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 .
The response of the applicant has been read and given careful consideration. Rejections of the previous office action, not repeated below are withdrawn. Responses to the arguments are presented after the first rejection to which they are directed.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1,8,9,12,15-16 and 18-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The specification describes reflective multilayered mirrors which are reflective (prepub at [0038]), but does not describe multilayered light transmitting materials. The specification does not support embodiments where the first component is a multilayered structure which is light transmitting/transmissive. The applicant is invited to point out where in the specification/application “as-filed” there is a basis for the added language.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 1,8,9,12,15-16 and 18-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being fully anticipated by Koeda et al. JP 06-174907.
Koeda et al. JP 06-174907 teaches the sinusoidal pattern being transferred from the resist to the metal layer [0003]. In example 1, a quartz glass substrate (1) is coated gold metal layer (2) and the resist (3) is exposed holographically (see figure 2a) and developed to form a half sine pattern (figures 2b,3b), which is then transferred to the gold layer by etching (figure 3c).
PNG
media_image1.png
198
241
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
229
413
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
216
408
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In example 2. A silicon wafer is provided with a ZnS/MgF2 antireflective layer on both sides to yield a composite having a transmittance of 98% or more at 3 microns. This is coated with a 2 nm NiCr layer and a 70 nm Au layer, the resist is coated, exposed interferometrically and developed to form, a half wave sinusoidal pattern. This was then transferred into the Au and NiCr layers by Ar/CCl2F2 plasma etching, the resist is removed by oxygen plasma ashing and the result is washed to form a lattice with a pitch of ~360 lines/mm with a width/pitch (duty cycle) of 0.6 [0009-0011].
The sinusoidal language is held to be met by the half sinewave (figure B) of the resist (3) on the gold/NiCr bilayer (2), which as a metal is reflective. The resist absorbs at least the wavelength.
The sinusoidal language is also held to be met by the half sinewave (figure C) of the gold/NiCr layer (2) on the ZnS/MgF2 antireflective layer coated silicon wafer (having a transmittance of more than 98%). The examiner notes that NiCr and gold inherently have both absorption and phase shift optical characteristics and therefore form attenuated phase shift masks.
Gold and the NiCr alloy absorb and shift the phase of EUV light and is the patterning material for EUV masks, while the glass substrate reflects some EUV light. The difference in the EUV light reflected by the gold and glass areas allow it to function as an EUV mask.
The amended claims are met by example 2 of the reference. In the intermediate product the half-wave sinusoidal patterned resist (second component) is on a NiCr/Au reflective bilayer (reflective multilayered first component). In the finished grating the half-wave sinusoidal patterned NiCr/Au bilayer (partially absorbing second component) on the ZnS/MgF2 antireflective layer coated silicon wafer (transmissive multilayered first component).
Claims 1,8,9,12,15-16 and 18-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being fully anticipated by Kaplan 5254202.
Kaplan 5254202 (cited in final action as of interest) teaches a quartz plate which is coated with a alternating layers of silicon oxide and tantalum oxide and a 100 nm or chromium and then a resist, which is exposed and etched using the resist as an etch mask, the resist is removed, diced and then etched using potassium hydroxide (5/30-48). The alternating layers are reflective and yield a reflective mask (abstract). In figure 7, the quartz substrate (11) has patterned reflective multilayer (15) capped by a rounded chromium layer which serves as a further reflective layer (7/1-11).
PNG
media_image4.png
150
188
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The claims do not require the first component to be unpatterned. The silicon oxide/ tantalum oxide multilayer in figure 7 meets the limitations of the reflective first component and a transmissive first component and the hemispherical chromium cap (71) illustrated in figure 7 meets the second component limitation as it partially absorbs light which is transmitted or reflected by the reflective multilayer. (The mask is used with a laser in an arrangement where the light is incident from the substrate side in column 7 and the Cr layer is described as reflecting a portion of the light transmitted by the multilayer)
Claims 1,8,9,12,15-16 and 18-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Huber et al. DE 10216208987.
Huber et al. DE 102016208987 (machine translation attached) illustrates in figure 2a, a substrate (2) a reflective multilayer (5), a partially semi-sinusoidal nanopillars/nanorods (6,12) which are made of different materials, for example of metallic materials such as Co, Cu, W, Mg, or Ru, or of oxides, for example TiO .sub.2 , or of borides, for example LaB .sub.6 , NdB .sub.6 , CeB .sub.6 , SmB .sub.6 [0064]. In general, the columnar nanostructures exhibit 12 which the structured top layer 6 form, distances A from each other, which are in a range of values between 10 nm and 10 microns, preferably between about 50 nm and about 1 micron. The heights H of the columnar nanostructures 12 are typically between about 2 nm and about 1000 nm, the diameter D of the nanostructures 12 between about 2 nm and about 150 nm or between about 5 nm and about 100 nm [0065-0066].
PNG
media_image5.png
403
409
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The examiner holds that the structure illustrated in figure 2a meets the structure as the reflective multilayer as the first component and the structures (12) meets the structural limitations and the disclosed materials Co, Cu, W, Mg, or Ru, or oxides, for example TiO .sub.2 , or borides, for example LaB .sub.6 , NdB .sub.6 , CeB .sub.6 , SmB .sub.6 all partially absorb radiation and one reading the reference would immediately envision the structure illustrated in figure 2a using them thereby anticipating the claimed invention.
If this position is not upheld, the examiner holds that it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to form an optical element having the structure illustrated in figure 2a where the partially semi-sinusoidal nanopillars/nanorods (6,12) are formed of Co, Cu, W or Mg which absorb some in the EUV with a reasonable expectation of forming a useful reflector.
Claims 1,8,9,12,15-16 and 18-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mangat et al. 20020039923, in view of Trogish et al. 20090097004, Shih et al. 20150138524, Kirchauer et al. 6479195, Kuroda et al. 20060110693 and Pomplun et al. “Rigorous FEM-simulation of EUV-masks: influence of shape and material parameters”, Proc SPIE Vol. 6349 article 63493D 8 pages (2006)
Mangat et al. 20020039923 teaches with respect to figure 7, an EUV mask with a substrate (10), an reflective multilayer (20) and a patterned attenuating phase shift layer [0023]. Other materials than those described above may be used for the layers on the attenuated phase shifting mask 100. For example, the reflective layer 20 may include a multi-layer stack of beryllium and molybdenum or any other layer or layers with suitable reflective. The attenuated phase shifting layer 30 can include ruthenium and germanium or can include multiple layers. For example, the phase shifting layer 30 can be a chrome oxide or chromium oxide layer over a chrome or chromium layer. Any refractory metal-containing material, such as tantalum silicon oxide, tantalum nitride, tungsten, titanium nitride or the like, can be used for the repairable layer 50 [0026].
PNG
media_image6.png
373
780
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Trogish et al. 20090097004 teaches EUV masks with sloped sidewalls as in figure 3A. Figure 3B describes masks with sidewall angles of 84, 81 and 78 degree. These are used in exposure systems where the illumination is non-telecentric (includes non-telecentric aberrations) [0002,0004]. Non-telecentric illumination is illustrated in figure 1A [0025-0029].
PNG
media_image7.png
361
352
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
305
807
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Other figures show symmetric and asymmetric structures including:
PNG
media_image9.png
511
797
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Kirchauer et al. 6479195 teaches that the prior art EUV masks with upper corners which are sharp with respect to figures | and 6 (col 2/lines 3-5 & 18-20). Figure 2 illustrates the embodiment where the substrate (210), is coated with a reflective multilayer (235,225), a capping layer (240), a buffer layer (250) and an absorber layer (260). The corners of the absorber (260) are rounded or smooth (angled), which reduces/relaxes the phase correlation between the light reflected off the reflective multilayer and that reflected off the upper surface of the absorber as illustrated in figure 7 (2/45-4/15).
PNG
media_image10.png
307
775
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Kuroda et al. 20060110693 illustrates in figure 7, a mask with a transparent substrate (503) and a light blocking film (706) with rounded edges (no sharp edges) which reduces diffraction [0075].
PNG
media_image11.png
395
476
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Pomplun et al. “Rigorous FEM-simulation of EUV-masks: influence of shape and material parameters”, Proc SPIE Vol. 6349 article 63493D 8 pages (2006) describes the use of finite element method (FEM) for numerical simulations of EUV photomasks which allows the evaluation of parameters such as absorber stack sidewall angle and absorber edge radius (see text associated with figures 4 and 6). Figure 2 includes SEM picture of EUV masks.
PNG
media_image12.png
263
749
media_image12.png
Greyscale
The edge radius does not have a great effect, but has a minimum at 6.2 nm (see 6C and page 7) with vertical sidewalls preferred (a= 90).
Shih et al. 20150138524 teaches with respect to figure 7 periodic phase sensitive grating blocks (PhSGBs) with a triangular profile [0032]. The light reflected off the mask is diffracted into different orders including 0,+1,-1 [0017].
PNG
media_image13.png
520
332
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Mangat et al. 20020039923 does not teach the sloped sidewalls or curved phase shifting features.
With respect to claims 1-5,8,9,12,15,16 and 18-31, it would have been obvious to modify the mask illustrated in figure 7 of Mangat et al. 20020039923 by forming the attenuating phase shifting elements (35) of symmetric cross-sections with sloped sidewalls to account for different incident angles across the exposure field as taught by Trogish et al. 20090097004 including some with features which are narrow at the top as in figures 5B and 5C of Trogish et al. 20090097004 with a reasonable expectation of these forming useful EUV phases shifting features based upon the use of tapered features in figure 7 of Shih et al. 20150138524 and rounding the top surface and the transition from the peak/top surface to the sidewalls reduce the phase correlation between the light reflected off the reflective multilayer and that reflected off the upper surface of the absorber as illustrated in figure 7 as taught in Kirchauer et al. 6479195 at (2/45-4/15) and the leftmost cross section in figure 2 of Pomplun et al. “Rigorous FEM-simulation of EUV-masks: influence of shape and material parameters”, Proc SPIE Vol. 6349 article 63493D 8 pages (2006) which will inherently reduce diffraction at the edges in the same manner taught in Kuroda et al. 20060110693.
The examiner holds that rounding the tops of the symmetric EUV patterning features of Trogish et al. 20090097004 to reduce the diffraction at these edges taught by the combination of references Kirchauer et al. 6479195 at (2/45-4/15) and Kuroda et al. 20060110693forms the symmetric structures with the rounded distal end.
In the response of 5/11/2026, the applicant argues that that the combination of the references does not meet the limitations of the claims. The claims require that the second component (the absorber pattern) have sidewall which surround/define the pattern, the distal end of the sidewalls has a curved (rounded) shape which is half or less of a sinusoidal curve. The position of the examiner is that the triangular cross section (“A” shape) of Shih et al. 20150138524 modified to round the point of/at the apex of the triangle (the distal end) to reduce diffraction as taught by Kuroda et al. 20060110693, noting the rounding observed in Pomplun et al. “Rigorous FEM-simulation of EUV-masks: influence of shape and material parameters”, Proc SPIE Vol. 6349 article 63493D 8 pages (2006) and discussed in Kirchauer et al. 6479195 at (abstract and 2/39-41). The arguments that the tip would be ground flat would only apply to extremely precise vertical milling which is not used in the formation of the triangular pattern of Shih et al. 20150138524, which is clearly formed to have a triangular shape, not one with a flat top. The applicant could provide data evidencing improved results for patterns bounded by the claims, over those having a triangular profile. The rejection as modified stands.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Martin J Angebranndt whose telephone number is (571)272-1378. The examiner can normally be reached 7-3:30 pm EST.
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, Ching-Yu (Coris) Fung can be reached on 571-270-5713. 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.
MARTIN J. ANGEBRANNDT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1737
/MARTIN J ANGEBRANNDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
July 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights