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 .
Status
Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed on 3/3/2025, which amended claims 15, 23, 28, and 33. Claims 15-34 are currently pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/3/2025 has been entered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the acronym “LEUP” in paras. [0139] and [0143] should be defined.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 15-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 15, the limitation “a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device” in lines 2-8 does not appear to find support in the originally filed specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor had possession of the subject matter of a pupil measurement of radiation patterned by the patterning device and emitted from the projection system for the pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors at the time the application was filed. The Applicant has not pointed out where the amended claim language is supported. The specification discloses a pupil measurement “that measures pupil related parameter such as an intensity of each of the pupil facet mirrors at the wafer level” in para. [0143] of the specification filed 8/26/2022, but the originally filed disclosure is silent that the pupil measurement is of “patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.” The specification of the parent application 17/265632, filed 2/3/2021, the specification of PCT application PCT/EP2019/071614, filed 8/12/2019, and the specification of the foreign priority application EP18190862.5, filed 8/24/2018 also describe measuring the pupil related parameter at the wafer level but fail to describe the claimed subject matter such that one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the inventor to have had possession of “the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device” in the claim as a whole. Thus, claim 15 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 28, the limitation “a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device” in lines 5-11 does not appear to find support in the originally filed specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor had possession of the subject matter of a pupil measurement of radiation patterned by the patterning device and emitted from the projection system for the pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors. The Applicant has not pointed out where the amended claim is supported. The specification discloses a pupil measurement “that measures pupil related parameter such as an intensity of each of the pupil facet mirrors at the wafer level” in para. [0143] of the specification filed 8/26/2022, but the originally-filed disclosure is silent that the pupil measurement is of “patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.” The specification of the parent application 17/265632, filed 2/3/2021, the specification of PCT application PCT/EP2019/071614, filed 8/12/2019, and the specification of the foreign priority application EP18190862.5, filed 8/24/2018 also describe measuring the pupil related parameter at the wafer level but fail to describe the claimed subject matter such that one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the inventor to have had possession of “the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device” in the claim as a whole. Thus, claim 28 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 15-31, 33, and 34 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 4, and 8-14, 17, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,460,782 in view of Kita (US PGPub 2015/0323786) in view of Wischmeier et al. (DE 102018207384, Wischmeier hereinafter) and Schubert et al. (US PGPub 2010/0265482, Schubert hereinafter).
Regarding claim 15, claim 1 of patent 782 recites a method (claim 1) comprising:
obtaining (i) a reference performance (claim 1, col. 34, lines 48-49);
determining, by a computer system, a performance based on measurement (claim 1, col. 34, lines 48-57); and
determining, by the computer system, a pupil of the apparatus such that the pupil reduces a difference between the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance (claim 1, col. 34, lines 58-63). Patent 782 does not appear to explicitly recite obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.
Kita discloses obtaining (i) a reference performance (Figs. 10, 11, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0140]-[0142], [0151], [0161]-[0162], [0204]-[0205], the linewidth error from the standard pupil illuminance is acquired), and (ii) a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus (Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0004], [0085]-[0086], [0088]-[0093], [0095], [0106], [0120], [0136]-[0138], [0141], [0143], [0144]-[0146], [0149], [0157]-[0161], [0163]-[0168], [0176], [0196], [0203], [0205], the light intensity distribution of the aerial image formed at the image plane of the projection optical system and the outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL formed by the mirror elements 30a of the spatial light modulator is measured), the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device (Fig. 6, paras. [0117]-[0118], [0136]-[0138], a pupil distribution measurement device DTw is provided to measure the pupil luminance distribution in an outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL, which projects the beam patterned by mask M illuminated by the illumination system IL).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included obtaining a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus, the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device as taught by Kita in the obtaining step in the method as recited by patent 782 since including obtaining a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus, the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device is commonly used to accurately measure the pupil distribution in each point of the image plane of the projection system (Kita, para. [0137]).
Patent 782 as modified by Kita does not appear to explicitly recite obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, and the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.
Wischmeier discloses a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device (Figs. 1-3, pages 5, 7-8 of the attached English translation, the detection device 70 measures illumination from the mirror element 30-3 of the facet mirror 28 illuminated by field facet mirror 20 in the lighting system 18, and the illumination from the lighting system 18 is patterned by the measurement structure 60 on measuring reticle 58 and projected through projection lens 40 to be incident upon the detection device 70 to detect intensity of illumination spots on the mirror elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device as taught by Wischmeier as the pupil measurement in the method as recited by patent 782 as modified by Kita since including the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device is commonly used to detect the intensity distribution with high accuracy to enable calibration of the illumination system (Wischmeier, abstract, page 2).
Patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier does not appear to explicitly recite obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors
Schubert discloses obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measurement of individual mirror elements of mirror array 46 is performed when all but one mirror element is placed in an “off” position).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Schubert in the method as recited by patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier since including obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors is commonly used to account for aberrations introduced by manufacturing tolerances of a specific illumination system (Schubert, para. [0115]).
Regarding claim 16, claim 3 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the determining of the pupil is an iterative process (claim 2, col. 35, lines 1-3), an iteration comprising:
changing one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (claim 3, col. 35, lines 4-7);
computing, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, a current performance (claim 3, col. 35, lines 8-9); and
determining a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance (claim 3, col. 35, lines 10-11).
Regarding claim 17, claim 4 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the changing one or more degrees of freedom include a change in orientation and/or intensity of one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facets (claim 4, col. 35, lines 12-17).
Regarding claim 18, patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the pupil measurement includes intensity and/or orientation of one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Schubert, Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measuring sensor measures the intensity distribution of light produced from a mirror element in an “on” state).
Regarding claim 19, claim 8 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus (claim 8, col. 35, lines 31-33).
Regarding claim 20, claim 9 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process (claim 9, col. 35, lines 34-36).
Regarding claim 21, patent 782 does not appear to explicitly recite wherein the reference performance is generated from superimposition of aerial images of each mirror of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors.
Kita discloses wherein the reference performance is generated from superimposition of aerial images of each mirror of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 16, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0129]-[0137], [0140]-[0142], [0151], [0157], [0159]-[0162], [0167], [0169], [0192], [0204]-[0205], the standard pupil luminance distribution of the mirror elements of the spatial light modulator 30 is acquired to compute the line width error on the basis of the light intensity distribution of the aerial image).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the reference performance is generated from superimposition of aerial images of each mirror of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Kita as the reference performance in the method as recited by patent 782 since including wherein the reference performance is generated from superimposition of aerial images of each mirror of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors is commonly used to accurately evaluate the pupil illuminance of an illumination pupil formed using a spatial light modulator to provide desired adjustment of the luminance distribution to improve exposure performance (Kita, paras. [0008]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 22, patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the aerial images are generated, by modeling and/or simulation, for a far field location at a substrate level (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 16, 18, paras. [0025], [0085]-[0086], [0186]-[0189], a model is used to acquire the standard pupil luminance distribution to compute the line width error).
Regarding claim 23, patent 782 does not appear to explicitly recite wherein the performance data is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror.
Kita discloses wherein the performance data is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 9-11, 16, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0129]-[0137], [0140]-[0145], [0151], [0157], [0159]-[0162], [0167], [0172], [0192], [0196], [0204]-[0205], the pupil distribution measurement device DT, DTw measures the light intensity distribution from the mirror elements 30a of spatial light modulator 30, and the standard pupil luminance distribution of the mirror elements of the spatial light modulator 30 is acquired to compute the line width error on the basis of the light intensity distribution of the aerial image).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the performance data is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror as taught by Kita in the method as recited by patent 782 since including wherein the performance data is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror is used to accurately evaluate the pupil illuminance of an illumination pupil formed using a spatial light modulator to provide desired adjustment of the luminance distribution to improve exposure performance (Kita, paras. [0008]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 24, claim 10 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance are related to a parameter of the patterning process including critical dimension and/or overlay (claim 10, col. 35, lines 37-40).
Regarding claim 25, claim 11 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the determined pupil minimizes the difference between the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance (claim 11, col. 35, lines 41-43).
Regarding claim 26, claim 12 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites further comprising adjusting performance of the apparatus based on the determined pupil (claim 12, col. 35, lines 44-46).
Regarding claim 27, claim 13 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the apparatus of the patterning process is a lithographic apparatus (claim 13, col. 35, lines 47-49).
Regarding claim 28, claim 14 of patent 782 recites a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions therein, the instructions, when executed by a computer system (claim 14, col. 35, lines 50-53) configured to cause the computer system to at least:
obtain (i) a reference performance (claim 14, col. 36, lines 1-2);
determine a performance based on measurement (claim 14, col. 36, lines 1-16); and
determine a pupil of the apparatus such that the pupil reduces a difference between the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance (claim 14, col. 36, lines 12-16).
Patent 782 does not appear to recite a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.
Kita discloses obtain (i) a reference performance (Figs. 10, 11, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0140]-[0142], [0151], [0161]-[0162], [0204]-[0205], the linewidth error from the standard pupil illuminance is acquired), and (ii) a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus (Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0004], [0085]-[0086], [0088]-[0093], [0095], [0106], [0120], [0136]-[0138], [0141], [0143], [0144]-[0146], [0149], [0157]-[0161], [0163]-[0168], [0176], [0196], [0203], [0205], the light intensity distribution of the aerial image formed at the image plane of the projection optical system and the outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL formed by the mirror elements 30a of the spatial light modulator is measured), the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device (Fig. 6, paras. [0117]-[0118], [0136]-[0138], a pupil distribution measurement device DTw is provided to measure the pupil luminance distribution in an outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL, which projects the beam patterned by mask M illuminated by the illumination system IL).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device, the patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation as taught by Kita in the obtaining step in the method as recited by patent 782 since including the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device, the patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation is commonly used to accurately measure the pupil distribution in each point of the image plane of the projection system (Kita, para. [0137]).
Patent 782 as modified by Kita does not appear to recite obtain a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors and the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.
Wischmeier discloses a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device (Figs. 1-3, pages 5, 7-8 of the attached English translation, the detection device 70 measures illumination from the mirror element 30-3 of the facet mirror 28 illuminated by field facet mirror 20 in the lighting system 18, and the illumination from the lighting system 18 is patterned by the measurement structure 60 on measuring reticle 58 and projected through projection lens 40 to be incident upon the detection device 70 to detect intensity of illumination spots on the mirror elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device as taught by Wischmeier as the pupil measurement in the method as recited by patent 782 as modified by Kita since including the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device is commonly used to detect the intensity distribution with high accuracy to enable calibration of the illumination system (Wischmeier, abstract, page 2).
Patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier does not appear to explicitly recite obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors.
Schubert discloses obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measurement of individual mirror elements of mirror array 46 is performed when all but one mirror element is placed in an “off” position).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Schubert in the method as recited by patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier since including obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors is commonly used to account for aberrations caused by manufacturing tolerances of a specific illumination system (Schubert, para. [0115]).
Regarding claim 29, claim 17 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the instructions configured to determine the pupil operate in an iterative manner (claim 17, col. 36, lines 27-30), an iteration comprising:
change of one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (claim 17, col. 36, lines 31-35);
computation, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, of a current performance (claim 17, col. 36, lines 36-37); and
determination of a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance (claim 17, col. 36, lines 37-38).
Regarding claim 30, patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the pupil measurement includes intensity and/or orientation of one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Schubert, Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measuring sensor measures the intensity distribution of light produced from a mirror element in an “on” state).
Regarding claim 31, patent 782 does not appear to explicitly recite wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus.
Kita discloses wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus (Kita, para. [0205], the matching is performed between different exposure apparatuses).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus as taught by Kita in the method as recited by patent 782 since including wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus is commonly used to perform matching between multiple exposure systems (Kita, para. [0205]) to improve consistency of exposure performance during mass production.
Regarding claim 33, patent 782 does not appear to recite wherein the performance is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror.
Kita discloses wherein the performance is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 9-11, 16, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0129]-[0137], [0140]-[0145], [0151], [0157], [0159]-[0162], [0167], [0172], [0192], [0196], [0204]-[0205], the pupil distribution measurement device DT, DTw measures the light intensity distribution from the mirror elements 30a of spatial light modulator 30, and the standard pupil luminance distribution of the mirror elements of the spatial light modulator 30 is acquired to compute the line width error on the basis of the light intensity distribution of the aerial image).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the performance is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror as taught by Kita in the method as recited by patent 782 since including wherein the performance is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror is used to accurately evaluate the pupil illuminance of an illumination pupil formed using a spatial light modulator to provide desired adjustment of the luminance distribution to improve exposure performance (Kita, paras. [0008]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 34, claim 18 of patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert recites wherein the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance are related to a parameter of the patterning process including critical dimension and/or overlay (claim 18, col. 36, lines 40-44).
Claim 32 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,460,782 in view of Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert as applied to claim 28 and further in view of Cao et al. (US PGPub 2012/0327383, Cao hereinafter).
Regarding claim 32, patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Schubert does not appear to explicitly recite wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process.
Cao discloses wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process (Fig. 12, para. [0080], the illumination pupil is adjusted to match a reference at a selected time to reduce source pupil drift and CD drift).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process as taught by Cao in the method as recited by patent 782 as modified by Kita in view of Wischmeier in view of Schubert since including wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process is commonly used to prevent drift in the critical dimensions produced by a lithography process over time (see Cao, para. [0080]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 15, 18, 19, 21-28, 30, 31, 33, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita (US PGPub 2015/0323786) in view of Wischmeier et al. (DE 102018207384, Wischmeier hereinafter) in view of Schubert et al. (US PGPub 2010/0265482, Schubert hereinafter).
Regarding claim 15, Kita discloses a method (Figs. 7-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0140], [0151], [0204]-[0205]) comprising:
obtaining (i) a reference performance (Figs. 10, 11, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0140]-[0142], [0151], [0161]-[0162], [0204]-[0205], the linewidth error from the standard pupil illuminance is acquired), and (ii) a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus (Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0004], [0085]-[0086], [0088]-[0093], [0095], [0106], [0120], [0136]-[0138], [0141], [0143], [0144]-[0146], [0149], [0157]-[0161], [0163]-[0168], [0176], [0196], [0203], [0205], the light intensity distribution of the aerial image formed at the image plane of the projection optical system and the outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL formed by the mirror elements 30a of the spatial light modulator is measured), the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device, the patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation (Fig. 6, paras. [0117]-[0118], [0136]-[0138], a pupil distribution measurement device DTw is provided to measure the pupil luminance distribution in an outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL, which projects the beam patterned by mask M illuminated by the illumination system IL);
determining, by a computer system (Figs. 6-7, paras. [0120], [0129], [0131], [0136], control section CR), a performance based on the pupil measurement (Figs. 10-11, 14, and 18, paras. [0136]-[0137], [0140]-[0141], [0151]-[0155], [0161]-[0169], [0172], [0175]-[0176], [0196]-[0197], [0203], [0205], the control section CR uses the results of the pupil distribution measurement to determine the line width errors of the resist patterns to determine necessary pupil luminance distribution adjustment); and
determining, by the computer system, a pupil of the apparatus such that the pupil reduces a difference between the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance (Figs. 6-7, 10-11, 14, and 18, paras. [0136]-[0137], [0140]-[0142], [0145], [0161]-[0170], [0172], [0175]-[0176], [0192]-[0198], [0203]-[0205], control section CR controls the adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution by adjusting the attitude of mirror elements 30a to obtain a line width error that falls within a permissible range using the difference between the change amount of the line width corresponding to the difference of the standard pupil luminance distribution and the actual pupil luminance distribution. The pupil luminance distribution is adjusted to match the designed pupil luminance distribution of a single exposure apparatus, or the pupil luminance distribution is adjusted to match with another exposure apparatus to suppress line width variation). Kita does not appear to explicitly describe obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors and the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.
Wischmeier discloses a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device (Figs. 1-3, pages 5, 7-8 of the attached English translation, the detection device 70 measures illumination from the mirror element 30-3 of the facet mirror 28 illuminated by field facet mirror 20 in the lighting system 18, and the illumination from the lighting system 18 is patterned by the measurement structure 60 on measuring reticle 58 and projected through projection lens 40 to be incident upon the detection device 70 to detect intensity of illumination spots on the mirror elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device as taught by Wischmeier as the pupil measurement in the method as taught by Kita since including the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device is commonly used to detect the intensity distribution with high accuracy to enable calibration of the illumination system (Wischmeier, abstract, page 2).
Kita as modified by Wischmeier does not appear to explicitly describe obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors.
Schubert discloses obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measurement of individual mirror elements of mirror array 46 is performed when all but one mirror element is placed in an “off” position).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Schubert as the obtaining the pupil measurement in the method as taught by Kita as modified by Wischmeier since including obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors is commonly used to account for aberrations caused by manufacturing tolerances of a specific illumination system (Schubert, para. [0115]).
Regarding claim 18, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the pupil measurement includes intensity and/or orientation of one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facets (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0085]-[0086], [0088]-[0093], [0095], [0106], [0120], [0133]-[0138], [0141], [0143], [0144]-[0146], [0149], [0157]-[0161], [0163]-[0168], [0176], [0196], [0203], [0205], the light intensity distribution of the aerial image formed at the image plane of the projection optical system formed by the mirror elements 30a of the spatial light modulator is determined using the measurement of the pupil distribution measurement device DT, DTw that measures intensity, and Schubert, Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measuring sensor measures the intensity distribution of light produced from a mirror element in an “on” state).
Regarding claim 19, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus (Kita, para. [0205], the matching is performed between different exposure apparatuses).
Regarding claim 21, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the reference performance is generated from superimposition of aerial images of each mirror of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 16, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0129]-[0137], [0140]-[0142], [0151], [0157], [0159]-[0162], [0167], [0192], [0204]-[0205], the standard pupil luminance distribution of the mirror elements of the spatial light modulator 30 is acquired to compute the line width error on the basis of the light intensity distribution of the aerial image).
Regarding claim 22, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the aerial images are generated, by modeling and/or simulation, for a far field location at a substrate level (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 16, 18, paras. [0025], [0085]-[0086], [0186]-[0189], a model is used to acquire the standard pupil luminance distribution to compute the line width error).
Regarding claim 23, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein performance is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 9-11, 16, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0129]-[0137], [0140]-[0145], [0151], [0157], [0159]-[0162], [0167], [0192], [0196], [0204]-[0205], the pupil distribution measurement device DT measures the light intensity distribution from the mirror elements 30a of spatial light modulator 30, and the standard pupil luminance distribution of the mirror elements of the spatial light modulator 30 is acquired to compute the line width error on the basis of the light intensity distribution of the aerial image).
Regarding claim 24, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance are related to a parameter of the patterning process including critical dimension and/or overlay (Kita, Figs. 10-11, 18, paras. [0154], [0161]-[0163], [0172]-[0176], [0194]-[0198], the line width errors ΔCD of the resist patterns are used as a metric to determine the necessary adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution).
Regarding claim 25, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the determined pupil minimizes the difference between the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance (Kita, Figs. 11 and 18, paras. [0195]-[0198], [0203]-[0205], the control section CR controls the adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution by adjusting the attitude of mirror elements 30a to obtain the linewidth error that falls within a permissible range. The pupil luminance distribution is adjusted to match the designed pupil luminance distribution of a single exposure apparatus, or the pupil luminance distribution is adjusted to match with another exposure apparatus to suppress line width variation).
Regarding claim 26, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses further comprising adjusting performance of the apparatus based on the determined pupil (Kita, Figs. 11-18, paras. [0195]-[0198], [0203]-[0205], the control section CR adjusts the mirrors 30a to change the linewidth of the resist pattern).
Regarding claim 27, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the apparatus of the patterning process is a lithographic apparatus (Kita, Figs. 4, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0076]-[0077], [0081]-[0082], [0108]-[0120], the exposure apparatus includes an illumination optical system IL, a mask M, and a wafer W on a wafer stage WS).
Regarding claim 28, Kita discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions therein, the instructions, when executed by a computer system (Figs. 7-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0140], [0142], [0151], [0204]-[0205]), configured to cause the computer system to at least:
obtain (i) a reference performance (Figs. 10, 11, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0140]-[0142], [0151], [0161]-[0162], [0204]-[0205], the linewidth error from the standard pupil illuminance is acquired), and (ii) a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus (Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0004], [0085]-[0086], [0088]-[0093], [0095], [0106], [0120], [0136]-[0138], [0141], [0143], [0144]-[0146], [0149], [0157]-[0161], [0163]-[0168], [0176], [0196], [0203], [0205], the light intensity distribution of the aerial image formed at the image plane of the projection optical system and the outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL formed by the mirror elements 30a of the spatial light modulator is measured), the pupil measurement being of radiation emitted from a projection system configured to project patterned radiation received from a patterning device, the patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation (Fig. 6, paras. [0117]-[0118], [0136]-[0138], a pupil distribution measurement device DTw is provided to measure the pupil luminance distribution in an outgoing pupil plane of the projection optical system PL, which projects the beam patterned by mask M illuminated by the illumination system IL);
determine a performance based on the pupil measurement (Figs. 10-11, 14, and 18, paras. [0136]-[0137], [0140]-[0141], [0151]-[0155], [0161]-[0169], [0172], [0175]-[0176], [0196]-[0197], [0203], [0205], the control section CR uses the results of the pupil distribution measurement to determine the line width errors of the resist patterns to determine necessary pupil luminance distribution adjustment); and
determine a pupil of the apparatus such that the pupil reduces a difference between the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance (Figs. 6-7, 10-11, 14, and 18, paras. [0136]-[0137], [0140]-[0142], [0145], [0151]-[0155], [0161]-[0170], [0172], [0175]-[0176], [0192]-[0198], [0203]-[0205], control section CR controls the adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution by adjusting the attitude of mirror elements 30a to obtain a line width error that falls within a permissible range using the difference between the change amount of the line width corresponding to the difference of the standard pupil luminance distribution and the actual pupil luminance distribution. The pupil luminance distribution is adjusted to match the designed pupil luminance distribution of a single exposure apparatus, or the pupil luminance distribution is adjusted to match with another exposure apparatus to suppress line width variation). Kita does not appear to explicitly describe obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors and the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device.
Wischmeier discloses a pupil measurement of a mirror of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus, the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device (Figs. 1-3, pages 5, 7-8 of the attached English translation, the detection device 70 measures illumination from the mirror element 30-3 of the facet mirror 28 illuminated by field facet mirror 20 in the lighting system 18, and the illumination from the lighting system 18 is patterned by the measurement structure 60 on measuring reticle 58 and projected through projection lens 40 to be incident upon the detection device 70 to detect intensity of illumination spots on the mirror elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device as taught by Wischmeier as the pupil measurement in the method as taught by Kita since including the pupil measurement being of patterned radiation from a patterning device configured to receive radiation from an illumination system and produce the patterned radiation and that is emitted from a projection system configured to project the patterned radiation received from the patterning device is commonly used to detect the intensity distribution with high accuracy to enable calibration of the illumination system (Wischmeier, abstract, page 2).
Kita as modified by Wischmeier does not appear to explicitly describe obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors.
Schubert discloses obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measurement of individual mirror elements of mirror array 46 is performed when all but one mirror element is placed in an “off” position).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Schubert as the obtaining the pupil measurement in the method as taught by Kita as modified by Wischmeier since including obtaining a pupil measurement specific to one or more mirrors of a plurality of pupil facet mirrors of an apparatus from one or more other mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors is commonly used to account for aberrations caused by manufacturing tolerances of a specific illumination system (Schubert, para. [0115]).
Regarding claim 30, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the pupil measurement includes intensity and/or orientation of one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0085]-[0086], [0088]-[0093], [0095], [0106], [0120], [0133]-[0138], [0141], [0143], [0144]-[0146], [0149], [0157]-[0161], [0163]-[0168], [0176], [0196], [0203], [0205], the light intensity distribution of the aerial image formed at the image plane of the projection optical system formed by the mirror elements 30a of the spatial light modulator is determined using the measurement of the pupil distribution measurement device DT, DTw that measures intensity, and Schubert, Figs. 2-4, 10, 11, 13, paras. [0072], [0115]-[0120], [0131]-[0132], a pupil measuring sensor measures the intensity distribution of light produced from a mirror element in an “on” state).
Regarding claim 31, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for a reference apparatus, the reference apparatus being different from the apparatus (Kita, para. [0205], the matching is performed between different exposure apparatuses).
Regarding claim 33, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein performance is determined from imaging data generated by superimposing aerial images of each mirror of a plurality of the pupil facet mirrors, each aerial image computed based on a respective intensity measurement of each such mirror (Kita, Figs. 2, 6-8, 9-11, 16, 18, paras. [0074]-[0076], [0093], [0129]-[0137], [0140]-[0145], [0151], [0157], [0159]-[0162], [0167], [0192], [0196], [0204]-[0205], the pupil distribution measurement device DT measures the light intensity distribution from the mirror elements 30a of spatial light modulator 30, and the standard pupil luminance distribution of the mirror elements of the spatial light modulator 30 is acquired to compute the line width error on the basis of the light intensity distribution of the aerial image).
Regarding claim 34, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses wherein the performance of the apparatus and the reference performance are related to a parameter of the patterning process including critical dimension and/or overlay (Kita Figs. 10-11, 18, paras. [0154], [0161]-[0163], [0172]-[0176], [0194]-[0198], the line width errors ΔCD of the resist patterns are used as a metric to determine the necessary adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution).
Claims 16, 17, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert as applied to claims 15 and 28 above, and further in view of Engelen et al. (US PGPub 2012/0229786, Engelen hereinafter).
Regarding claim 16, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses changing one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Kita, Figs. 10-11, 14, and 18, paras. [0142], [0145], [0161]-[0170], [0175]-[0176], [0192]-[0198], [0203]-[0205], control section CR controls the adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution by adjusting the attitude of mirror elements 30a to obtain a line width error that falls within a permissible range using the difference between the change amount of the line width corresponding to the difference of the standard pupil luminance distribution and the actual pupil luminance distribution), but Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the determining of the pupil is an iterative process, the iteration comprising: computing, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, a current performance; and determining a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance.
Engelen discloses wherein the determining of the pupil is an iterative process (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0104], [0106], [0108], [0111], [0114]-[0118], an iterative process is used to determine optimum illumination conditions such as the illumination pupil produced by a programmable mirror array), an iteration comprising:
changing one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0104], [0106], [0108], [0111], [0114]-[0118], the adjuster AD includes a programmable mirror array which defines the intensity distribution in the pupil plane of the illumination system, and the settings of the programmable mirror array are adjusted based on a calculated difference between a calculated value of a parameter of the aerial image of the pattern and a desired value (see Fig. 6));
computing, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, a current performance (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0083], [0104], [0106], [0108]-[0111], [0114]-[0118], the steps of Fig. 6 are repeated, and the applied settings are used to determine a value of the aerial image of the pattern using simulation and the updated mirror settings); and
determining a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0104], [0106], [0108], [0111], [0114]-[0118], the steps of Fig. 6 are repeated, and the difference between the determined value of the aerial image of the pattern and the desired value is determined).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the determining of the pupil is an iterative process, the iteration comprising: computing, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, a current performance; and determining a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance as taught by Engelen in the method including changing one or more degrees of freedom the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert since including wherein the determining of the pupil is an iterative process, the iteration comprising: computing, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, a current performance; and determining a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance is commonly used to optimize a lithographic process while producing high volumes of semiconductor devices using inline feedback to improve throughput (Engelen, paras. [0007]-[0010], [0107]-[0108]).
Regarding claim 17, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert in view of Engelen discloses wherein the changing one or more degrees of freedom include a change in orientation and/or intensity of one or more mirrors of the plurality of pupil facets (Kita, Figs. 6-8, 10-11, 14, 18, paras. [0120]-[0121], [0129], [0131], [0136], [0138], [0168], [0192]-[0198], [0203], [0205], the control section controls the operation of each mirror 30a to change the attitude of the mirror elements 30a to obtain the desired pupil luminance distribution).
Regarding claim 29, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert discloses changing one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Kita, Figs. 10-11, 14, and 18, paras. [0142], [0145], [0161]-[0170], [0175]-[0176], [0192]-[0198], [0203]-[0205], control section CR controls the adjustment of the pupil luminance distribution by adjusting the attitude of mirror elements 30a to obtain a line width error that falls within a permissible range using the difference between the change amount of the line width corresponding to the difference of the standard pupil luminance distribution and the actual pupil luminance distribution), but Kita as modified by Schubert does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the instructions configured to determine the pupil operate in an iterative manner, an iteration comprising: computation, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, of a current performance; and determination of a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance.
Engelen discloses wherein the instructions configured to determine the pupil operate in an iterative manner (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0031], [0104], [0106], [0108], [0111], [0114]-[0118], an iterative process is used to determine optimum illumination conditions such as the illumination pupil produced by a programmable mirror array), an iteration comprising:
change of one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0104], [0106], [0108], [0111], [0114]-[0118], the adjuster AD includes a programmable mirror array which defines the intensity distribution in the pupil plane of the illumination system, and the settings of the programmable mirror array are adjusted based on a calculated difference between a calculated value of a parameter of the aerial image of the pattern and a desired value (see Fig. 6));
computation, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, of a current performance (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0083], [0104], [0106], [0108]-[0111], [0114]-[0118], the steps of Fig. 6 are repeated, and the applied settings are used to determine a value of the aerial image of the pattern using simulation and the updated mirror settings); and
determination of a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance (Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. [0104], [0106], [0108], [0111], [0114]-[0118], the steps of Fig. 6 are repeated, and the difference between the determined value of the aerial image of the pattern and the desired value is determined).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the instructions configured to determine the pupil operate in an iterative manner, an iteration comprising: computation, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, of a current performance; and determination of a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance as taught by Engelen in the method including changing one or more degrees of freedom the plurality of pupil facet mirrors as taught by Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert since including wherein the determining of the pupil is an iterative process, the iteration comprising: computing, via modeling and/or simulation and based on the changed one or more degrees of freedom of the plurality of pupil facet mirrors, a current performance; and determining a current difference between the current performance and the reference performance is commonly used to optimize a lithographic process while producing high volumes of semiconductor devices using inline feedback to improve throughput (Engelen, paras. [0007]-[0010], [0107]-[0108]).
Claims 20 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert as applied to claims 15 and 28 above, and further in view of Cao et al. (US PGPub 2012/0327383, Cao hereinafter).
Regarding claim 20, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process.
Cao discloses wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process (Fig. 12, para. [0080], the illumination pupil is adjusted to match a reference at a selected time to reduce source pupil drift and CD drift).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process as taught by Cao in the method as taught by Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert since including wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process is commonly used to prevent drift in the critical dimensions produced by a lithography process over time (see Cao, para. [0080]).
Regarding claim 32, Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process.
Cao discloses wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process (Fig. 12, para. [0080], the illumination pupil is adjusted to match a reference at a selected time to reduce source pupil drift and CD drift).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process as taught by Cao in the method as taught by Kita as modified by Wischmeier in view of Schubert since including wherein the reference performance is obtained from reference imaging data for the apparatus determined at a particular time of the patterning process is commonly used to prevent drift in the critical dimensions produced by a lithography process over time (see Cao, para. [0080]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 15-34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Weidman et al. (US PGPub 2019/0056669) discloses a sensor arranged on a wafer table to measure intensity distribution of patterned beam of radiation patterned by a mask.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA A. RIDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7538. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30AM-5PM.
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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at (571)272-2303. 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.
/CHRISTINA A RIDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights