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 Amendment and Status of Application
This notice is in response to the amendments filed 16 October 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application where claims 1, 14, and 19 have been amended. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome some but not all claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 22 July 2025. Those objections/rejections overcome are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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. Specifically, this is in regards to the reference Levy not teaching the newly added limitations “measuring a property of the photoresist layer having the first thickness…depositing the photoresist layer to a second thickness…and measuring the property of the photoresist layer having the second thickness”.
Applicant's arguments filed 16 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. These arguments (remarks page 2 “Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102/103”) are directed towards the cited references in the Non-Final Office Action dated 22 July 2025 (namely Levy as evidenced by Wang) not teaching newly amended claim limitations, including but not limited to “measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness” of claims 14 and 19. These claim limitations are addressed via a revised interpretation of the art of record below.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informality: “one or more source gasses” should be written as “one or more source gases” for a spelling/grammatical correction.
Claims 14 and 18 are objected to because of the following informality: “one or more processing gasses” should be written as “one or more processing gases” for a spelling/grammatical correction.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informality: The claim recites “…uses one or more of ellipsometry, reflectometery, or fluorescence of photoelectron emittance”. Reflectometry is misspelled as “reflectometery” and should be corrected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claims 2-3, 14, 16, and 19, the claims recite the limitation “a short burst of electromagnetic (EM) radiation”. While “short” is a term of degree, the specification [0020] recites “embodiments disclosed herein include OBM (on-board metrology) systems that emit light at a short duration (e.g., 100 milliseconds or less)”. The claim term is interpreted in light of this example in the specification and is therefore found to be definite (see MPEP § 2173.05(b) I. paragraph 2).
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 1-10 and 12-13- are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2002/0190207 A1 by Ady Levy et al. (herein after “Levy”) in view of US 6,801,321 B1 by Ofer Du-Nour (herein after “Nour”).
Regarding claim 1, Levy discloses a method of monitoring a photoresist deposition process (Levy [0003] and [0005] discloses semiconductor fabrication processes including etch, deposition, plating, etc. [photoresist deposition process]), comprising:
depositing a photoresist layer to a first thickness over a substrate (Levy [0158] teaches specimen 10 as layers of photoresist materials formed upon substrate);
measuring a property of the photoresist layer having a first thickness using a first electromagnetic (EM) radiation source (Levy [0088] teaches measurement device may determine characteristics of the layer prior, during or after formation; fig. 3 and [0168] discloses an illumination system 36 comprising an energy source 44, configured to emit light [first EM radiation source]; [0187] discloses that light returned from the specimen is used to determine the thickness of various films on the wafer [0088] before during or after formation [i.e. a property of the layer is determined after the photoresist layer has been applied to a first thickness]).
Levy is silent to depositing the photoresist layer to a second thickness over the substrate; and measuring the property of the photoresist layer having the second thickness using the first EM radiation source.
However, Nour does address this limitation. Levy and Nour are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to the method of applying photoresist layers to at least semiconducting substrates.
Nour discloses “depositing the photoresist layer to a second thickness over the substrate” (Nour fig. 6 and col 7 ll. 43-67 discloses a method for measuring the thickness of a photoresist coating before, during, and after the photoresist coating is applied; the photoresist coating is applied, and an initial thickness measurement is obtained [first thickness]; then, a rotary motor 4 is engaged which changes the thickness of the photoresist layer [depositing the photoresist layer to a second thickness over the substrate]); and
measuring the property of the photoresist layer having the second thickness using the first EM radiation source (Nour fig. 6 and col 7 ll. 43-67 discloses subsequent measurements of thickness are made as the rotary motor spins the substrate, see block 35, and the obtained thickness is used to determine whether a desired thickness has been obtained [measuring the property of the photoresist layer having the second thickness; col 6 ll. 46-54 discloses an optical head 12 which projects a beam of light 13 onto the photoresist coating [measuring property using the first EM radiation source]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Levy to incorporate depositing the photoresist layer to a second thickness over the substrate; and measuring the property of the photoresist layer having the second thickness using the first EM radiation source as suggested by Nour for the advantage of enabling real-time feedback of thickness information to a system timer and hot plate temperature controller (Nour col 7 ll. 57-67) , thereby reducing the chance of overcoating.
Regarding claim 2, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1, and Levy further teaches the method wherein the measuring property of the photoresist layer with the first EM radiation source includes a short burst of EM radiation (Levy [0372] discloses laser pulses of radiation).
Regarding claim 4, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 2, and Levy further teaches the method wherein the EM radiation has a wavelength between approximately 200nm and approximately 800nm (Levy [0168] discloses EM radiation of multiple wavelengths including ultraviolet and visible, which fulfill this claimed wavelength range).
Regarding claim 5, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 2, and Levy further teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the EM radiation has a wavelength of approximately 400nm or less (Levy [0168] discloses that the EM radiation is emitted at least in the ultraviolet range, fulfilling the claimed wavelength range).
Regarding claim 6, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1, and Levy further teaches the method wherein the property comprises one or more of thickness, surface roughness, chemical composition, complex dielectric constant, and complex refractive index (Levy [0075] discloses obtained property of specimen as a thickness).
Regarding claim 7, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1, and Levy further teaches the method wherein the EM radiation source is configured to provide ellipsometry, reflectometry, or fluorescence of photoelectron emittance (Levy [0012] and [0075] discloses ellipsometer and reflectometer as measurement devices obtaining properties of the specimen).
Regarding claim 8, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1, and Levy further teaches the method wherein the property is used as part of a feedback loop in order to modify the photoresist deposition process (Levy [0013] teaches feedback control technique for use within a semiconductor fabrication process tool in response to at least the determined first or second property of the specimen [including thickness]).
Regarding claim 9, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 8, and Levy further teaches the method wherein the feedback loop is used to modify a flow rate of one or more source gases into a chamber where the photoresist layer is deposited (Levy [0414] teaches flow rate of gas can be altered with feedback control technique).
Regarding claim 10, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1, and Levy further teaches the method wherein depositing the photoresist layer comprises a dry deposition process (Levy [0297] teaches chemical vapor deposition).
Regarding claim 12, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1. Levy does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the first EM radiation source emits radiation onto the photoresist layer that has a duration and power for measuring the property without initiating a chemical reaction in the photoresist layer.
However, Levy does suggest this limitation.
Levy suggests or renders obvious the method of claim 1, “wherein the first EM radiation source emits radiation onto the photoresist layer that has a duration and power for measuring the property without initiating a chemical reaction in the photoresist layer” (Levy at least [0081] discloses a determination of at least two properties of a specimen via an illumination system configured to direct energy to a surface of the specimen and a measurement system configured to generate signals in response to detected energy from the specimen; Levy discloses the detection system as a “measurement system” and [0082] lists determining a concentration of an element in the specimen or the thickness of the specimen as properties able to be determined – it is clear to one of ordinary skill that the illumination system used in the measurement process would not initiate a chemical reaction, as that could affect either property, but specifically a concentration of elements within the specimen since chemical reactions can directly affect the elemental concentration before illumination).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the first EM radiation source emits radiation onto the photoresist layer that has a duration and power for measuring the property without initiating a chemical reaction in the photoresist layer as suggested by Levy for the advantage of avoiding the possible generation of new defects and/or compromise the fabrication and monitoring quality of the semiconductors.
Regarding claim 13, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1, and Levy further teaches the method further comprising: repeating the process any number of times in order to fully characterize the photoresist layer (Levy [0266] discloses additional processing of the specimen if determined as necessary via “reworking” as informed by the determined property).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levy in view of Nour, and further in view of US 6,552,803 B1 by Haiming Wang et al. (herein after “Wang”).
Regarding claim 3, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 2. Levy when modified by Nour is silent to the method of claim 2, wherein the short burst is approximately two microseconds or less.
However, Wang does address this limitation. Levy, Nour, and Wang are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are devices/methods for measuring the thickness of deposited thin films on substrates.
Wang discloses the method of claim 2, “wherein the short burst is approximately two microseconds or less” (Wang col. 2 ll. 55-60 discloses measurement of thin films using measurement pulses of light at 10 picoseconds or less, an example range within the claimed range).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Levy in view of Nour to incorporate wherein the short burst is approximately two microseconds or less as suggested by Wang for the advantage of obtaining adequate resolution for film thickness measurements (col. 13 ll. 50 – col. 14 ll. 5).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levy in view of Nour, and further in view of “Chemical and structural investigation of zinc-oxo cluster photoresists for DUV lithography” by Chun-Chen Yeh et al. (doi: 10.1039/c6tc05201k) (herein after “Yeh”).
Regarding claim 11, Levy when modified by Nour discloses the method of claim 1. Levy when modified by Nour is silent to the method of claim 1, wherein the photoresist layer comprises a metal oxo material.
However, Yeh does address this limitation. Levy, Nour, and Yeh are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to investigating the properties of photoresist layers for semiconducting substrates.
Yeh discloses the method of claim 1, “wherein the photoresist layer comprises a metal oxo material” (Yeh 1. Introduction paragraph 1 discloses the use of metal oxo materials as photoresists for use producing semiconducting metal oxide patterns within the art of lithography [photoresist layer comprises metal oxide material]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Levy in view of Nour to incorporate wherein the photoresist layer comprises a metal oxo material as suggested by Yeh for the advantage of avoiding conventional etching processes which may generate defects and degrade device performance (Yeh 1. Introduction paragraph 1)
Claims 14-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levy.
Regarding claim 14, Levy discloses a semiconductor processing tool (Levy [0108] discloses a system including a process chamber and measurement device for semiconductor devices), comprising:
a chamber (Levy [0426] and fig. 24 disclose a process chamber 274);
a susceptor configured to support a substrate (Levy fig. 2a/2b, fig. 24, [0159] and [0427] disclose stages 24 and 280 for fig. 2a/b and fig. 24 respectively, where the stage may be a vacuum chuck, electrostatic chuck, may be a motorized translation stage, robotic wafer handler, or any other suitable device known in the art – while the stage is not explicitly disclosed as a susceptor, their use in the semiconducting fabrication art is well known to one of ordinary skill);
a gas inlet for flowing one or more processing gases into the chamber (Levy fig. 24 and [0440] discloses a valve 301 on which flow rate of etchant gases into the chamber is dependent [etchant gases being “processing gases”]);
a window (Levy [0430] and fig. 24 discloses a transparent material 276 within wall of the chamber [window]); and
an optical inspection tool (Levy [0431]-[0432] and fig. 24 discloses a measurement device 272 which directs incident light to the specimen, [0437] for purposes of inspecting specimen characteristics [optical inspection tool]) for measuring one or more film properties of a photoresist layer on the substrate through the window (Levy fig. 24 shows interrogation light passing through window 276 to be incident on the specimen 278; [0437] discloses measurement of thickness, index of refraction, critical dimension, etc. [for measuring one or more film properties of the specimen]; [0158] discloses specimen comprises layers including at least photoresist materials [properties of a photoresist layer]), wherein the optical inspection tool is configured to provide a short burst of electromagnetic (EM) radiation that allows for measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer (Levy [0431] discloses light source 282 within measurement device 272 which generates incident EM radiation, [0431] teaches as laser, [0372] teaches laser pulses [short burst of EM radiation], [0437] discloses measurement of thickness, index of refraction, critical dimension, etc. via detected EM radiation from the specimen[for measuring one or more film properties of the specimen]; [0158] discloses specimen comprises layers including at least photoresist materials [properties of a photoresist layer]), the measuring comprising measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness (Levy [0437] discloses measurement of thickness of the specimen, including [0158] photoresist layers on the specimen).
Levy does not explicitly disclose measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer without inducing a chemical change in the photoresist layer, and the measuring comprising measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness, and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness.
However, Levy does suggest this limitation.
Levy discloses “measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer without inducing a chemical change in the photoresist layer” (Levy at least [0081] discloses a determination of at least two properties of a specimen via an illumination system configured to direct energy to a surface of the specimen and a measurement system configured to generate signals in response to detected energy from the specimen; Levy discloses the detection system as a “measurement system” and [0082] lists determining a concentration of an element in the specimen or the thickness of the specimen as properties able to be determined – it is clear to one of ordinary skill that the illumination system used in the measurement process would not initiate a chemical reaction, as that could affect either property, but specifically a concentration of elements within the specimen since chemical reactions can directly affect the elemental concentration before illumination), “and the measuring comprising measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness, and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness” (Levy [0385]-[0387] discloses determining the thickness of a deposited layer either after the layer is deposited or while the layer is being deposited, that thickness changes can be monitored continuously or intermittently, and that the device making the measurement may be used to determine one or more endpoint of the deposition process [i.e. multiple measurements may be made during a layer formation process where the thickness is increasing as the layer formation process is carried out – second thickness greater than the first thickness]; while [0385]-[0387] discloses an eddy current device to perform the thickness measurement, [0388] discloses the use of incident light on the specimen in combination with the eddy current device (i.e. EM radiation to determine one or more film properties); additionally, this limitation is a recitation of an inherent function of the device and/or a recitation of a manner of operating the device – given the ability for the device to make a plurality of thickness measurements during a deposition process, under MPEP § 2114 I. and II. this limitation does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer without inducing a chemical change in the photoresist layer and measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness, and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness as suggested by Levy for the advantage of avoiding the possible generation of new defects and/or compromise the fabrication and monitoring quality of the semiconductors, and allowing for real-time layer formation on a substrate to be monitored to prevent undesired thicknesses for the deposited material.
Regarding claim 15, Levy discloses or renders obvious the semiconductor processing tool of claim 14, and further teaches the tool wherein the optical inspection tool uses inspection techniques including one or more of ellipsometry, reflectometry, and fluorescence of photoelectron emittance (Levy [0012] and [0075] discloses ellipsometer and reflectometer as measurement devices obtaining properties of the specimen; [0390] also discloses a spectroscopic ellipsometer as the measurement device).
Regarding claim 17, Levy discloses or renders obvious the semiconductor processing tool of claim 14, and further teaches the tool wherein the EM radiation has a wavelength of approximately 400nm or less (Levy [0168] discloses that the EM radiation is emitted at least in the ultraviolet range, fulfilling the claimed wavelength range).
Regarding claim 18, Levy discloses or renders obvious the semiconductor processing tool of claim 14, and further teaches the tool, further comprising a controller, wherein the optical inspection tool provides feedback to the controller in order to change a flow rate of one or more processing gases through the gas inlet (Levy [0013] discloses feedback control technique for use within a semiconductor fabrication process tool in response to the determined first or second property of the specimen; [0414] teaches that the flow rate of gas can be altered with feedback control technique to processor).
Claims 16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levy in view of Wang.
Regarding claim 16, Levy discloses or renders obvious the semiconductor processing tool of claim 14. Levy is silent to the semiconductor processing tool of claim 14, wherein the short burst has a duration of approximately 100 milliseconds or less.
However, Wang does address this limitation. Levy and Wang are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are devices for measuring the thickness of deposited thin films on substrates.
Wang discloses the semiconductor processing tool of claim 14, “wherein the short burst has a duration of approximately 100 milliseconds or less” (Wang col. 2 ll. 55-60 discloses measurement of thin films using measurement pulses of light at 10 picoseconds or less, an example range within the claimed range).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Levy to incorporate wherein the short burst has a duration of approximately 100 milliseconds or less as suggested by Wang for the advantage of obtaining adequate resolution for film thickness measurements (col. 13 ll. 50 – col. 14 ll. 5).
Regarding claim 19, Levy discloses a semiconductor processing tool (Levy [0108] discloses a system including a process chamber and measurement device for semiconductor devices), comprising:
a chamber (Levy [0426] and fig. 24 disclose a process chamber 274);
a susceptor configured to support a substrate (Levy fig. 2a/2b, fig. 24, [0159] and [0427] disclose stages 24 and 280 for fig. 2a/b and fig. 24 respectively, where the stage may be a vacuum chuck, electrostatic chuck, may be a motorized translation stage, robotic wafer handler, or any other suitable device known in the art – while the stage is not explicitly disclosed as a susceptor, their use in the semiconducting fabrication art is well known to one of ordinary skill);
a window along a wall of the chamber, wherein the window allows for electromagnetic (EM) radiation to pass through the chamber (Levy [0430] and fig. 24 discloses a transparent material 276 within wall of the chamber [window]; fig. 24 shows incoming light through the transparent material 276 [window allows for EM radiation to pass through the chamber]); and
an inspection tool (Levy [0431]-[0432] and fig. 24 discloses a measurement device 272 which directs incident light to the specimen, [0437] for purposes of inspecting specimen characteristics [inspection tool]) for measuring one or more film properties of a photoresist layer on the substrate through the window (Levy fig. 24 shows interrogation light passing through window 276 to be incident on the specimen 278; [0437] discloses measurement of thickness, index of refraction, critical dimension, etc. [for measuring one or more film properties of the specimen]; [0158] discloses specimen comprises layers including at least photoresist materials [properties of a photoresist layer]), wherein the optical inspection tool is configured to provide a short burst of electromagnetic (EM) radiation that allows for measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer (Levy [0431] discloses light source 282 within measurement device 272 which generates incident EM radiation, [0431] teaches as laser, [0372] teaches laser pulses [short burst of EM radiation], [0437] discloses measurement of thickness, index of refraction, critical dimension, etc. via detected EM radiation from the specimen[for measuring one or more film properties of the specimen]; [0158] discloses specimen comprises layers including at least photoresist materials [properties of a photoresist layer]), the measuring comprising measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness (Levy [0437] discloses measurement of thickness of the specimen, including [0158] photoresist layers on the specimen), and wherein a wavelength of the EM radiation is approximately 400nm or less (Levy [0168] discloses that the EM radiation is emitted at least in the ultraviolet range, fulfilling the claimed wavelength range).
Levy does not explicitly disclose measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer without inducing a chemical change in the photoresist layer, and the measuring comprising measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness, and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness
However, Levy does suggest this limitation.
Levy discloses “measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer without inducing a chemical change in the photoresist layer” (Levy at least [0081] discloses a determination of at least two properties of a specimen via an illumination system configured to direct energy to a surface of the specimen and a measurement system configured to generate signals in response to detected energy from the specimen; Levy discloses the detection system as a “measurement system” and [0082] lists determining a concentration of an element in the specimen or the thickness of the specimen as properties able to be determined – it is clear to one of ordinary skill that the illumination system used in the measurement process would not initiate a chemical reaction, as that could affect either property, but specifically a concentration of elements within the specimen since chemical reactions can directly affect the elemental concentration before illumination), “and the measuring comprising measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness, and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness” (Levy [0385]-[0387] discloses determining the thickness of a deposited layer either after the layer is deposited or while the layer is being deposited, that thickness changes can be monitored continuously or intermittently, and that the device making the measurement may be used to determine one or more endpoint of the deposition process [i.e. multiple measurements may be made during a layer formation process where the thickness is increasing as the layer formation process is carried out – second thickness greater than the first thickness]; while [0385]-[0387] discloses an eddy current device to perform the thickness measurement, [0388] discloses the use of incident light on the specimen in combination with the eddy current device (i.e. EM radiation to determine one or more film properties); additionally, this limitation is a recitation of an inherent function of the device and/or a recitation of a manner of operating the device – given the ability for the device to make a plurality of thickness measurements during a deposition process, under MPEP § 2114 I. and II. this limitation does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate measuring the one or more film properties of the photoresist layer without inducing a chemical change in the photoresist layer and measuring the photoresist layer at a first thickness, and then measuring the photoresist layer at a second thickness greater than the first thickness as suggested by Levy for the advantage of avoiding the possible generation of new defects and/or compromise the fabrication and monitoring quality of the semiconductors, and allowing for real-time layer formation on a substrate to be monitored to prevent undesired thicknesses for the deposited material.
Levy is silent to wherein the short burst has a duration of approximately 100 milliseconds or less.
However, Wang does address this limitation. Levy and Wang are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are devices for measuring the thickness of deposited thin films on substrates.
Wang discloses “wherein the short burst has a duration of approximately 100 milliseconds or less” (Wang col. 2 ll. 55-60 discloses measurement of thin films using measurement pulses of light at 10 picoseconds or less, an example range within the claimed range).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Levy to incorporate wherein the short burst has a duration of approximately 100 milliseconds or less as suggested by Wang for the advantage of obtaining adequate resolution for film thickness measurements (col. 13 ll. 50 – col. 14 ll. 5)
Regarding claim 20, Levy when modified by Wang discloses the semiconductor processing tool of claim 19, and Levy further teaches the tool wherein the inspection tool uses one or more of ellipsometry, reflectometry, or fluorescence of photoelectron emittance (Levy [0012] and [0075] discloses ellipsometer and reflectometer as measurement devices obtaining properties of the specimen; [0390] also discloses a spectroscopic ellipsometer as the measurement device).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA M CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0065. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Tarifur R Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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 M CARLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights