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 .
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.
Priority
This application is a continuation of PCT/JP2020/023003 filed on 06/11/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/07/2023 and 09/26/2024 were filed after the filing date of this application on 11/08/2022. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 14 recites “The pulse width extension device according to claim 1, wherein the first surface is parallel to the gravity direction.” Applicant does not define “a first surface” or “the gravity direction” in any claim. Accordingly, it is unclear what surface applicant is referring too. For the purpose of this Office Action, the Office will interpret the claim as “a first surface of the first delay optical system or the second delay optical system is parallel to a gravity direction”
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Partlo et al. (US20090080476A1), hereafter Partlo, in view of Ershov et al. (US20100108913A1), hereafter Ershov.
Regarding claim 1, Partlo discloses a pulse width extension device (Figs. 3A and 3B; [0016]; [0032], comprising: a first delay optical system (Fig. 3A element 150) including a first beam splitter ([0032]) and a plurality of first concave mirrors (Figs. 3A elements 154, 158, 162, 168, 180, 182; [0035]), and having a first loop optical path formed on a first plane, the first loop optical path being configured by the first beam splitter and the plurality of first concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 152, 156, 160, 16, 182, 186); a second delay optical system (Fig. 3A element 190) including a second beam splitter ([0033]) and a plurality of second concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 172, 176, 194, 195, 198, 202; [0035]), and having a second loop optical path formed on a second plane parallel to and different from the first plane (Fig. 3A element 150 is formed in a plane that is parallel to the plane 190 is formed in), the second loop optical path being configured by the second beam splitter and the plurality of second concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 178, 174, 200, 193, 192, 204, 196). Partlo does not explicitly disclose a first beam rotation mechanism arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system and the second delay optical system and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane. However, Ershov discloses a first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 380a), a second delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 420a), and a first beam rotation mechanism (Fig. 33 element 412a) arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 380a) and the second delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 420a) and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane (Fig. 33 inset 414a show the beam being rotated 90 degrees compared to the beam shown in inset 410a and inset 414 is perpendicular, the profile is into and out of the page, to the plane of the delay 420 which lies in the page). An advantage is to lower coherence in order to reduce speckle in the beam on a workpiece ([0225]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Partlo with a first beam rotation mechanism arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system and the second delay optical system and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane as disclosed by Ershov in order to lower coherence in order to reduce speckle in the beam on a workpiece.
Regarding claim 4, Ershov further discloses a second beam rotation mechanism ahead of the first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 376a), wherein the second beam rotation mechanism is configured to rotate a beam of the pulse laser light to enter the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the first loop optical path is perpendicular to the first plane (Fig. 33 element 378a shows the longitudinal direction going into and out of the page while the loop is in the page; Compare also 374a and 378a).
Regarding claim 5, Ershov further discloses the second beam rotation mechanism includes two or more mirrors (Fig. 33 element 376a shows at least 4 mirrors).
Regarding claim 6, Partlo further discloses the first delay optical system includes four or more of the first concave mirrors (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 150 show at least 6 concave mirrors; [0035]).
Regarding claim 7, Partlo further discloses the first delay optical system includes an even number of pairs of the first concave mirrors (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 150 show at least 6 concave mirrors; [0035]), the first concave mirrors of each pair being arranged to face each other (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 154 and 184 face each other, elements 162 and 176 face each other, and elements 180 and 158 face each other).
Regarding claim 8, Partlo further discloses the second delay optical system includes four or more of the second concave mirrors (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 190 show at least 6 concave mirrors; [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, Partlo further discloses the second delay optical system includes an even number of pairs of the second concave mirrors (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 190 show at least 6 concave mirrors; [0035]), the second concave mirrors of each pair being arranged to face each other (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 202 and 194 face each other, elements 172 and 168 face each other, and elements 195 and 198 face each other).
Regarding claim 10, Ershov further discloses the first beam rotation mechanism includes two or more mirrors (Fig. 33 element 412a shows at least 4 mirrors).
Regarding claim 11, Ershov further discloses the first beam rotation mechanism includes four or more mirrors (Fig. 33 element 412a shows at least 4 mirrors).
Regarding claim 12, Partlo in view of Ershov do not explicitly disclose an angle formed between incident light and reflection light of at least one mirror among the four or more mirrors configuring the first beam rotation mechanism is 45 degrees. However, Ershov discloses that the angle between the incident light and the reflection light of at least one mirror may be optimized based on the configuration of the beam rotation mechanism (Compare Fig. 31 and 32). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Partlo and Ershov with an angle formed between incident light and reflection light of at least one mirror among the four or more mirrors configuring the first beam rotation mechanism is 45 degrees, since Ershov discloses that the angle between the incident light and the reflection light of at least one mirror may be optimized based on the configuration of the beam rotation mechanism in order to achieve the desired optical path and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 13, Partlo further discloses the pulse width extension device is arranged on a back side of a laser device which outputs the pulse laser light (Fig. 1 element 62 is on the output side of the laser device).
Regarding claim 14, Partlo further discloses the first surface is parallel to the gravity direction (Fig. 4 shows the mirror mounts having a vertical surface that is parallel to the gravity direction as evidenced by the base 92B).
Regarding claim 15, Partlo further discloses the first delay optical system includes 2n pieces of the first concave mirrors and the second delay optical system includes 2m pieces of the second concave mirrors (See annotated Fig. 3A below), where each of n and m is an integer of two or more (See annotated Fig. 3A below), the 2n pieces of the first concave mirrors are arranged into rows, each including n pieces of the first concave mirrors (See annotated Fig. 3A below), as being faced to each other in a second axis direction (See annotated Fig. 3A below), and the n pieces of the first concave mirrors on each of the rows of the first concave mirrors are arranged in a third axis direction (See annotated Fig. 3A below), and the 2m pieces of the second concave mirrors are arranged into rows (See annotated Fig. 3A below), each including m pieces of the second concave mirrors (See annotated Fig. 3A below), as being faced to each other in the second axis direction (See annotated Fig. 3A below), and the m pieces of the second concave mirrors on each of the rows of the second concave mirrors are arranged in the third axis direction (See annotated Fig. 3A below), where a first axis direction represents a direction perpendicular to the first plane (See annotated Fig. 3A below), and the second axis direction and the third axis direction represents two directions perpendicular to the first axis direction and perpendicular to each other (See annotated Fig. 3A below).
PNG
media_image1.png
487
411
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Partlo further discloses the pulse laser light is incident on the first beam splitter in the first axis direction (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 140 and 152; [0032]).
Regarding claim 17, Partlo further discloses the pulse laser light is incident on the first beam splitter in the third axis direction (Figs. 3A and 3B elements 186 and 142; [0032]).
Regarding claim 18, Ershov further discloses a folded propagation optical system (Fig. 33 elements unlabeled fold mirror above element 392a and 400a), arranged on an optical path between the first beam splitter and the first beam rotation mechanism (Fig. 33 element 400a and unlabeled folding mirror are between unshown splitter in element 380a and element 412a), through which the pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system propagates, wherein an optical path formed in the folded propagation optical system is formed on the same plane as the first plane (Fig. 33 the folding path and the first delay element are formed in the plane of the page).
Regarding claim 19, Partlo discloses a laser device (Title; Fig. 1) comprising: a laser oscillator configured to output pulse laser light (Fig. 1 element 30; Abstract); and a pulse width extension device (Figs. 3A and 3B; [0016]; [0032], comprising: a first delay optical system (Fig. 3A element 150) including a first beam splitter ([0032]) and a plurality of first concave mirrors (Figs. 3A elements 154, 158, 162, 168, 180, 182; [0035]), and having a first loop optical path formed on a first plane, the first loop optical path being configured by the first beam splitter and the plurality of first concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 152, 156, 160, 16, 182, 186); a second delay optical system (Fig. 3A element 190) including a second beam splitter ([0033]) and a plurality of second concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 172, 176, 194, 195, 198, 202; [0035]), and having a second loop optical path formed on a second plane parallel to and different from the first plane (Fig. 3A element 150 is formed in a plane that is parallel to the plane 190 is formed in), the second loop optical path being configured by the second beam splitter and the plurality of second concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 178, 174, 200, 193, 192, 204, 196). Partlo does not explicitly disclose a first beam rotation mechanism arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system and the second delay optical system and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane. However, Ershov discloses a first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 380a), a second delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 420a), and a first beam rotation mechanism (Fig. 33 element 412a) arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 380a) and the second delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 420a) and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane (Fig. 33 inset 414a show the beam being rotated 90 degrees compared to the beam shown in inset 410a and inset 414 is perpendicular, the profile is into and out of the page, to the plane of the delay 420 which lies in the page). An advantage is to lower coherence in order to reduce speckle in the beam on a workpiece ([0225]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Partlo with a first beam rotation mechanism arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system and the second delay optical system and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane as disclosed by Ershov in order to lower coherence in order to reduce speckle in the beam on a workpiece.
Regarding claim 20, Partlo discloses an electronic device manufacturing method ([0021]), comprising: generating laser light with a pulse width extended using a laser device (Fig. 1; Abstract); outputting the laser light to an exposure apparatus ([0021]); and exposing a photosensitive substrate to the laser light in the exposure apparatus to manufacture an electronic device ([0021]), the laser device (Title; Fig. 1) including: a first delay optical system (Fig. 3A element 150) including a first beam splitter ([0032]) and a plurality of first concave mirrors (Figs. 3A elements 154, 158, 162, 168, 180, 182; [0035]), and having a first loop optical path formed on a first plane, the first loop optical path being configured by the first beam splitter and the plurality of first concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 152, 156, 160, 16, 182, 186); a second delay optical system (Fig. 3A element 190) including a second beam splitter ([0033]) and a plurality of second concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 172, 176, 194, 195, 198, 202; [0035]), and having a second loop optical path formed on a second plane parallel to and different from the first plane (Fig. 3A element 150 is formed in a plane that is parallel to the plane 190 is formed in), the second loop optical path being configured by the second beam splitter and the plurality of second concave mirrors (Fig. 3A elements 178, 174, 200, 193, 192, 204, 196). Partlo does not explicitly disclose a first beam rotation mechanism arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system and the second delay optical system and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane. However, Ershov discloses a first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 380a), a second delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 420a), and a first beam rotation mechanism (Fig. 33 element 412a) arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 380a) and the second delay optical system (Fig. 33 element 420a) and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane (Fig. 33 inset 414a show the beam being rotated 90 degrees compared to the beam shown in inset 410a and inset 414 is perpendicular, the profile is into and out of the page, to the plane of the delay 420 which lies in the page). An advantage is to lower coherence in order to reduce speckle in the beam on a workpiece ([0225]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Partlo with a first beam rotation mechanism arranged on an optical path between the first delay optical system and the second delay optical system and configured to rotate a beam of pulse laser light having passed through the first delay optical system so that a longitudinal direction of a beam cross-sectional shape of the pulse laser light traveling on the second loop optical path is perpendicular to the second plane as disclosed by Ershov in order to lower coherence in order to reduce speckle in the beam on a workpiece.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 2 recites “The pulse width extension device according to claim 1, further comprising a return propagation optical system through which the pulse laser light having passed through the second delay optical system propagates, wherein an optical path formed in the return propagation optical system is formed on the same plane as the second plane.” While return propagation optical systems are well known in the art, the Office has no evidence that a person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine a return propagation optical system in the specific configuration as claimed by applicant in claim 2 with Partlo and Ershov. Claim 3 is objected to based on its dependence from claim 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/Joshua King/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 01/23/2026