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 .
Non-Final Office Action
DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Notes
(a) Claim date: 04/06/2023.
(b) Priority date: 08/08/2022.
(c) Invention: Layout edge placement error correction using OPC and AI.
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.Claims 1, 5, 8-12, 15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the prior art of record “VAN” < KR 20180116388 A>.(As to claim 1, 10, 15, VAN discloses):
1. An optical proximity correction (OPC) method for a mask used in manufacturing a pattern in a semiconductor process [Page 13, as highlighted], the OPC method comprising:
obtaining training data for calculating a Jacobian matrix [page 12, “Jacobian matrix”] which is a differentiation of a mask segment for an edge placement error (EPE) [Page 28, “edge placement error”];
obtaining a neural Jacobian matrix model [page 12, “Jacobian matrix”] through artificial neural network (ANN) training using the training data [Page 15, “data-driven technique may be performed using a machine learning algorithm such as a neural network,”]; and
applying a prediction value based on the neural Jacobian matrix model [page 12, “Jacobian matrix”] to mask optimization (MO) to minimize the EPE [Page 28, “edge placement error”], resulting in a mask layout used to generate the mask [Page 2: “mask”, “reticle”].
(As to claim 5, 12, VAN discloses):
5. The OPC method of claim 1, wherein the minimizing of the EPE comprises performing the MO by using gradient decent [Page 8, “edge placement is derived from values of overlay values, CD values and local variations (e.g., edge roughness, shape asymmetry, etc. of individual structures)”].
(As to claim 8, VAN discloses):
8. The OPC method of claim 5, wherein the minimizing of the EPE comprises inputting an arbitrary mask segment, obtained by performing the gradient decent at least once, to an optical simulation to calculate the EPE [Page 12: “derivative generated during modeling, in addition to the Jacobian matrix”].
(As to claim 9, VAN discloses):
9. The OPC method of claim 1, further comprising obtaining, as the training data, graphics data system (GDS) data of a clip which is a portion of a full chip [Page 15: “training is performed on a subset of substrates, and authentication is performed on another (disjunct) subset of substrate”],
wherein the minimizing of the EPE comprises inputting the GDS data of the full chip to calculate the EPE [Page 27: “edge placement error based on the parameter. In one embodiment, the optical property value obtained from a pixel”].
(As to claim 11, VAN discloses):
11. The OPC method of claim 10, wherein the first training data comprises a relative position, a relative angle, and optical parameters [Page 15: “training is performed on a subset of substrates, and authentication is performed on another (disjunct) subset of substrate”] [Page 27: “edge placement error based on the parameter. In one embodiment, the optical property value obtained from a pixel”].
Allowable Subject Matter
The following claims would be allowable if all rejections/objections cited in this office action (if any) are overcome and rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.The reason for this allowance is: the claimed subject matter could not have been anticipated or obviated using any prior arts.Allowable claims are: 2-4, 6-7, 13-14 and16-20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record in the form PTO-892 are not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.Contact information:Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED ALAM whose telephone number is (571) 270-1507, email address: [mohammed.alam@uspto.gov] and fax number (571) 270-2507. The examiner can normally be reached on 10AM to 4PM (EST), Monday to Friday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's Supervisor, JACK CHIANG can be reached on (571) 272-7483. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300./Mohammed Alam/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851