Appeal No. 2004-0595
Application No. 09/747,201
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Schram, deceased et al. 4,818,169 Apr. 4, 1989
(Schram)
Wooding et al. 4,886,412 Dec. 12, 1989
(Wooding)
Mallory et al. 4,907,931 Mar. 13, 1990
(Mallory)
Appellant's claimed invention is directed to an apparatus
for handling, positioning and examining flat objects, such as
semiconductor wafers and printed circuit boards, that are
delivered in a cassette. The apparatus comprises, inter alia, a
robotic arm, or effector, that is rotatable about a Z-axis with
respect to a bed to which it is attached. The bed is movable in
the X and Y directions and includes a chuck which receives the
flat objects transported by the effector.
Appealed claims 1-9, 11-19, 21 and 22 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Schram in view of
Wooding. Claims 10 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over the stated combination of references
further in view of Mallory.
Appellant submits at page 7 of the Brief that the claims in
the following two groups stand or fall together: (I) claims
1-10, 21, 23, 24, 26 and 27; (II) claims 11-20, 22, 25 and 28.
However, inasmuch as claims 23-28 have been withdrawn from
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007