Lee International

The IPTAB had previously determined indicated that the patented invention, which is directed to a novel mechanism for correcting the position of a wafer in a wafer transfer device, lacks an inventive step over the Cited Reference, and thus, the subject patent should be cancelled.  

 

Based on the thorough analysis of the Cited reference, Lee International argued during a technical hearing at the IPTAB that i) the IPTAB’s interpretation was based on an ex post facto analysis of the Cited Reference, and the mechanism for correcting the position of a wafer in the Cited Reference is clearly different from the mechanism in the patented invention, and ii) in consideration of the common technical knowledge at the time of filing the application, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to conceive the patented invention from the Cited Reference.  Further, iii) Lee International mathematically proved that the probability of success for correcting the position of a wafer according to the mechanism of the patented invention is nearly 100%, while the probability of success for correcting the position of a wafer by the mechanism of the Cited Reference is less than 33%The trial judge at the IPTAB conceded that the patented invention is distinguished from the Cited Reference, and thus, has an inventive step. 

The subject case is a good example where Lee international performed an outstanding technical analysis in the field of wafer transfer device, and accordingly succeeded in persuading IPTAB to reverse initial determination based on hindsight analysis.