DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-11, in the reply filed on November 11, 2025, is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1-11, are 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 1 recites the manufacturing of a photomask, however, the body of the claim recites photomask design data and the optimizing of a design data and is not clear what has been modified on the photomask, since the optimization is still part of the layout design and nothing in the independent claim recites forming the optimized mask design on the photomask that is being manufactured.
Claim 1, at line 1, recites “manufacturing a photomask”, and at line 3, recites “patterns to be formed on a photomask”. It is not clear if the photomask recited at line 1, and the photomask recited at line 3 are one and the same or different from one another.
Claim 10 recites at line 2, “a photomask”, and is not clear if the photomask recited at line 10 is the same as the photomask recited at claim 1, at line 1 or photomask recited at line 3 of claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 at line 1, recites the limitation "the photomask". It is not clear if the photomask refers to the photomask in claim 10 or the photomask recited in claim 1, at line 3 or the photomask recited in line 1 of claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-11, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0232748 (hereinafter referred to as Hsu).
Hsu, in the abstract, and in [0007], [0166], discloses the manufacturing of a patterning device (photomask), the process includes obtaining an initial design pattern (data) that has plurality of polygons (features to be formed on the mask, [0104]). Hsu, in [0058], [0086], [0144], discloses that the optimizing of the design data includes adjusting of exposure dose such as minimizing exposure dose (parameter, printing exposure), and then the parameters of the design pattern (includes dimensions of the pattern). Hsu, in [0104], discloses size biasing being carried out in optimized illumination mode (includes optimized dose). Hsu, in [0048], and [0061], discloses that part of the optimization includes using the different parameters that optimizes and includes minimizing the deviations, and Hsu, in [0068]-[0069], discloses minimizing dose minimizes edge placement error (EPE) which in turn maximizes the overlapping EPE process window, and maximizing the EPE process window enables the maintaining the size or pattern quality (within 5% of critical dimension), and discloses iteratively calculating the overlapping EPE process window. Hsu, in [0070], discloses that the optimization process includes iteratively repeating the adjusting of the design variables (that includes characteristics of the design pattern such as size) till a desired result is obtained, and in [0128], and [0133]-[0134], Hsu discloses performing size biasing so that the features of the final pattern correspond to the right size, and shape corresponding to the initial design pattern (satisfy the pattern quality and size). Hsu, in [0061], and [0063], discloses that the design variable of the patterning device includes parameters of the illumination system variables such as spatial/angular distribution and other adjustable parameters of the illumination system, and adjusting the design variables and Hsu, in [0070], discloses adjusting design variable and iteratively repeating the process to determine optimized values, and Hsu, in [0107], and [0109], discloses using the optimization process to generate a design pattern (final pattern) thereby creating an optimized design pattern (optimized patterning device pattern) (claim 1). Hsu, in [0107], [0128], and [0133], discloses that the size biasing can be increased (increase in size or dimension of the feature, positive size biasing) or decreased (reducing in size/dimension of the feature, negative size biasing) (claims 2-3). Hsu, in [0061], [0086], discloses that the mask variables include pattern edge biases (claims 4, and 7). Hsu, in [0058], discloses that the processing parameters of the mask includes mask structures (shapes and/or location of features) (claims 5 and 7). Hsu, in [0053], discloses that the variables that affect the design pattern model includes illumination shape (optical characteristics of the illumination mode and/or the illumination system (claims 6, and 7). Hsu, in [0058], discloses that part of the design parameters includes optical proximity correction. Hsu, in [0116], discloses that after performing optimization to realize a patterning device pattern (optimized photomask design data), optical proximity correction adjustments are performed on the patterning device pattern (claim 8). Hsu, in [0104], [0209], [0255], discloses that the optimized design pattern is provided to the patterning device (mask substrate, mask or reticle, provided to the mask blank to form the mask or claimed photomask) and used in the process (lithography process), and Hsu, in [0101], discloses that the mask (patterning device is used in a lithography process to manufacture devices such as flat panel displays (claims 9-11).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daborah Chacko-Davis whose telephone number is (571) 272-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30AM-6:00PM EST Mon-Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark F. Huff can be reached on (571) 272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. 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.
/DABORAH CHACKO-DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
December 27, 2025.
Prosecution Insights