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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment filed 1/26/2026. Claims 1 and 33 are amended and claims 1-4, 7-10, 27-38, 40-44, 46-47 are currently pending.
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 1-3, 5, 7-10, 27, 31-32, 40, 42-43, and 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. No. 6,792,023 to Kleinschmidt et al. (hereinafter Kleinschmidt) in view of US Pat. No. 6,636,297 to Wakabayashi, et al. (hereinafter Wakabayashi) and US Pat. No. 4,099,852 to Kobierecki et al. (hereinafter Kobierecki).
Regarding claim 1, Kleinschmidt discloses a spectral feature adjuster (“line-narrowing module 1”, Fig. 3) comprising: a body defining an interior that is held at a pressure below atmospheric pressure (vacuum housing, Fig. 3, col. 8, ll. 27-39); at least one optical pathway through the body (from beam expander 12 and dispersion element 13, e.g., a grating, Fig. 3), the optical pathway being transparent to a light beam having a wavelength in the ultraviolet range (“for use with a deep ultraviolet (DUV) or vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) industrial application”); a set of optical elements within the interior (beam expander 12 and dispersion element 13, e.g., a grating, Fig. 3), the optical elements in the set being configured to interact with the light beam, wherein the set of optical elements include one or more actuatable optical elements (“there is a distance Z between the final prism of the beam expander 12 and the dispersive element 13” and/or “one or more line-narrowing and/or selection optics may be tuned by rotation”, Figs. 3-4 & 9); and an actuation system disposed entirely (at least the lever 301 and rotational stage with the line-narrowing module, Fig. 9) within the interior of the body (“one or more line-narrowing and/or selection optics may be tuned by rotation according to the exemplary configuration of FIG. 9”, “lever 301 is within the evacuated line-narrowing module, e.g., the rear optics module 210, of the resonator”, “motor drive 307, 309 sealably feeds into the evacuated line-narrowing module 210 using o-rings 311 and a bellow 313”; col. 22, ln. 50-col. 23, ln. 11), the actuation system being in communication with the one or more actuatable optical elements, the actuation system comprising, for each actuatable optical element, an actuator (motorized lever 301, Fig. 9) configured to adjust a physical aspect of the actuatable optical element, a spectral feature control module external to the body (“at least one of the one or more line-narrowing and/or selection optics is rotated by a lever which is moved by a motor drive which feeds through to move the lever by a bellow and otherwise sealed feedthrough to prevent contaminants from entering the line-narrowing and/or selection module”; col. 3, ll. 49-60).
Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose an electromagnetic communication path through the body between the actuation system within the interior and the spectral feature control module external to the body.
Wakabayashi discloses an electromagnetic communication path through the body between the actuation system within the interior and the spectral feature control module external to the body (“wavelength controller 4 outputs a command signal to the band narrowing unit 10 on the basis of the wavelength characteristics and controls the band narrowing unit 10 so that the wavelength characteristics of the laser beam 11 are limited within a predetermined range”; col. 2, ll. 19-25). Applicant argues that “speculation” is required to asset that Wakabayashi describes an electromagnetic communication path. Examiner respectfully disagrees as a “command signal” from the wavelength controller 4 to the actuator requires an electromagnetic communication path. Examiner acknowledges that the path is not necessarily “electrical feedthrough”.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electromagnetic communications path as taught by Wakabayashi with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide an automated feedback mechanism (col. 1, ll. 23-31).
Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose an actuation interface including one or more hermetically-sealed electrical feedthrough defined in the body, each electrical feedthrough providing an electromagnetic communication path through the body between the actuation system within the interior and the control module external to the body.
Kobierecki discloses an actuation interface including one or more hermetically-sealed electrical feedthrough (“Flanged section 17 of spool 11 is provided with a plurality of openings 18 (two in this embodiment) within which electrical feed-through assemblies, indicated generally at 19 (only one shown), are secured”, Figs. 1a-1b; col. 3, ll. 1-27) defined in the body (vacuum chamber 12, Figs. 1a-1b), each electrical feedthrough providing an electromagnetic communication path through the body between the actuation system within the interior (actuators 37-39 of lens positioner 10, Fig. 1a-1b) and the control module external to the body (Fig. 1b).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electrical feedthrough as taught by Kobierecki with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide disconnectable electrical fittings (Figs. 1b; col. 3, ll. 28-45).
Regarding claim 2, Kleinschmidt discloses the set of optical elements comprises: a set of refractive elements; and a diffractive element (beam expander 12 and dispersion element 13, e.g., a grating, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Kleinschmidt discloses each refractive element is a prism and the diffractive element is a grating (beam expander 12 and dispersion element 13, e.g., a grating, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Kleinschmidt discloses the interior lacks helium (nitrogen; col. 12, ll. 36-65).
Regarding claim 8, Kleinschmidt discloses the interior includes a purge gas (nitrogen; col. 12, ll. 36-65).
Regarding claim 9, Kleinschmidt discloses the body includes a purge port fluidly communicating the interior with a source of the purge gas (nitrogen; col. 12, ll. 36-65).
Regarding claim 10, Kleinschmidt discloses at least part of the body is defined by a motion dampening device that physically couples to a gas discharge body of the gas discharge chamber, and the optical pathway extends through an interior of the motion dampening device and through an optical port defined in the gas discharge body.
Regarding claim 27, Kleinschmidt discloses a vacuum port defined in a wall of the body, the vacuum port being in fluid communication with the interior and with a vacuum pump external to the spectral feature adjuster (“a vacuum port 2 for evacuating the interior of the module 1 to a pressure of less than 80 mbar, and preferably less than 5 mbar, and more preferably 50-200 milliTorr or less, and still better, less than around 10.sup.-3 mbar or 0.5 milliTorr or less”, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 31, Kleinschmidt discloses the purge gas includes nitrogen (nitrogen; col. 12, ll. 36-65).
Regarding claim 32, Kleinschmid discloses the body is hermetically-sealed and the interior of the motion dampening device is held at the same pressure as the interior of the body (“Standard vacuum components may be used throughout the system for maintaining the vacuum throughout the beam delivery path outside the discharge chamber 27”, col. 8, ln. 66-col. 9, ln. & col. 10, ln. 62-col. 11, ln. 15).
Regarding claim 40, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose an electromagnetic communication path through the body between the actuation system within the interior and the spectral feature control module external to the body.
Wakabayashi discloses the actuation interface provides a hermetically-sealed (“an inside space shielded by the cover 22 is kept in the oxygen-free condition by evacuation with a vacuum pump which is not shown or by purging the inside with a gas not including oxygen by purge means which is not shown”) feedthrough for each actuator to thereby provide a set of communication paths, each communication path enabling communication between an actuator and the spectral feature control module (“wavelength controller 4 outputs a command signal to the band narrowing unit 10 on the basis of the wavelength characteristics and controls the band narrowing unit 10 so that the wavelength characteristics of the laser beam 11 are limited within a predetermined range” & “the grating 33 is mounted on a rotary actuator 34 rotating on the basis of an output signal from the wavelength controller 4”; col. 2, ll. 19-25).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electromagnetic communications path as taught by Wakabayashi with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide an automated feedback mechanism (col. 1, ll. 23-31).
Regarding claim 41, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose the electrical feedthroughs.
Kobierecki discloses the actuation interface provides a hermetically-sealed feedthrough (“Flanged section 17 of spool 11 is provided with a plurality of openings 18 (two in this embodiment) within which electrical feed-through assemblies, indicated generally at 19 (only one shown), are secured”, Figs. 1a-1b; col. 3, ll. 1-45)for all of the actuators to thereby provide a communication path that enables communication between of the actuators and the spectral feature control module (Figs. 1a-1b; col. 3, ll. 28-45).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electrical feedthrough as taught by Kobierecki with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide disconnectable electrical fittings (Figs. 1b; col. 3, ll. 28-45).
Regarding claim 42, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose the electrical feedthroughs provide a path for a power signal and a path for a drive signal.
Kobierecki discloses the electrical feedthroughs provide a path for a power signal and a path for a drive signal (“Flanged section 17 of spool 11 is provided with a plurality of openings 18 (two in this embodiment) within which electrical feed-through assemblies, indicated generally at 19 (only one shown), are secured”, Figs. 1a-1b; col. 3, ll. 1-45) defined in the body (vacuum chamber 12, Figs. 1a-1b).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electrical feedthrough as taught by Kobierecki with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide disconnectable electrical fittings (Figs. 1b; col. 3, ll. 28-45).
Regarding claim 43, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose electrical feedthrough.
Kobierecki discloses the electrical feedthroughs include a dedicated hermetically-sealed electrical feedthrough for the power signal (“Flanged section 17 of spool 11 is provided with a plurality of openings 18 (two in this embodiment) within which electrical feed-through assemblies, indicated generally at 19 (only one shown), are secured”, Figs. 1a-1b; col. 3, ll. 1-45) defined in the body (vacuum chamber 12, Figs. 1a-1b).Note: The language limits the feedthrough, which is a passage that is inherently capable of performing the claimed function of providing power.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electrical feedthrough as taught by Kobierecki with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide disconnectable electrical fittings (Figs. 1b; col. 3, ll. 28-45).
Regarding claim 46, Kleinschmidt discloses the spectral feature control module is in communication with a photolithography exposure apparatus receiving an output light beam produced from the light beam (Fig. 1, col. 4, ln. 63-col. 5, ln. 25).
Regarding claim 47, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Kleinschmidt to provide a plurality of actuators. Mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)
In this instance, Kleinschmidt discloses “one or more prisms” and further properly incorporates US Pat. No. 6,154,470 which discloses retroreflection and line-narrowing via alignment of two optical elements (Fig. 8a-8b). A person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that alignment of the optical elements would benefit from duplicated actuators, as claimed.
Further, Kobierecki discloses the actuation system includes a plurality of actuators (actuators 37-39, Figs. 1a-1b).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a plurality of actuators as taught by Kobierecki with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to provide additional degrees of freedom for movable elements (Abstract).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kleinschmidt in view of Wakabayashi and Kobierecki, as applied to claim 3, and further in view of US Pat. No. 6,424,666 to Stamm (hereinafter Stamm; previously cited).
Regarding claim 4, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose four prisms.
Stamm discloses “a line-narrowing module for an ArF laser preferably includes four prisms” (col. 7, ll. 33-47).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide four prisms as taught by Kobierecki with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to narrow linewidths of a ArF laser (col. 7, ll. 33-47).
Claims 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleinschmidt in view of Wakabayashi and Kobierecki as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US Pat. No. 7,075,963 to Basting et al. (hereinafter Basting).
Regarding claims 28-30, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose: a pressure sensor configured to measure a pressure within the interior and a pressure control module.
Regarding claims 28, Basting discloses a pressure sensor configured to measure a pressure within the interior (col. 7, ll. 11-26), a vacuum pump in fluid communication with the interior (“port 42 is shown for filling the enclosure with an inert gas such as preferably argon or nitrogen”); and a pressure control module in communication with the pressure sensor and the vacuum pump (“gauge or other mechanism for measuring the pressure in the enclosure is also preferably included and a connection for permitting a signal to be sent to the processor 16 is included for processor monitoring of the pressure”), the pressure control module configured to: receive a measured pressure from the pressure sensor, determine whether the measured pressure is within a range of an operating pressure, and adjust a control signal to the vacuum pump based on the determination (col. 7, ll. 12-61).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a pressure sensor as taught by Basting with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to ensure the optical system is pressurized properly by the external vacuum.
Regarding claim 29, Kleinschmidt discloses the interior is held at a pressure at or below 16 kilopascals (kPa), at or below 12 kPa, or at or below 8 kPa (“a vacuum port 2 for evacuating the interior of the module 1 to a pressure of less than 80 mbar, and preferably less than 5 mbar, and more preferably 50-200 milliTorr or less, and still better, less than around 10.sup.-3 mbar or 0.5 milliTorr or less”, Fig. 3).
Bastings discloses pressure control module to maintain pressure (col. 7, ll. 12-61)..
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a pressure control as taught by Basting with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to ensure the optical system is pressurized properly by the external vacuum.
Regarding claim 30, Kleinschmidt discloses the interior is held within 400 pascals (Pa) of an operating pressure or within 140 Pa of the operating pressure or within 20 Pa of the operating pressure (“a vacuum port 2 for evacuating the interior of the module 1 to a pressure of less than 80 mbar, and preferably less than 5 mbar, and more preferably 50-200 milliTorr or less, and still better, less than around 10.sup.-3 mbar or 0.5 milliTorr or less”, Fig. 3).
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kleinschmidt in view of Wakabayashi and Kobierecki as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US Pat. No. 6,916,401 to Long (hereinafter Long).
Regarding claim 44, Kleinschmidt discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose the electrical feedthroughs include electrical insulation.
Long discloses the electrical feedthroughs include electrical insulation (“opening 126 is preferably surrounded with a dielectric insulator 126D to prevent an undesirable electrical connection forming through chamber 20, which is typically made of a conducting material”, Fig. 4) and are shielded from stray radiation produced from the light beam (conductive wall 24, Fig. 4).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide insulation as taught by Long with the system as disclosed by Kleinschmidt. The motivation would have been to precent electrical shorting with conductive housing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J STANFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3337. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM PST M-F.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER STANFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872