicitly teach the pitch angle of the traversing platform is changed independently of the vertical position of the traversing platform.
Park teaches the pitch angle of a traversing platform is changed independently of the vertical position of the traversing platform (0001 wherein “[0001] The present invention relates to a wafer prober, and more specifically, to a wafer prober in which a plurality of lifting pillars independently driven are arranged to be spaced from each other under the chuck and the height of each of the lifting pillars are adjusted independently, so that the height of the chuck and the slope of the chuck can be adjusted, and as a result, the contact surface between a wafer placed on the top of the chuck and a probe card in contact with the wafer can be allowed to retain a flat posture”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Hofmeister’s teachings of changing the pitch angle to incorporate Park’s teachings of the pitch angle of a traversing platform is changed independently of the vertical position of the traversing platform. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 14, Hofmeister teaches controlling the pitch angle of the traversing platform (para 0038, 0056 wherein “[0056] For instance, three magnetic circuits may be employed to affect lift, pitch and roll of the system”).
However, Hofmeister fails to explicitly teach wherein controlling the pitch angle of the traversing platform does not change the vertical position of the traversing platform.
Park teaches wherein controlling the pitch angle of a traversing platform does not change the vertical position of the traversing platform (0001 wherein “[0001] The present invention relates to a wafer prober, and more specifically, to a wafer prober in which a plurality of lifting pillars independently driven are arranged to be spaced from each other under the chuck and the height of each of the lifting pillars are adjusted independently, so that the height of the chuck and the slope of the chuck can be adjusted, and as a result, the contact surface between a wafer placed on the top of the chuck and a probe card in contact with the wafer can be allowed to retain a flat posture”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Hofmeister’s teachings of controlling the pitch angle of the traversing platform to incorporate Park’s teachings of controlling the pitch angle of a traversing platform does not change the vertical position of the traversing platform. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 10 and 17 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hosek (US 20200262660 A1) teaches to actuate three vertical actuators to control first, second, and third degrees of freedom related to a vertical position of a traversing platform of a robot; actuate three horizontal actuators to control fourth and fifth degrees of freedom related to a horizontal position of the traversing platform of the robot; and actuate a linear actuator to control a sixth degree of freedom related to a linear movement of the traversing platform of the robot (para 0112).
Genov teaches a robot arm (i.e. traversing platform) that is actuated in six degrees of freedom using actuators (col 1 lines 40-50 wherein “This motion is effected using appropriate actuation means such as motors and associated belt-pulley linkages (not shown) as described in the aforementioned patent application. Other motions include yaw and roll motion of the end effector 18, permitting the robot to achieve six or more degrees of freedom and possibly kinematic redundancy”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAGAR KC whose telephone number is (571)272-7337. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5 pm.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571) 270-5376. 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.
/SAGAR KC/Examiner, Art Unit 3657 /KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights