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 .
Response to Amendments/Arguments
Applicant’s amendments, see Pages 7-20, filed 10/20/2025, with respect to claims 1, 3-5, 7-14, 17, 19-22 and 24 under 35 USC 102(a)(2) and claims 2, 6, 15-16, 18, 23 and 25 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are sufficient to overcome the rejection of the claims. The rejection of claims 1-25 has been withdrawn. Claims 1-16 are found to be allowable. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for claims 17-25 in view of Pollak et al. (US 5287169) and Saraf et al. (US 10962470 B1).
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.
Claim(s) 17, 19-22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pollak et al. (US 5287169) in view of Saraf et al. (US 10962470 B1).
Regarding claim 17, Pollak discloses a metrology system, comprising: an illumination source (50) configured to provide an amount of illumination light to one or more structures disposed on a wafer (62) (Fig. 1-2; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 17);
a detector (56) configured to receive an amount of collected light from the one or more structures in response to the amount of illumination light and generate a set of measurement signals indicative of the amount of collected light (Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 12-20; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 17);
an electric field modulation subsystem including,
a first electrode (104) disposed above and spaced apart from a top surface of a wafer (Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 21-32);
a second electrode (101) electrically coupled to a bottom surface of the wafer (Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 21-32); and
a modulated high voltage source (54) electrically coupled to the first and second electrodes, the modulated high voltage source configured to provide a modulated high voltage signal across the first and second electrodes (Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 43-48), wherein an amplitude of the modulated high voltage signal is at least 1 kilovolt, wherein the modulated high voltage signal generates a modulated electric field between the first and second electrodes within a volume that includes the one or more structures disposed on the wafer while the illumination source provides the amount of illumination light to the one or more structures (Fig. 2; Col. 3, lines 62-68).
Pollak does not disclose an illumination source configured to provide an amount of modulated illumination light to one or more structures disposed on a wafer;
wherein the modulated high voltage signal generates a modulated electric field between the first and second electrodes within a volume that includes the one or more structures disposed on the wafer while the illumination source provides the amount of modulated illumination light to the one or more structures.
However, Saraf, in the field of endeavor of electro-reflectance, discloses an illumination source (32) configured to provide an amount of modulated illumination light to a sample (40) (Fig. 3; Abstract; Col. 12, lines 16-32 – where incident beam light from the light source is modulated by polarizer 33)
wherein the modulated high voltage signal generates a modulated electric field between the first and second electrodes (Fig. 3 shows potentiostat 46 comprises three electrodes WE, RE and CE) within a volume that includes the sample while the illumination source provides the amount of modulated illumination light to the sample (Fig. 3; Abstract; Col. 1, line 54-59; Col. 11, 19-34; Col. 13, lines 4-12 and 30-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pollak with a means to modulate the illumination beam, providing an apparatus with increased functionality for effectively characterizing material samples, providing insights into properties of the sample outside the measurement range of Pollak’s device.
Regarding claim 19, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the metrology system of Claim 17, as outlined above, and further discloses wherein the measurement is any of a spectroscopic ellipsometry measurement, a spectroscopic reflectometry measurement, an angle resolved spectroscopic reflectometry measurement, or any combination thereof (Pollak: Abstract).
Regarding claim 20, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the metrology system of Claim 17, as outlined above, and further discloses wherein the first electrode (104) includes a transparent, electrically conductive material, wherein the illumination light is transmitted through the transparent, electrically conductive material (Pollak: Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 25-32).
Regarding claim 21, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the metrology system of Claim 17, as outlined above, and further discloses wherein the first electrode (105) includes a highly reflective surface, wherein the illumination light is reflected by the highly reflective surface (Saraf: Fig. 2; Col. 7, lines 35-47 – where metals are inherently highly reflective).
Regarding claim 22, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the metrology system of Claim 17, as outlined above, and further discloses wherein the first electrode (204 – wire mesh) includes an aperture, wherein the illumination light passes through the aperture (Saraf: Fig. 9; Col. 7, lines 20-28).
Regarding claim 24, Pollak discloses a method comprising: providing an amount of illumination light to one or more structures disposed on a wafer (62) (Fig. 1-2; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 17);
generating a modulated electric field within a volume that includes the one or more structures disposed on the wafer while an illumination source (50) provides the amount of illumination light to one or more structures (Fig. 1; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 17), wherein the generating of the modulated electric field involves providing a modulated high voltage signal across a first electrode (104) disposed above and spaced apart from a top surface of the wafer and a second electrode (101) electrically coupled to a bottom surface of the wafer (Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 43-48), wherein an amplitude of the modulated high voltage signal is at least 1 kilovolt (Fig. 2; Col. 3, lines 62-68);
detecting an amount of collected light from the one or more structures in response to the amount of illumination light (Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 12-20; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 17); and
generating a set of measurement signals indicative of the amount of collected light (Col. 4, lines 12-20).
Pollak does not disclose providing an amount of modulated illumination light to one or more structures disposed on a wafer;
generating a modulated electric field within a volume that includes the one or more structures disposed on the wafer while an illumination source provides the amount of modulated illumination light to one or more structures.
However, Saraf, in the field of endeavor of electro-reflectance, discloses providing an amount of modulated illumination light to a sample (40) (Fig. 1; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 2);
generating a modulated electric field within a volume that includes a sample while an illumination source provides the amount of modulated illumination light to the sample (Fig. 3; Abstract; Col. 1, line 54-59; Col. 11, 19-34; Col. 13, lines 4-12 and 30-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pollak with a means to modulate the illumination beam, providing an apparatus with increased functionality for effectively characterizing material samples, providing insights into properties of the sample outside the measurement range of Pollak’s device.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pollak et al. (US 5287169) in view of Saraf et al. (US 10962470 B1) further in view of Yun et al. (US 2022/0082515 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the metrology system of claim 17, as outlined above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more structures includes a Gate All Around (GAA) structure.
However, Yun, in the same field of endeavor of spectroscopic reflectometry measurement systems and methods, discloses wherein one or more structures includes a Gate All Around (GAA) structure ([0073], lines 1-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pollak’s apparatus to measure GAA structures, improving its overall functionality.
Claim(s) 23 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pollak et al. (US 5287169) in view of Saraf et al. (US 10962470 B1) further in view of Teng et al. (US 2023/0105985 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the metrology system of Claim 17, as outlined above, but does not disclose wherein a difference between a frequency of optical modulation and a resonant frequency of a band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is less than 20% of a value of the resonant frequency of the band structure, and wherein a difference between a frequency of the modulated electric field and the resonant frequency of the band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is less than 20% of the value of the resonant frequency of the band structure.
However, Teng, in the same field of endeavor of spectroscopic reflectometry measurement systems and methods, discloses a metrology system wherein a difference between a frequency of optical modulation and a resonant frequency of a band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is near a value of the resonant frequency of a value of the resonant frequency of the band structure, and wherein a difference between a frequency of a modulated electric field and the resonant frequency of the band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is near a value of the resonant frequency of the value of the resonant frequency of the band structure ([0094], [0124], [0125]).
Teng does not explicitly disclose less than 20% of a value for either the difference between the modulated optical or electric field frequencies relative to the resonant frequency of the band structure, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use optimum range. Since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim is disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art; in this case, the use of a difference between the modulated optical or electric field frequencies relative to the resonant frequency of the band structure of less than 20% instead of any value approaching no difference (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233). Furthermore, modifying Pollak so that optical and/or electric field modulation frequencies are near a resonant frequency of a band structure of the one or more structures under test increases the response of the measured structures, improving the overall signal-to-noise ratio (Teng: [0094]).
Regarding claim 25, Pollak in view of Saraf discloses the method of claim 24, as outlined above, but does not disclose wherein a difference between a frequency of optical modulation and a resonant frequency of a band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is less than 20% of a value of the resonant frequency of the band structure, and wherein a difference between a frequency of the modulated electric field and the resonant frequency of the band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is less than 20% of the value of the resonant frequency of the band structure.
However, Teng, in the same field of endeavor of spectroscopic reflectometry measurement systems and methods, discloses wherein a difference between a frequency of optical modulation and a resonant frequency of a band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is near a value of the resonant frequency of the band structure, and wherein a difference between a frequency of a modulated electric field and the resonant frequency of the band structure of the one or more structures under measurement is near a value of the resonant frequency of the band structure ([0094], [0124], [0125]).
Teng does not explicitly disclose less than 20% of a value for either the difference between the modulated optical or electric field frequencies relative to the resonant frequency of the band structure, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use optimum range. Since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim is disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art; in this case, the use of a difference between the modulated optical or electric field frequencies relative to the resonant frequency of the band structure of less than 20% instead of any value approaching no difference (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233). Furthermore, modifying Pollak so that optical and/or electric field modulation frequencies are near a resonant frequency of a band structure of the one or more structures under test increases the response of the measured structures, improving the overall signal-to-noise ratio (Teng: [0094]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a measurement system comprising: an electric field modulation subsystem including, a first electrode disposed above and spaced apart from a top surface of a wafer; a second electrode electrically coupled to a bottom surface of the wafer; and a modulated high voltage source electrically coupled to the first and second electrodes, the modulated high voltage source configured to provide a modulated high voltage signal across the first and second electrodes, wherein an amplitude of the modulated high voltage signal is at least 1 kilovolt, wherein the modulated high voltage signal generates a modulated electric field between the first and second electrodes within a volume that includes one or more structures disposed on the wafer; an illumination source configured to provide an amount of illumination light to the one or more structures while the electric field modulation subsystem generates the modulated electric field between the first and second electrodes; a detector configured to receive an amount of collected light from the one or more structures in response to the amount of illumination light and generate a set of measurement signals indicative of the amount of collected light; an optical modulation element disposed in an optical path from the illumination source to the detector, wherein a frequency of optical modulation of the amount of illumination light, the amount of collected light, or both, is different from a frequency of the modulated electric field; and a computing system configured to: receive the set of measurement signals associated with a measurement of the one or more structures; and estimate a value of a parameter of interest of the one or more structures based on the set of measurement signals.
With regard to the above claim, US 5287169 to Pollack discloses an electroreflectance (ER) measurement system which comprises a broadband illumination source (50) configured to provide an amount of illumination light to one or more structures (Fig. 1; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 2), a detector (56) configured to receive an amount of collected light from the one or more structures in response to the amount of illumination light and generate a set of measurement signals indicative of the amount of collected light (Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 12-20; Col. 4, line 51 – Col. 5, line 2), a first electrode (104) and a second electrode (101) above a top surface and electrically coupled to a bottom surface of a wafer, respectively (Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 21-32), a modulated high voltage source (54) electrically coupled to the first and second electrodes (Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 43-48), and a computing system (70) configured to receive the set of measurement signals associated with a measurement of the one or more structures (Col. 4, lines 12-20) and estimate a value of a parameter of interest of the one or more structures based on the set of measurement signals (Col. 4, lines 35-48). Pollack, however, does not teach or suggest an optical modulation element in the optical path from the illumination source to the detector wherein a frequency of optical modulation of the amount of illumination light, the amount of collected light, or both, is different from a frequency of the modulated electric field. US 8300227 B2 to Chism II discloses a method and apparatus for z-scan photoreflectance where the apparatus (see Fig. 2) comprises a pump diode laser (203), a probe diode laser (204), a lock-in amplifier (202) for driving and modulating the pump laser, a photodiode (212) and a computer to control measurement parameters and record reflectivity changes (Fig. 2; Col. 14, line 53 – Col. 15, line 6). Specifically, Chism II discloses a photo-reflectance technique where probe wavelengths are utilized such that photo-reflectance signals arising from modulated surface electric fields, induced by the pump laser, of a sample allows for the characterization of active electronic properties of the sample. Though Chism II describes modulating an illumination source/pump source and the electromodulation of a sample, it does not appear that Chism II explicitly discloses an optical modulation element disposed in an optical path from the illumination source to the detector, wherein a frequency of optical modulation of the amount of illumination light, the amount of collected light, or both, is different from a frequency of the modulated electric field. US 10962470 B1 to Saraf discloses an apparatus for characterizing local electrochemical processes of a liquid sample comprising a laser (32), a polarizer (33) included in the beam path, a series of optical components for focusing a microspot (38) onto a sample, and an electrochemical setup using a potentiaostat (46) with three electrodes WE, RE and CE, and a power supply (47) for creating an oscillating potential in the sample, resulting in changes in the reflected beam relative to the incident beam (Fig. 3; Abstract; Col. 12, lines 16-32; Col. 13, lines 4-12 and 30-56). Though Saraf introduces a polarizer in the optical beam path of the incident light and measuring changes in the polarization of the reflected light, with respect to the applied oscillatory potential, it does not appear that Saraf explicitly discloses an optical modulation element disposed in an optical path from the illumination source to the detector, wherein a frequency of optical modulation of the amount of illumination light, the amount of collected light, or both, is different from a frequency of the modulated electric field. US 5991044 to Zhang discloses a method and apparatus for measuring the characteristics of microstructures by modulating a sample using a modulated source and utilizing a microscope (19) and direct probe light source (15) to detect a reflected light from the sample (Fig. 1; Col. 3, lines 43-55). A computer (115) is used to control the modulation frequency of the modulated source and Zhang describes one embodiment where the modulation source is a laser (14) (Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 11-28) and a second embodiment where the modulation source is an electromodulator (118) with a first and second electrode/conductive plates on either side of the sample (Fig. 2, 3; Col. 4, line 60 – Col. 5, line 34). However, Zhang does not appear to disclose modulation of the probe source and, specifically, an optical modulation element disposed in an optical path from the illumination source to the detector, wherein a frequency of optical modulation of the amount of illumination light, the amount of collected light, or both, is different from a frequency of the modulated electric field.
All combinations of prior art references listed above or cited failed to specifically disclose the limitations emphasized in bold wording above. Therefore, the Examiner has failed to find prior art that is analogous to the invention claimed or any motivation suggesting a similar system or purpose. As such claim 1 has been found allowable. Claims 2-16 are allowed due to their dependence on claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHER YAZBACK whose telephone number is (703)756-1456. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571)270-5789. 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.
/MAHER YAZBACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2877 /MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877