DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 Arguments
Claim rejections under 35 USC §103
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 19, filed 12/05/2025, in view of the amendment to claims 1, 28, and 55 with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chen, et. al. (US 10545099 B1), Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A), and Suganuma, et. al. (US 20170278672 A1).
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 18, filed 12/05/2025 with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are unpersuasive because Suganuma does teach the claimed element of “one or more pre-lens deflectors are configured to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields.” In particular, paragraphs ([0036]-[0041] of Suganuma teach the interpreted pre-lens deflectors (208, 209, 216) as dividing the target object (scan field of the primary electron beam) into strip-shaped regions, sub-fields, and under sub-fields to be written on. The applicant argues that Suganuma fails to teach the claim limitation because Suganum does not disclose the utilization of beam splitting. The claim, as written does not require beam splitting.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 18, 28, 29, 35, 45, 55, 56, and 61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, et. al. (US 10545099 B1), hereinafter Chen, in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A), and Suganuma, et. al. (US 20170278672 A1), hereinafter Suganuma.
Regarding claim 1, Chen, et. al. teaches a large field of view miniature electron optical column apparatus (miniature electron beam column, Col. 9, line 9), comprising:
a set of electron-optical elements configured to direct a primary electron beam of an electron beam source to a sample (Col. 15, line 39 – Col. 16, line 16), the set of electron-optical elements comprising:
an objective lens (Col. 15 line 65- Col. 16, line 16); and
a deflection sub-system (Col. 16 lines 17 – 35).
Chen does not explicitly teach that the deflection sub-system comprises one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens, wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include one or more upper pre-lens deflectors and one or more lower pre-lens deflectors, wherein the one or more upper pre-lens deflectors are configured to operate in conjunction with the one or more lower pre-lens deflectors to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields; a post-lens deflector positioned between the objective lens and the sample; and a post-lens miniature optical element positioned between the objective lens and the sample.
Suganuma teaches one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens (main deflector 208 and sub deflector 209 and sub sub deflector 216 are positioned between electron gun 201 and objective lens 207, Fig. 1, [0031]), wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include one or more upper pre-lens deflectors and one or more lower pre-lens deflectors (the main deflector 208 is above sub deflector 209 and the sub deflector 209 is above sub sub deflector 216 as seen in Fig. 1), wherein the one or more upper pre-lens deflectors are configured to operate in conjunction with the one or more lower pre-lens deflectors to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields ([0036]-[0041], particularly, [0036] teaches the main deflector 208 dividing the target object into strip-shaped regions, the sub deflector 209 dividing the stripe regions into mesh-like subfields, and the subfields being divided into mesh-like under subfields by the sub-sub deflector 216.);
Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a) positioned between the objective lens and the sample ([0038], see Fig. 4a where 22 is between objective lens 21 and sample 24); and
a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a) positioned between the objective lens and the sample ([0039], see Fig. 4a where 23 is between objective lens 21 and sample 24).
Suganuma modifies Chen by suggesting the deflection sub-system comprises pre-lens deflectors including upper pre-lens deflector and lower pre-lens deflectors configured to operate in conjunction with each other to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields. Nawotec GmbH modifies Loschner, et. al. by suggesting the deflection sub-system also comprises a post-lens deflector and a post-lens miniature optical element.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Suganuma because doing so provides an organized method of writing a desired pattern at high resolution and high precision on a sample, (Suganuma, [0005], [0036]-[0041]). Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because this configuration allows the probe spot to remain in a fixed position on the sample even when the beam intensity is adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0038]). Additionally it allows the beam to be adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]).
Regarding claim 2 and claim 29, Chen does not teach wherein a post-lens deflector is configured to augment deflection of the one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens.
Nawotec GmbH teaches wherein a post-lens deflector (post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a) is configured to augment deflection ([0039], the beam is deflected first by the pre-lens deflector and then deflected again by the pos-lens deflector, therefore the deflection is augmented) of the one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens (pre-lens deflection multipole 20, [0038], see Fig. 4a where 20 is between where beam 26 originates and objective lens 21).
Nawotec GmbH modifies Loschner, et. al. by suggesting a post-lens deflector that augments deflection of a pre-lens deflector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because doing so allows the beam to be adjusted as desired, (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]-[0040]).
Regarding claim 8 and claim 35, Chen does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to apply one or more corrections to the primary electron beam.
Nawotec GmbH teaches wherein the post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a) is configured to apply one or more corrections to the primary electron beam (grid bar 23 allows the beam to be adjusted, [0039]).
Nawotec GmbH modifies Loschner, et. al. by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element configured to apply corrections to the electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because the post-lens miniature optical element as taught by Nawotec GmbH allows the beam to be adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]).
Regarding claim 18 and claim 45, Chen does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes a shield electrode.
In an embodiment of Nawotec GmbH, Nawotec GmbH teaches wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes a shield electrode (shield element 439, see [0024], Fig. 1, is a shield electrode located after objective lens 427 and before sample plan 419).
Nawotec GmbH modifies Chen by suggesting a post-lens miniature that includes a shield electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because the shield electrode as taught by Nawotec GmbH “reduce[s] the influence of electric charges concentrated on the surface of the sample 403 hindering the primary electron beam,” (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]).
Regarding claim 28, Chen teaches a multi-column characterization system (array of miniature probes/electron beam columns, Abstract, Col. 9, line 9), comprising:
one or more electron beam sources configured to generate an array of primary electron beams (a plurality of charged particle sources arranged to generate charged particle beams, Col. 15 line 39-55);
a plurality of miniature electron optical columns (miniature electron beam columns Col 15 lines 39-55, Col. 9, line 9), each miniature electron optical column of the plurality of miniature electron optical columns comprising:
a set of electron-optical elements configured to direct a primary electron beam of an electron beam source to a sample (electron-optic elements, Col. 15, lines 65- Col. 16 line 16), the set of electron-optical elements comprising:
an objective lens (Col. 15, lines 65- Col. 16 line 16); and
a deflection sub-system (Col. 16 lines 17-35).
Chen does not teach that the deflection sub-system comprises one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens, wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include one or more upper pre-lens deflectors and one or more lower pre-lens deflectors, wherein the one or more upper pre-lens deflectors are configured to operate in conjunction with the one or more lower pre-lens deflectors to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields; a post-lens deflector positioned between the objective lens and the sample; and a post-lens miniature optical element positioned between the objective lens and the sample.
Suganuma teaches one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens (main deflector 208 and sub deflector 209 and sub sub deflector 216 are positioned between electron gun 201 and objective lens 207, Fig. 1, [0031]), wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include one or more upper pre-lens deflectors and one or more lower pre-lens deflectors (the main deflector 208 is above sub deflector 209 and the sub deflector 209 is above sub sub deflector 216 as seen in Fig. 1), wherein the one or more upper pre-lens deflectors are configured to operate in conjunction with the one or more lower pre-lens deflectors to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields ([0036]-[0041], particularly, [0036] teaches the main deflector 208 dividing the target object into strip-shaped regions, the sub deflector 209 dividing the stripe regions into mesh-like subfields, and the subfields being divided into mesh-like under subfields by the sub-sub deflector 216.);
Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a) positioned between the objective lens and the sample ([0038], see Fig. 4a where 22 is between objective lens 21 and sample 24); and
a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a) positioned between the objective lens and the sample ([0039], see Fig. 4a where 23 is between objective lens 21 and sample 24).
Suganuma modifies Chen by suggesting the deflection sub-system comprises pre-lens deflectors including upper pre-lens deflector and lower pre-lens deflectors configured to operate in conjunction with each other to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields. Nawotec GmbH modifies Loschner, et. al. by suggesting the deflection sub-system also comprises a post-lens deflector and a post-lens miniature optical element.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Suganuma because doing so provides an organized method of writing a desired pattern at high resolution and high precision on a sample, (Suganuma, [0005], [0036]-[0041]). Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because this configuration allows the probe spot to remain in a fixed position on the sample even when the beam intensity is adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0038]). Additionally it allows the beam to be adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]).
Regarding claim 55, Chen teaches a method, comprising:
generating a primary electron beam (charged particle beam, Col. 15 line 39-55) with an electron beam source (charged particle source, Col. 15 lines 39-55);
directing the primary electron beam to a sample with a miniature electron optical column (Col. 15 lines 39-55, Col. 9, line 9);
Chen does not teach adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include one or more upper pre-lens deflectors and one or more lower pre-lens deflectors, wherein the one or more upper pre-lens deflectors are configured to operate in conjunction with the one or more pre-lens deflectors to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields; adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post- lens deflector positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column; and adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post- lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column.
Suganuma teaches adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens (main deflector 208 and sub deflector 209 and sub sub deflector 216 are positioned between electron gun 201 and objective lens 207 and deflect the electron beam, Fig. 1, [0031]), wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include one or more upper pre-lens deflectors and one or more lower pre-lens deflectors (the main deflector 208 is above sub deflector 209 and the sub deflector 209 is above sub sub deflector 216 as seen in Fig. 1), wherein the one or more upper pre-lens deflectors are configured to operate in conjunction with the one or more pre-lens deflectors to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields ([0036]-[0041], particularly, [0036] teaches the main deflector 208 dividing the target object into strip-shaped regions, the sub deflector 209 dividing the stripe regions into mesh-like subfields, and the subfields being divided into mesh-like under subfields by the sub-sub deflector 216.);
Nanotec GmbH teaches adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post- lens deflector positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column (post-lens deflection multipole 22 is positioned between the objective lens 21 and the sample 24, [0038], see Fig. 4a); and
adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post- lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh is positioned between the objective lens 21 and the sample 24, [0038], [0039], see Fig. 4a).
Suganuma modifies Loschner, et. al. by suggesting the deflection sub-system comprises pre-lens deflectors including upper pre-lens deflector and lower pre-lens deflectors which are configured to operate in conjunction with each other to split a full scan field of the primary electron beam into a plurality of sub-fields. Nawotec GmbH modifies Loschner, et. al. by suggesting adjusting characteristics of the electron beam using a pre-lens deflector configured between the electron beam source and the objective lens, a post-lens deflector configured between the objective lens and the sample, and a post-lens miniature optical element configured between the objective lens and the sample.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Suganuma because doing so provides an organized method of writing a desired pattern on a sample, (Suganuma, [0005], [0036]-[0041]). Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because this configuration allows the probe spot to remain in a fixed position on the sample even when the beam intensity is adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0038]). Additionally it allows the beam to be adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]).
Regarding claim 56, Chen does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens deflector positioned below an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column comprises: augmenting deflection of the one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens.
Nawotec GmbH teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens deflector positioned below an objective lens of the electron optical column (post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a) comprises: augmenting deflection of the one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned between the electron beam source and the objective lens ([0039], the beam is deflected first by the pre-lens deflector and then deflected again by the pos-lens deflector, therefore the deflection is augmented).
Nawotec GmbH modifies Chen by suggesting a post-lens deflector that augments deflection of a pre-lens deflector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because doing so allows the beam to be adjusted as desired, (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]-[0040]).
Regarding claim 61, Chen does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: applying one or more corrections to primary electron beam.
Nawotec GmbH teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: applying one or more corrections to primary electron beam (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 allows the beam to be adjusted, [0039]).
Nawotec GmbH modifies Chen by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element configured to apply corrections to the electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Nawotec GmbH because the post-lens miniature optical element as taught by Nawotec GmbH allows the beam to be adjusted (Nawotec GmbH, [0039]).
Claims 3, 4, 7, 9, 21, 22, 24, 25, 30, 31, 34, 36, 42, 48, 49, 51, 57, 58, 62, 68, and 69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Brodie (US 20180068825 A1).
Regarding claim 3 and claim 30, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (Nawotec GmbH, post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens deflector is configured to apply one or more corrections to the primary electron beam
Brodie teaches wherein the deflector (multi-pole beam deflector 300, [0058]) is configured to apply one or more corrections to the primary electron beam (last sentence of [0058]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 4 and claim 31, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam that correct for astigmatism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 7 and claim 34, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (Nawotec GmbH, post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens deflector includes a silicon post-lens deflector.
Brodie teaches wherein the deflector includes a silicon deflector (the multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any silicon-based micro-fabrication technique…known in the art, [0061]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a silicon-based post-lens deflector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because fabricating a deflector using silicon is known in the art, as disclosed by Brodie, “The multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any method of fabrication known in the art. For example, the multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any silicon-based micro-fabrication technique or micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) processing technique known in the art,” (Brodie, [0061]).
Regarding claim 9 and claim 36, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that applies corrections to the primary electron beam that correct for astigmatism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 15 and claim 42, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is formed of silicon.
Brodie teaches wherein the optical element is formed of silicon (the multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any silicon-based micro-fabrication technique…known in the art, [0061]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a silicon-based post-lens miniature optical element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because fabricating an optical element using silicon is known in the art, as disclosed by Brodie, “The multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any method of fabrication known in the art. For example, the multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any silicon-based micro-fabrication technique or micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) processing technique known in the art,” (Brodie, [0061]).
Regarding claim 21 and claim 48, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors are configured to apply one or more corrections to the primary electron beam.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors (multi-pole beam deflector 300, [0058] is located between the electron beam source 10 and the objective lens 116) are configured to apply one or more corrections to the primary electron beam (last sentence of [0058]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a pre-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 22 and claim 49, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism or offsets.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism or offsets ([0058]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a pre-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam that correct for astigmatism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 24 and claim 51, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors include silicon pre-lens deflectors.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors (multi-pole beam deflector 300, [0058] is located between the electron beam source 10 and the objective lens 116) include silicon pre-lens deflectors (the multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any silicon-based micro-fabrication technique…known in the art, [0061]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a silicon-based pre-lens deflector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because fabricating a deflector using silicon is known in the art, as disclosed by Brodie, “The multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any method of fabrication known in the art. For example, the multi-pole beam deflector 300 may be fabricated by any silicon-based micro-fabrication technique or micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) processing technique known in the art,” (Brodie, [0061]).
Regarding claim 57, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (Nawotec GmbH, post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens deflector positioned below an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column comprises: applying one or more corrections to primary electron beam.
Brodie teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a deflector (multi-pole beam deflector 300, [0058]) comprises: applying one or more corrections to primary electron beam (last sentence of [0058]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 58, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam that correct for astigmatism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 62, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism, field curvature, or offsets.
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that applies corrections to the primary electron beam that correct for astigmatism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 68, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned above an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: applying one or more corrections to primary electron beam.
Brodie teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using one or more pre-lens deflectors (multi-pole beam deflector 300, [0058] is located between the electron beam source 10 and the objective lens 116) positioned above an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: applying one or more corrections to primary electron beam (last sentence of [0058]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a pre-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Regarding claim 69, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism or offsets.
Brodie teaches wherein the one or more corrections are configured to correct for at least one of: astigmatism or offsets ([0058]).
Brodie modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a pre-lens deflector that applies corrections to the primary electron beam that correct for astigmatism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie because “allow[ing] for adjustment of the primary electron beam…reduce[s] the amount of astigmatism in the SEM system,” (Brodie, [0058]).
Claims 5, 10, 16, 17, 32, 37, 43, 44, 59, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Parker (US 20060145087).
Regarding claim 5 and claim 32, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens deflector is configured to apply one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
Parker teaches wherein the post-lens deflector (deflector/stigmator 513, [0129], Fig. 4A, Fig. 16, is placed after main lens comprising 510, 511, 512, and before substrate 402) is configured to apply one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam (dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator 513, [0129]).
Parker modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting that the post-lens deflector is configured to apply dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Parker because performing “dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator…correct[s] for astigmatism,” (Parker, [0129]).
Regarding claim 10 and claim 37, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to apply one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
Parker teaches wherein the post-lens optical element (deflector/stigmator 513, [0129], Fig. 4A, Fig. 16 is placed after main lens comprising 510, 511, 512, and before substrate 402) is configured to apply one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam (dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator 513, [0129]).
Parker modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting that the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to apply dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Parker because performing “dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator…correct[s] for astigmatism,” (Parker, [0129]).
Regarding claim 16 and claim 43, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes a post-lens detector.
Parker teaches wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes a post-lens detector (detector 903, [0090], [0011], placed after main lens comprising lens 510, 511, 512 and before substrate 402, see Fig. 4A).
Parker modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting that the post-lens miniature optical element includes a post-lens detector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Parker because designing the detector optics with such a configuration “facilitate[s] a wide scan field in each column,” (Parker, [0021]).
Regarding claim 17 and claim 44, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes an extraction control electrode.
Parker teaches wherein the optical element includes an extraction control electrode (extraction electrode 502, [0088], Fig. 4A).
Parker modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting that the post-lens miniature optical element includes an extraction control electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Parker because an extraction control electrode allows an electric field to be generated such that electrons are emitted by the source tip, (Parker, [0178]).
Regarding claim 59, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens deflector positioned below an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column comprises: applying one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
Parker teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens deflector positioned below an objective lens of the electron optical column (deflector/stigmator 513, [0129], Fig. 4A, Fig. 16, is placed after main lens comprising 510, 511, 512, and before substrate 402) comprises: applying one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam (dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator 513, [0129]).
Parker modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting that the post-lens deflector is configured to apply dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Parker because performing “dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator…correct[s] for astigmatism,” (Parker, [0129]).
Regarding claim 63, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: applying one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
Parker teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column (deflector/stigmator 513, [0129], Fig. 4A, Fig. 16 is placed after main lens comprising 510, 511, 512, and before substrate 402), comprises: applying one or more dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam (dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator 513, [0129]).
Parker modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting that the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to apply dynamic focus corrections to the primary electron beam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Parker because performing “dynamic variation of the quadrupole excitation of the deflector/stigmator…correct[s] for astigmatism,” (Parker, [0129]).
Claims 6, 11, 23, 25-27, 33, 38, 50, 52-54, 60, 64, and 70 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Kumamoto, et. al. (US 20180033588 A1).
Regarding claim 6 and claim 33, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (Nawotec GmbH, post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens deflector is configured for scanning.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the deflector (two-stage deflection coil unit 17, [0041], Fig. 1) is configured for scanning (the two-stage deflection coil unit 17 scans a sample 23, [0041], [0046]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens deflector that is configured for scanning.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because a configuration that includes deflectors for scanning “reduces image distortion,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0148]).
Regarding claim 11 and claim 38, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured for scanning.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the optical element (two-stage deflection coil unit 17, [0041], Fig. 1) is configured for scanning (the two-stage deflection coil unit 17 scans a sample 23, [0041], [0046]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Chen. in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that is configured for scanning.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because a configuration that includes an optical element for scanning “reduces image distortion,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0148]).
Regarding claim 23 and claim 50, Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors are configured for scanning.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the one or more pre-lens deflectors (two-stage deflection coil unit 17, [0041], Fig. 1, placed between electron source 11 and objective lens 18) are configured for scanning (the two-stage deflection coil unit 17 scans a sample 23, [0041], [0046]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a pre-lens deflector that is configured for scanning.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because a configuration that includes deflectors for scanning “reduces image distortion,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0148]).
Regarding claim 25 and claim 52, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the objective lens has a bore diameter less than 4 mm.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the objective lens has a bore diameter less than 4 mm (objective-lens aperture 16 having a bore diameter of 30 µm, [0091]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting an objective lens with a bore diameter of 30 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because utilizing an objective lens with a bore diameter of 30 µm allows “for removal of electrons in unnecessary trajectories,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0091]).
Regarding claim 26 and claim 53, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the objective lens has a bore diameter less than 2 mm.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the objective lens has a bore diameter less than 2 mm (objective-lens aperture 16 having a bore diameter of 30 µm, [0091]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting an objective lens with a bore diameter of 30 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because utilizing an objective lens with a bore diameter of 30 µm allows “for removal of electrons in unnecessary trajectories,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0091]).
Regarding claim 27 and claim 54, Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the objective lens has a bore diameter less than 1 mm.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the objective lens has a bore diameter less than 1 mm (objective-lens aperture 16 having a bore diameter of 30 µm, [0091]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting an objective lens with a bore diameter of 30 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because utilizing an objective lens with a bore diameter of 30 µm allows “for removal of electrons in unnecessary trajectories,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0091]).
Regarding claim 60, although Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens deflector (Nawotec GmbH, post-lens deflection multipole 22, [0038], Fig. 4a), Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens deflector positioned below an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column comprises scanning.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a deflector (two-stage deflection coil unit 17, [0041], Fig. 1) comprises scanning (the two-stage deflection coil unit 17 scans a sample 23, [0041], [0046]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens deflector that is configured for scanning.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because a configuration that includes deflectors for scanning “reduces image distortion,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0148]).
Regarding claim 64, although Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column comprises scanning.
Kumamoto, et. al. teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using an optical element (two-stage deflection coil unit 17, [0041], Fig. 1) comprises scanning (the two-stage deflection coil unit 17 scans a sample 23, [0041], [0046]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that is configured for scanning.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because a configuration that includes an optical element for scanning “reduces image distortion,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0148]).
Regarding claim 70, Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned above an objective lens of the miniature electron optical column comprises scanning.
Kumamotor, et. al. teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using one or more pre-lens deflectors positioned above an objective lens of the electron optical column (two-stage deflection coil unit 17, [0041], Fig. 1, placed between electron source 11 and objective lens 18) comprises scanning (the two-stage deflection coil unit 17 scans a sample 23, [0041], [0046]).
Kumamoto, et. al. modifies Loschner, et. al. in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a pre-lens deflector that is configured for scanning.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Kumamoto, et. al. because a configuration that includes deflectors for scanning “reduces image distortion,” (Kumamoto, et. al., [0148]).
Claims 12, 39, and 65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Winkler, et. al. (US 20210366683 A1).
Regarding claim 12 and claim 39, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (Nawotec GmbH, blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to vary an extraction field from the sample.
Winkler et. al. teaches wherein the post-lens optical element (proxy electrode of the retarding field device 100, [0043]) is configured to vary an extraction field from the sample ([0043]).
Winkler, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that varies an extraction field from the sample.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Winkler, et. al. because such an optical element can be used to decelerate the primary charged particle beam and accelerate the secondary particles emitted by the sample, (Winkler, et. al., [0043]).
Regarding claim 65, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: varying an extraction field from the sample.
Winkler, et. al. teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the electron optical column (proxy electrode of the retarding field device 100, [0043]), comprises: varying an extraction field from the sample ([0043]).
Winkler, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that varies an extraction field from the sample.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Winkler, et. al. because such an optical element can be used to decelerate the primary charged particle beam and accelerate the secondary particles emitted by the sample, (Winkler, et. al., [0043]).
Claims 13, 20, 40, 47, and 66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Adamec (US 20030089859).
Regarding claim 13 and claim 40, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to vary a termination field.
Adamec teaches wherein the optical element is configured to vary a termination field (field termination structure 25, see [0034]-[0035]).
Adamec modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that varies a termination field.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Adamec because a field termination structure allows the deflection field to be concentrated close to the specimen effectively, (Adamec, [0034, 0035]).
Regarding claim 20 and claim 47, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes an electrostatic lens.
Adamec teaches wherein the optical element includes an electrostatic lens (electrostatic retarding lens, [0032], Fig. 3).
Adamec modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that includes an electrostatic lens.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Adamec because an electrostatic lens can allow the electrons to be decelerated as desired, (Adamec, [0033]).
Regarding claim 66, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: varying a termination field.
Adamec teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using an optical element, comprises: varying a termination field (field termination structure 25, see [0034]-[0035]).
Adamec modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element that varies a termination field.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Adamec because a field termination structure allows the deflection field to be concentrated close to the specimen effectively, (Adamec, [0034, 0035]).
Claims 14, 41, and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Brodie, et. al. (US 10338013 B1).
Regarding claim 14 and claim 41, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to vary a focusing element.
Brodie, et. al. teaches wherein the post-lens miniature optical element is configured to vary a focusing element (adjustable focusing elements 1028, (93)).
Brodie, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element configured to vary a focusing element.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie, et. al. because an adjustable focusing element may adjust the magnification of imaged spots, or provide near-edge correction as a means of adjusting positions of one or more imaged spots, (Brodie, et. al., (93)).
Regarding claim 67, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: varying a focusing element.
Brodie, et. al. teaches wherein the adjusting one or more characteristics of the primary electron beam using a post-lens miniature optical element positioned below the objective lens of the miniature electron optical column, comprises: varying a focusing element (adjustable focusing elements 1028, (93)).
Brodie, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element configured to vary a focusing element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Brodie, et. al. because an adjustable focusing element may adjust the magnification of imaged spots, or provide near-edge correction as a means of adjusting positions of one or more imaged spots, (Brodie, et. al., (93)).
Claims 19 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10545099 B1), in view of Nawotec GmbH (JP 2011508943 A) and Suganuma (US 20170278672 A1), further in view of Stanislav, et. al. (US 20180269031 A1).
Regarding claim 19 and claim 46, although Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH teaches a post-lens miniature optical element (blocking element such as aperture plate or grid bar 23 of a shield mesh, [0038], [0039], Fig. 4a), Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH does not teach wherein the post-lens miniature optical element includes an additional post-lens deflector.
Stanislav, et. al. teaches wherein the optical element includes an additional post-lens deflector (precession deflection system 5, where the precession deflection system makes up the second/additional deflector in a two-stage deflection system, with the scanning deflection system 4 being the first deflector, [0027], See Fig. 5).
Stanislav, et. al. modifies Chen in view of Nawotec GmbH by suggesting a post-lens miniature optical element including an additional post-lens deflector.
Since all inventions are directed towards electron beam microscopes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Stanislav, et. al. because “this arrangement allows an increase in the deflection strength of the scanning deflection system 4 in order to achieve larger scan fields. Similarly, an increase in the deflection strength of the precession deflection system 5 leads to a larger precession angle.”, (Stanislav, [0028]).
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 LAURA E TANDY whose telephone number is (703)756-1720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 5712722293. 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.
LAURA E TANDY
Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881