DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 13, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 6, 8, 17-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. [US 2008/0210888] in view of Pierrat et al. [US 2001/0002304], Chen et al. [US 2012/0264066], and Minamide et al. [US 2009/0239159].
For claim 1, Inoue teaches a method (see Figs. 1-4), comprising:
receiving data defining one or more main features for a lithographic process (design data, see [0047]), the one or more main features including one or more polygons (lines of the LSP, see Fig. 4);
determining a position and a width of two or more auxiliary features based on the received data defining the one or more main features (initial auxiliary pattern width for correction of the line, see [0055]-[0057]);
determining a pattern bias to be applied for the two or more auxiliary features during the lithographic process, the pattern bias of the two or more auxiliary features determined based on the position and the width of the one or more main features (correcting the line width and the position in the design data of auxiliary patterns until the line width the line patterns is uniform, see [0057]);
converting the received data corresponding to the one or more main features, the two or more auxiliary features, and the pattern bias to a virtual mask file (design data is corrected and output to the drive system 30, see [0057]-[0060]); and
patterning a substrate using the virtual mask file in a maskless lithography device (design data provided to the variable mask VM for imaging of the substrate P, see Fig. 1 and [0058]-[0060]).
Inoue fails to teach determining a pattern bias to be applied for the one or more main features during the lithographic process, the pattern bias of the one or more main features determined based on the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features.
Pierrat teaches determining a pattern bias to be applied for the one or more main features during the lithographic process (changed of CD of main feature 12, see Figs. 1 and 2, change in main feature 12 to maintain D2, see Fig, 5), the pattern bias of the one or more main features determined based on the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features (bias determined by relative position between the main feature and auxiliary feature, gap D2, and the width S of the features 14 are maintained, see [0013]-[0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the adjustment of main pattern instead of the assist features as taught by Pierrat in the correction of design data as taught by Inoue in order to optimize the correction of the resolved feature width by adjusting a single element instead of multiple elements.
Inoue fails to teach the lithographic process including exposure using at least two spatial light modulators of at least two of image projection systems of a processing unit, the processing unit is a pattern generator configured to receive a virtual mask file; and patterning a substrate using the virtual mask file in a maskless lithography device including the processing unit, the processing unit receiving the virtual mask file, and the substrate patterned by exposing the substrate to light modulated from the at least two spatial light modulators of the at least two image projection systems.
Chen teaches the lithographic process including exposure using at least two spatial light modulators of at least two of image projection systems of a processing unit (a plurality of spatial light modulator (SLM) imaging units, where each of the plurality of SLM imaging units includes one or more projection lenses, see [0019]), the processing unit is a pattern generator configured to receive a virtual mask file; and patterning a substrate using the virtual mask file in a maskless lithography device including the processing unit, the processing unit receiving the virtual mask file, and the substrate patterned by exposing the substrate to light modulated from the at least two spatial light modulators of the at least two image projection systems (parallel image writer system further includes a controller configured to control the plurality of SLM imaging units, where the controller further includes logic for receiving a mask data pattern to be written to a substrate, logic for processing the mask data pattern to form a plurality of partitioned mask data patterns corresponding to different areas of the substrate, logic for assigning one or more SLM imaging units to handle each of the partitioned mask data pattern, and logic for controlling the plurality of SLM imaging units to write the plurality of partitioned mask data patterns to the substrate in parallel, see [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the plurality of imaging units as taught by Chen in the exposure unit as taught by Inoue because the parallel imaging allows for imaging large area substrates, such flat panel displays, while providing varied depth of focus that can accommodate the uneven surface of the substrate, thereby increasing throughput and accuracy.
Inoue fails to teach one or more first auxiliary features positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features have a greater width than one or more second auxiliary features that are not positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features, and wherein the one or more first auxiliary features are separated from the main feature edges by more than a threshold distance such that the one or more first auxiliary features are not printed.
Minamide teaches one or more first auxiliary features (sub-features 362 and 363 see Fig. 19) positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features (between main features 232 and 233) have a greater width (rule 3, increased width from the initial width set for the sub-features, see [0141]-[0148], other rules reduce the width or leave the sub-features unchanged, see Fig. 20) than one or more second auxiliary features (the remaining unchanged or narrowed sub-resolution features) that are not positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features, and wherein the one or more first auxiliary features are separated from the main feature edges by more than a threshold distance such that the one or more first auxiliary features are not printed (spacing sub-features from the main pattern edge for maintaining sub resolution margin, see [0099] and [0135]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the auxiliary line widths as taught by Minamide in the auxiliary lines as taught by Inoue in order to resolve isolated main features that have large pitch relative to other main features that have a lesser or no pitch, while also maintaining the desired spacing between the main features and assist features.
For claim 17, Inoue teaches a system (see Figs. 1-4), comprising:
a moveable stage (ST) configured to support a substrate having a photoresist disposed thereon; and
a processing unit (10, 28, VM, PL) disposed over the moveable stage configured to print a virtual mask file provided by a controller (20, 30, 32) in communication with the processing unit, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive data defining one or more main features for a lithographic process (design data, see [0047]), the one or more main features including one or more polygons (rectangular lines of the LSP, see Fig. 4);
determine a position and a width of two or more auxiliary features based on the data defining the one or more main features (initial auxiliary pattern width for correction of the line, see [0055]-[0057]);
determine a pattern bias to be applied for the two or more auxiliary features during the lithographic process, the pattern bias of the two or more auxiliary features determined based on the position and the width of the one or more main features (correcting the line width and the position in the design data of auxiliary patterns until the line width the line patterns is uniform, see [0057]);
convert the received data corresponding to the one or more main features, the two or more auxiliary features, and the pattern bias to the virtual mask file (design data is corrected and output to the drive system 30, see [0057]-[0060]); and
pattern a substrate using the virtual mask file with the processing unit device (design data provided to the variable mask VM for imaging of the substrate P, see Fig. 1 and [0058]-[0060]).
Inoue fails to teach a pattern bias to be applied for the one or more main features during the lithographic process, the pattern bias of the one or more main features determined based on the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features.
Pierrat teaches determining a pattern bias to be applied for the one or more main features during the lithographic process (changed of CD of main feature 12, see Figs. 1 and 2, change in main feature 12 to maintain D2, see Fig, 5), the pattern bias of the one or more main features determined based on the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features (bias determined by relative position between the main feature and auxiliary feature, gap D2, and the width S of the features 14 are maintained, see [0013]-[0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the adjustment of main pattern instead of the assist features as taught by Pierrat in the correction of design data as taught by Inoue in order to optimize the correction of the resolved feature width by adjusting a single element instead of multiple elements.
Inoue fails to teach the processing unit comprising at least two spatial light modulators of at least two image projection systems, wherein the processing unit is configured to receive the virtual mask file and the substrate is to be patterned by exposing the substrate to light modulated from the at least two spatial light modulators of the at least two image projection systems.
Chen teaches the processing unit comprising at least two spatial light modulators of at least two image projection systems (a plurality of spatial light modulator (SLM) imaging units, where each of the plurality of SLM imaging units includes one or more projection lenses, see [0019]), wherein the processing unit is configured to receive the virtual mask file and the substrate is to be patterned by exposing the substrate to light modulated from the at least two spatial light modulators of the at least two image projection systems (parallel image writer system further includes a controller configured to control the plurality of SLM imaging units, where the controller further includes logic for receiving a mask data pattern to be written to a substrate, logic for processing the mask data pattern to form a plurality of partitioned mask data patterns corresponding to different areas of the substrate, logic for assigning one or more SLM imaging units to handle each of the partitioned mask data pattern, and logic for controlling the plurality of SLM imaging units to write the plurality of partitioned mask data patterns to the substrate in parallel, see [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the plurality of imaging units as taught by Chen in the exposure unit as taught by Inoue because the parallel imaging allows for imaging large area substrates, such flat panel displays, while providing varied depth of focus that can accommodate the uneven surface of the substrate, thereby increasing throughput and accuracy.
Inoue fails to teach one or more first auxiliary features positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features have a greater width than one or more second auxiliary features that are not positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features, and wherein the one or more first auxiliary features are separated from the main feature edges by more than a threshold distance such that the one or more first auxiliary features are not printed.
Minamide teaches one or more first auxiliary features (sub-features 362 and 363 see Fig. 19) positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features (between main features 232 and 233) have a greater width (rule 3, increased width from the initial width set for the sub-features, see [0141]-[0148], other rules reduce the width or leave the sub-features unchanged, see Fig. 20) than one or more second auxiliary features (the remaining unchanged or narrowed sub-resolution features) that are not positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features, and wherein the one or more first auxiliary features are separated from the main feature edges by more than a threshold distance such that the one or more first auxiliary features are not printed (spacing sub-features from the main pattern edge for maintaining sub resolution margin, see [0099] and [0135]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the auxiliary line widths as taught by Minamide in the auxiliary lines as taught by Inoue in order to resolve isolated main features that have large pitch relative to other main features that have a lesser or no pitch, while also maintaining the desired spacing between the main features and assist features.
For claims 6 and 18, Inoue teaches processing the substrate by developing or etching the substrate to form a pattern on the substrate (see [0078]).
For claims 8 and 19, Inoue teaches the width of the two or more auxiliary features is less than a critical dimension of the one or more main features (sub resolution features AP1 and AP2, see Fig. 4 and [0055]).
For claim 21, in the combination, Minamide teaches at least one of the two or more auxiliary features is oriented substantially non-parallel to the main feature edges (sub features 353 and 351 are oriented in a perpendicular direction relative to the edges of the main features 232 and 233 that sub features 362 and 363 are between, see Fig. 19).
Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Pierrat, Chen, Minamide, and Liebmann et al. [US 2004/0170905].
For claim 10, Inoue teaches a method, comprising:
receiving data defining one or more main features for a lithographic process (design data, see [0047]), the one or more main features including one or more polygons (rectangular lines of the LSP, see Fig. 4);
determining a position and a width of two or more auxiliary features based on the received data defining the one or more main features (initial auxiliary pattern width for correction of the line, see [0055]-[0057]);
determining a pattern bias to be applied for the two or more auxiliary features during the lithographic process, the pattern bias of the two or more auxiliary features determined based on the position and the width of the one or more main features (correcting the line width and the position in the design data of auxiliary patterns until the line width the line patterns is uniform, see [0057]);
converting the received data corresponding to the one or more main features, the two or more auxiliary features, and the pattern bias to a virtual mask file (design data is corrected and output to the drive system 30, see [0057]-[0060]); and
patterning a substrate using the virtual mask file in a maskless lithography device (design data provided to the variable mask VM for imaging of the substrate P, see Fig. 1 and [0058]-[0060]).
Inoue fails to teach inputting the received data to a lithography model constructed to predict an aerial image and resist profile based on the received data; determining a position and a width of one or more two or more auxiliary features using numerical calculations to solve the lithography model, wherein the position and the width determined correspond to a maximum intensity log-slope (ILS) or depth-of-focus of the one or more main features formed in a photoresist of a substrate based on the received data; determining a pattern bias to be applied for the one or more main features during the lithographic process, the pattern bias of the one or more main features determined using numerical calculations to solve the lithography model, wherein the pattern bias determined corresponds to a maximum ILS or depth-of-focus of the one or more main features formed in the photoresist of the substrate based on the received data.
Pierrat teaches determining a position and a width of two or more auxiliary features, wherein the position and the width determined correspond to a maximum intensity log-slope (ILS) or depth-of-focus of the one or more main features formed in a photoresist of a substrate based on the received data (proximity effects-correcting features 14 each have respective width dimensions and the desired spacing D1 is conducted to optimize the depth of focus (DOF) and image log slope in the lithographic process, see [0013] and [0014]); determining a pattern bias to be applied for the one or more main features during the lithographic process, wherein the pattern bias determined corresponds to a maximum ILS or depth-of-focus of the one or more main features formed in the photoresist of the substrate based on the received data (after definition of the desired spacing which, in a preferred embodiment, is selected to achieve a desired depth of focus (DOF), at least portions of one or more of the sides or edges of main feature 20 are moved or repositioned to define a second width dimension, see [0021] and [0022] and Fig. 2 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the adjustment of main pattern instead of the assist features as taught by Pierrat in the correction of design data as taught by Inoue in order to optimize the correction of the resolved feature width by adjusting a single element instead of multiple elements.
Liebmann teaches inputting the received data to a lithography model (Model-Based SRAF process, see [0090] and Figs. 5 and 9) constructed to predict an aerial image and resist profile based on the received data (simulation based on input mask data, see [0088] and [0094]); determining a position and a width of two or more auxiliary features using numerical calculations to solve the lithography model (application SRAF elements to modify mask to compensate for the error performed as an iterative process until no error is detected, see [0086]-[0100] and [0129]); and the pattern bias of the one or more main features determined using numerical calculations to solve the lithography model (main pattern biasing in regions of SRAF loss, see [0125]-[0129]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the model based correction as taught by Liebmann in the auxiliary placement as taught by Inoue in order to determine positioning of the auxiliary features to resolve a more accurate pattern.
Inoue fails to teach the lithographic process including exposure using at least two spatial light modulators of at least two of image projection systems of a processing unit, the processing unit is a pattern generator configured to receive a virtual mask file; and patterning a substrate using the virtual mask file in a maskless lithography device including the processing unit, the processing unit receiving the virtual mask file, and the substrate patterned by exposing the substrate to light modulated from the at least two spatial light modulators of the at least two image projection systems.
Chen teaches the lithographic process including exposure using at least two spatial light modulators of at least two of image projection systems of a processing unit (a plurality of spatial light modulator (SLM) imaging units, where each of the plurality of SLM imaging units includes one or more projection lenses, see [0019]), the processing unit is a pattern generator configured to receive a virtual mask file; and patterning a substrate using the virtual mask file in a maskless lithography device including the processing unit, the processing unit receiving the virtual mask file, and the substrate patterned by exposing the substrate to light modulated from the at least two spatial light modulators of the at least two image projection systems (parallel image writer system further includes a controller configured to control the plurality of SLM imaging units, where the controller further includes logic for receiving a mask data pattern to be written to a substrate, logic for processing the mask data pattern to form a plurality of partitioned mask data patterns corresponding to different areas of the substrate, logic for assigning one or more SLM imaging units to handle each of the partitioned mask data pattern, and logic for controlling the plurality of SLM imaging units to write the plurality of partitioned mask data patterns to the substrate in parallel, see [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the plurality of imaging units as taught by Chen in the exposure unit as taught by Inoue because the parallel imaging allows for imaging large area substrates, such flat panel displays, while providing varied depth of focus that can accommodate the uneven surface of the substrate, thereby increasing throughput and accuracy.
Inoue fails to teach one or more first auxiliary features positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features have a greater width than one or more second auxiliary features that are not positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features, and wherein the one or more first auxiliary features are separated from the main feature edges by more than a threshold distance such that the one or more first auxiliary features are not printed.
Minamide teaches one or more first auxiliary features (sub-features 362 and 363 see Fig. 19) positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features (between main features 232 and 233) have a greater width (rule 3, increased width from the initial width set for the sub-features, see [0141]-[0148], other rules reduce the width or leave the sub-features unchanged, see Fig. 20) than one or more second auxiliary features (the remaining unchanged or narrowed sub-resolution features) that are not positioned between main feature edges of two adjacent main features, and wherein the one or more first auxiliary features are separated from the main feature edges by more than a threshold distance such that the one or more first auxiliary features are not printed (spacing sub-features from the main pattern edge for maintaining sub resolution margin, see [0099] and [0135]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the auxiliary line widths as taught by Minamide in the auxiliary lines as taught by Inoue in order to resolve isolated main features that have large pitch relative to other main features that have a lesser or no pitch, while also maintaining the desired spacing between the main features and assist features.
For claim 11, in the combination of Inoue and Liebmann, Liebmann teaches the determining the position of the two or more auxiliary features, the width of the two or more auxiliary features, and the pattern bias includes providing inputs to the lithography model of a pattern modification software application (method and software and CAD system, see [0040]), the pattern modification software application operable to form a mask pattern with the one or more main features and the two or more auxiliary features (step 118, see Fig. 5 and 9).
For claim 12, in the combination of Inoue Pierrat and Liebman, Liebman teaches use of the pattern modification software application (method and software and CAD system, see [0040]), while Pierrat teaches predicts the pattern bias required to maintain a critical dimension for the one or more main features based on the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features (achieve a desired transferred main feature dimension, see [0015]).
For claim 13, Inoue teaches the width of the two or more auxiliary features is less than a critical dimension of the one or more main features (sub resolution features AP1 and AP2, see Fig. 4 and [0055]).
For claim 14, Inoue teaches processing the substrate by developing or etching the substrate to form a pattern on the substrate (see [0078]).
Claims 2, 3, 9, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Pierrat, Chen, and Minamide as applied to claims 1 and 17 above and in further view of Yasuzato [US 2006/0246362].
For claims 2, 3, and 20, Inoue teaches a controller for generating a mask pattern, but fails to teach determining the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features includes referencing a lookup table, the lookup table including empirical data relating to the one or more main features, wherein the lookup table determines the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features based on a maximum of one or both of an intensity log-slope (ILS) and depth-of-focus of the one or more main features formed in a photoresist of a substrate based on the received data.
Yasuzato teaches determining the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features includes referencing a lookup table, the lookup table including empirical data relating to the one or more main features (line width and space with width and positioning of the auxiliary pattern, see Table 1 and [0060]-[0067]), wherein the lookup table determines the position and the width of the two or more auxiliary features based on a maximum of one or both of an intensity log-slope (ILS) and depth-of-focus of the one or more main features formed in a photoresist of a substrate based on the received data (increasing depth of focus, see [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the rules based auxiliary feature placement as taught by Yasuzato in the auxiliary placement as taught by Inoue in order to determine positioning of the auxiliary features to resolve a more accurate pattern.
For claim 9, Inoue fails to explicitly teach the two or more auxiliary features construct a 180-degree phase interference between the two or more auxiliary features and a main feature edge of the one or more main features.
Yasuzato teaches the two or more auxiliary features construct a 180-degree phase interference between the two or more auxiliary features and a main feature edge of the one or more main features (two beam interference, see [0061] and [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the auxiliary feature for interference with the main patterns as taught by Yasuzato in the auxiliary placement as taught by Inoue in order to resolve a more accurate pattern without imaging the auxiliary pattern.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Pierrat, Chen, and Minamide as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Liebmann et al. [US 2002/0091985, herein after Liebmann2].
For claim 5, Inoue fails to teach the determining the pattern bias includes referencing a lookup table, the lookup table including empirical data relating to biasing for maintaining a predefined critical dimension for the one or more main features.
Liebmann2 teaches the determining the pattern bias includes referencing a lookup table (rules table generated for features having size range, see [0043]), the lookup table including empirical data relating to biasing for maintaining a predefined critical dimension for the one or more main features (main feature biasing based on space, see [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the rule table with pitch biasing and dimension rage as taught by Liebmann2 in the pattern biasing as taught by Inoue in view of Pierrat in order to account for more conditions within the process window.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Pierrat, Chen, and Minamide as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Makarovic et al. [US 2006/0269116].
For claim 7, Inoue fails to teach the converting the received data of the one or more main features and the received data indicating the pattern bias to the virtual mask file includes converting each of the one or more polygons within the received data to one or more quadrilateral polygons to generate the virtual mask file.
Makarovic teaches the converting the received data of the one or more main features and the received data indicating the pattern bias to the virtual mask file includes converting each of the one or more polygons within the received data to one or more quadrilateral polygons to generate the virtual mask file (mask data converted to trapezoids, see [0114] and [0115] and Fig. 8-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to convert the received data for complex polygons as taught by Makarovic when providing virtual mask data as taught by Inoue in order to remove overlap in pattern date to ensure that pixels are not rasterized more than once.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Pierrat, Chen, Liebman, and Minamide as applied to claim 10 above, and in further view of Makarovic.
For claim 15, Inoue fails to teach the converting the received data of the one or more main features and the received data indicating the pattern bias to the virtual mask file includes converting each of the one or more polygons within the received data to one or more quadrilateral polygons to generate the virtual mask file.
Makarovic teaches the converting the received data of the one or more main features and the received data indicating the pattern bias to the virtual mask file includes converting each of the one or more polygons within the received data to one or more quadrilateral polygons to generate the virtual mask file (mask data converted to trapezoids, see [0114] and [0115] and Fig. 8-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to convert the data for complex polygons as taught by Makarovic when providing virtual mask data as taught by Inoue in order to remove overlap in pattern date to ensure that pixels are not rasterized more than once.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue in view of Pierrat, Chen, Liebman, and Minamide as applied to claim 10 above, and in further view of Yasuzato.
For claim 16, Inoue fails to explicitly teach the two or more auxiliary features construct a 180-degree phase interference between the two or more auxiliary features and a main feature edge of the one or more main features.
Yasuzato teaches the two or more auxiliary features construct a 180-degree phase interference between the two or more auxiliary features and a main feature edge of the one or more main features (two beam interference, see [0061] and [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the auxiliary feature for interference with the main patterns as taught by Yasuzato in the auxiliary placement as taught by Inoue in order to resolve a more accurate pattern without imaging the auxiliary pattern.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 10, and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Minamide, instead of Nolscher, is relied upon to teach the salient features of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liebmann et al. [US 6,413,683] teaches a method for adjusting assist features in positions between the main features and assist features that are not between main features.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven H Whitesell whose telephone number is (571)270-3942. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM (MST).
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/Steven H Whitesell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights