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 .
1. Claims 1-13 are presented for examination. Claims 14-17 and 19 are withdrawn from consideration and claims 18 and 20 are cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-13) in the reply filed on 11/13/2025 is acknowledged.
Applicant argues that the claims had been examined in the international search report (ISR) as a whole. Applicant’s argument for claim 14 (Group II) and 17 (Group IV) are persuasive since they disclose information process. As the result, claims 14 and 17 are rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
However, applicant’s argument for claims 15, 16 and 19 (Group III) are not persuasive since they claimed a machine learning device, which different than Group I, II and IV. For this reason, claims 15, 16 and 19 are not rejoined.
Because claims 14 and 17 previously withdrawn from consideration under 37 CFR 1.142 have been rejoined, the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action for claims 14 and 17 is hereby withdrawn. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to the rejoined inventions, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Note
3. Examiner reached out Applicant’s representative, Bartfeld Neil, to expeditious prosecution by including the allowable subject matter to the independent claims. However, due to the timing, it was not successful.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
4. 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.
4.1 Claim(s) 14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shibata ( US 2009/0014125 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Shibata discloses an information processing system (The control section (OP) 500 consisting of a multi-purpose computer including an operation part (CPU) 501 and a storage part (memory) 502) comprising:
a processor ([0044], CPU); and;
a storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon (([0076], The host computer includes an operation part and a storage part), wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by the processor ([0028],[0066], the parameters are controlled by a controller 210 for controlling the light exposure apparatus 200 as a whole, in accordance with instructions from the control section 500), perform processing of:
reading correspondence information in which material information indicating a material of a resist ([0083], resist), and a process condition in a predetermined process using the resist are associated with performance information indicating performance of the resist obtained by the process from a storage medium ([0073], determined by the etching time and the composition ratio of the etching gas; sequentially performed to form a first pattern in the resist film and a developable material layer (SOG film)), and
acquiring the performance information on the basis of the read material information and process condition and the correspondence information([0083], material), the process condition, and the correspondence information (Abstract, [0048], [0118], FIG. 2, Fig. 5, the coating/developing apparatus includes a cassette station, a process station , and an interface section 4 integrated connected to each other. The process station comprises a plurality of processing units stacked one on the other and configured to perform predetermined processes on wafers one by one in a photolithography sequence); and
outputting the performance information ([0048], Fig. 1, Fig. 2 and Fig. 5, transmit examination result and transfer route information to hot computer; interface section is disposed adjacent to the process station and configured to transfer wafers W to and from the light exposure apparatus).
Regarding claim 17, Shibata discloses acquiring performance information on the basis of correspondence information in which material information indicating a material of a resist (Abstract, [0048], [0118], FIG. 2, the coating/developing apparatus includes a cassette station, a process station , and an interface section 4 integrated connected to each other. The process station comprises a plurality of processing units stacked one on the other and configured to perform predetermined processes on wafers one by one in a photolithography sequence); and
a process condition in a predetermined process using the resist is associated with the performance information indicating performance of the resist obtained by the process ([0069] The control section 500 of each of the resist pattern forming apparatuses Li1 to Li3 is connected to the host computer 600, and is configured to supply the host computer 600 with the measurement results of the wafer W obtained in the corresponding one of the forming apparatuses Li1 to Li3 and a wafer ID for identifying the wafer W. The host computer 600 uses the wafer ID not only as information for identifying the wafer W but also as information for obtaining transfer data for identifying which module has been used for processing the wafer W); and
outputting the performance information ([0048], Fig. 1, 2 and 5, transmit examination result and transfer route information to hot computer; interface section is disposed adjacent to the process station and configured to transfer wafers W to and from the light exposure apparatus)..
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
5.1 Claim(s) 1-3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibata ( US 2009/0014125 A1) in view of Tejnil (US 2008/0059128 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shibata discloses an information processing system (Fig. 2, The control section (OP) 500 consisting of a multi-purpose computer including an operation part (CPU) 501 and a storage part (memory) 502) comprising:
a processor ([0044], CPU); and
a storage medium configured to store correspondence information ([0076], The host computer includes an operation part and a storage part) in which material information indicating a material ([0083], resist), of a composition ([0073], determined by the etching time and the composition ratio of the etching gas; sequentially performed to form a first pattern in the resist film and a developable material layer (SOG film)),
and the storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by the processor ([0044], the control section (OP) consisting of a multi-purpose computer including an operation part (CPU) and a storage part (memory) is disposed to administrate 500 measurement results obtained by the examination apparatus),
perform processing of:
acquiring the performance information on the basis of the material information ([0083], material), the process condition, and the correspondence information ( Abstract, [0048], [0118], FIG. 2, the coating/developing apparatus includes a cassette station, a process station , and an interface section 4 integrated connected to each other. The process station comprises a plurality of processing units stacked one on the other and configured to perform predetermined processes on wafers one by one in a photolithography sequence), and
outputting the performance information ([0048], Fig. 1, 2 and 5, transmit examination result and transfer route information to hot computer; interface section is disposed adjacent to the process station and configured to transfer wafers W to and from the light exposure apparatus).
Shibata fails to discloses a process condition in a process using the composition are associated with performance information of the composition obtained by the process.
Tejnil discloses a process condition in a process using the composition ([0004], processes such as etching, ion-implantation (doping), metallization, oxidation, chemo-mechanical polishing, etc.) is associated with performance information of the composition obtained by the process ([0003], lithographic projection apparatus, each target portion is irradiated by exposing the entire mask pattern onto the target portion in one go; such an apparatus is commonly referred to as a wafer stepper).
Shibata and Tejnil are analogous art. They relate to substrate manufacturing system.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify, substrate processing, taught by Shibata, incorporating with resist performance, taught by Tejnil, for modeling resist development of a lithography process to allow for the generation of a more accurate model for simulating the imaging performance of an optical imaging system.
Regarding claim 2, Shibata discloses the composition is used for patterning of an object (Abstract, a resist pattern forming apparatus including modules each configured to perform a predetermined process on a substrate with an underlying film formed thereon, an etched pattern forming apparatus), and the performance information indicates a performance when the composition is used for the patterning (Abstract, Fig, 5 and 6, [0004], [0014], [0083], processes are sequentially performed to form a predetermined pattern on a target substrate; a resist coating process is performed such that a coating liquid or resist liquid is applied onto the wafer to form a resist film).
Regarding claim 3, Shibata discloses information processing system according to wherein the composition is a resist (Abstract, [0020], [0073], a resist pattern forming apparatus; disposed in the resist pattern forming apparatuses and the etched pattern forming apparatuses).
Regarding claim 10, Tejnil discloses the performance information is information indicating lithography performance of the resist ([0002],[0031], [0068], modeling the resist development in a lithography process).
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claim 4 is 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.
As claims 5-9 and 11 are directly or indirectly dependent on claim 4, those claims are also allowable at least by virtue of their dependency.
Citation Pertinent prior art
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kasashima (JP H01-130525 A) discloses drying a resist film by pre-baking is to heat the resist film to 100°C or higher using a hot plate, oven, infrared irradiation, etc., evaporate the solvent in the resist film, and dry the resist film. It was a method of drying.
Moon et al. (US 20200041897 A1) discloses semiconductor resist composition including an organometallic compound represented by chemical formula and forming patterns using the composition.
Tadokoro et al. (US 2009/0214963 A1) an initial condition of a substrate, any of a film thickness of a processing film on the substrate, a refractive index of the processing film, an absorption coefficient of the processing film, and a warpage amount of the substrate.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for allthat it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed wereinstead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1 009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck& Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed Kidest Worku whose telephone number is 571-272-3737. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ali Mohammad can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application information Retrieval IPAIRI system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PMR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAG system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217- 9197.
/KIDEST WORKU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights