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 .
This action is responsive to the amendment of 5/20/2026.
Response to Arguments
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
The existing grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) are only partially overcome by amendment. In particular, the present amendment clarifies that the lack of symmetry of features of the first overlay target refers to the first linear grating and the second linear grating considered as a unit, however, the current amendment fails to clarify whether features on the first layer should be considered interchangeable with those in the second layer when testing for symmetry, a question that applies to limitations regarding both the first overlay target and the second overlay target. The other issues with limitations regarding the second overlay target also remain, as described below.
Prior Art Rejections
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 12, 14-15, and 17 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12, 14-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 12, lines 6-8 state that the second target feature is formed in a position adjacent to the first target feature in a first direction. Lines 8-9 require the first target feature comprise a first linear grating oriented along the first direction. Lines 9-10 require the second first target feature comprise a second linear grating oriented along the first direction. While it is clear what is meant by two linear gratings both being oriented in the same first direction (the lines in the first grating are parallel to the lines in the second grating), it is unclear how to judge whether the direction of adjacency between the two linear gratings matches the direction along which the two linear gratings are oriented. In particular, it is ambiguous whether a particular linear grating is oriented (a) along the direction of each of the lines (e.g., the y axis in FIG. 2) or (b) along an axis along which those lines collectively form a grating (e.g., the x axis in FIG. 2). The newly added limitation requiring adjacency in the same direction calls the question, as the different interpretations lead to different requirements of the relative positions of the linear gratings compared to their individual orientations. Interpretation (a) is exemplified in FIG. 2A of the present disclosure, while interpretation (b) is exemplified in FIG. 2B of the present disclosure. As Applicant’s remarks only cited FIG. 2A in support of the most recent amendment, interpretation (a) is adopted.
Regarding claim 12, lines 11-13 require that features on the first and second linear gratings lack 180° rotational symmetry when considered together, however, it is unclear whether a feature in one layer should be counted as the same or different as a feature in the other layer when such a system is rotated. Following the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification (especially the exemplary embodiment of FIG. 2A, cited by Applicant as supporting the current amendment), features on one layer are not considered identical to features on the other. Note that this is the interpretation is required for the gratings shown in the figures to fall within the scope of the claim.
Regarding claim 12, lines 16-18 require that the first and second overlay targets have rotational symmetry. It is unclear whether this is intended to state that each overlay target has symmetry on its own or that the system comprising the two overlay targets together has symmetry as a unit (in the latter case, it is additionally unclear how the first overlay target could be rotated in such a way as to match the second overlay target, as the second overlay target comprises a first part identical to the first overlay target and also comprises a second part, unless the second part is trivial, not containing anything substantial enough to be considered to break symmetry). Further, it is unclear whether a feature in one layer should be counted as the same or different as a feature in the other layer when such a system is rotated. In light of the specification (especially FIG. 5A), the claim is interpreted as saying that rotating the second overlay target by 180° maps the first part symmetrically onto the second part and the second part onto the first part, and that features must be on the same layer to be considered identical.
Regarding claim 12, lines 18-19 require that the features on the first overlay target and second overlay target be identical. It is unclear which features are required to be identical to which other features or if each must be identical to itself (which would be trivial). The limitation is interpreted as requiring each feature in the first overlay target be identical to the corresponding feature in the first part of the second overlay target.
The Examiner posits that replacing references to “the first overlay target” and “the second overlay target” with “the first part” and “the second part”, respectively, in lines 16-19 would clear up some, but not all, of the issues in the paragraph starting on line 14, namely those caused by recursively defining the second overlay target as including a copy of the first overlay target plus an additional second part (suggesting that the second overlay target is “bigger” in some way) while also possibly having symmetry with or being identical to the first overlay target (suggesting that the overlay targets may be the same size in some way).
Figures 14, 15, and 17 are indefinite due to depending on an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 12, 14-15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shchegrov (US patent publication 20190271542).
Regarding claim 12, Shchegrov teaches a product, comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (FIG. 1, sample 118); and
first and second film layers, which are disposed on the semiconductor substrate with the second film layer overlying the first film layer, and that are patterned to define (paragraph 23):
a first overlay target (FIG. 3, quadrants 306a and 306b) disposed in a first location on the semiconductor substrate (paragraph 83, any location on the sample. Note that Shchegrov does not require that optically-resolvable features be placed only in scribe lines, especially when the overlay targets have features that adhere to process design rules) and comprising a first target feature formed in the first film layer (FIG. 3, first-layer features 308, particularly as they appear in quadrant 306a) and a second target feature formed in the second film layer (FIG. 3, second-layer features 310, particularly as they appear in quadrant 306a) in a position adjacent to the first target feature (FIG. 3, the first-layer features 308 in quadrant 306a are adjacent to second-layer features 310 in the same quadrant) in a first direction (FIG. 3, the direction connecting quadrants 306a and 306b), wherein the first target feature comprises a first linear grating oriented along the first direction in the first film layer (FIG. 3, first-layer features 308, particularly as they appear in quadrant 306a. Note that each of the lines of the linear grating is parallel to the direction of adjacency), and the second target feature comprises a second linear grating oriented in the first direction in the second film layer (FIG. 3, second-layer features 310, particularly as they appear in quadrant 306a. Note that each of the lines of the linear grating is parallel to the direction of adjacency),
wherein features on the first linear grating and features on the second linear grating do not have rotational symmetry of 180° around a normal to the semiconductor substrate when considered together (FIG. 3, while rotating the first and second linear gratings 180° about their collective center would map the location of each grating onto the location of the other, the two gratings are on different layers and so are not symmetric); and
a second overlay target (FIG. 3, target 304 as a whole) disposed in a second location on the semiconductor substrate (paragraph 83 teaches placing the target in a scribe line as an option) and comprising a first part (FIG. 3, quadrants 306a and 306b), which is identical to the first overlay target (FIG. 3, quadrants 306a and 306b), and a second part (FIG. 3, quadrants 306c and 306d), which is disposed adjacent to the first part (FIG. 3, quadrants 306c and d are adjacent to quadrants 306 b and a) such that features on the first overlay target and features on the second overlay target have rotational symmetry of 180° around the normal to the semiconductor substrate (FIG. 3, target 304 has 180° rotational symmetry about its center) and that the features on the first overlay target and the features on the second overlay target are identical (FIG. 3 quadrants 306 a and b, which are the first overlay target are identical to the corresponding parts of the second overlay target, found in FIG. 3, quadrants 306a and b);
wherein the first linear grating and the second linear grating are configured for determination of a center of symmetry during measurement (paragraph 49).
Regarding claim 14, Shchegrov teaches the product according to claim 12, wherein the first overlay target is one of a plurality of the first overlay targets, each comprising the first and second target features, disposed at different, respective locations on the semiconductor substrate (paragraph 83 describes placement of plural overlay targets, as shown with hybrid overlay targets 406 in FIG. 4. Note that the overlay target 304 shown in FIG. 3 has a first overlay target as described above).
Regarding claim 15, Shchegrov teaches the product according to claim 12, wherein the semiconductor substrate comprises dies separated by scribe lines (FIG. 4, scribe lines 404, described in paragraphs 83-84), and wherein the first overlay target is disposed in a device area of a die (paragraph 84 describes how overlay targets (such as the one in FIG. 3 that includes a first overlay target) may be placed in dies when they adhere to process design rules) and the second overlay target is disposed in one of the scribe lines (FIG. 4 shows multiple hybrid overlay targets 406 located in scribe lines).
Regarding claim 17, Shchegrov teaches the product according to claim 12, wherein the first target feature further comprises a third linear grating oriented along a second direction, which is not parallel with the first direction, in the first film layer (FIG. 3, first-layer features 308, particularly as they appear in quadrant 306b, which are oriented orthogonal to the first direction), and the second target feature comprises a fourth linear grating oriented in the second direction in the second film layer (FIG. 3, second-layer features 310, particularly as they appear in quadrant 306b, which are oriented orthogonal to the first direction).
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 PAUL D SCHNASE whose telephone number is (703)756-1691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/PAUL SCHNASE/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights