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 .
Status
Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed on 7/6/2026, which amended claims 20, 24, 28, 29, 34-36, and 38 and cancelled claims 23 and 25. Claims 20-22, 24, 27-39 are currently pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the subject matter “a second conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a second deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a second gas” in claim 29 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 22, 27, 28-33, and 39 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 22, the claim recites “a pump upstream of the one or more optical elements, and a flow restrictor between the pump and the one or more optical elements” in lines 3-4 and depends from amended claim 20, which recites “a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas” in lines 2-4. The conditioning system requiring both a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas and a pump upstream of the one or more optical elements, and a flow restrictor between the pump and the one or more optical elements was not described in the specification to reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Although Fig. 4 and para. [0056] of the published specification does describe a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, this embodiment is silent regarding the arrangement of a pump upstream of the one or more optical elements, and a flow restrictor between the pump and the one or more optical elements. There is no evidence or suggestion from the originally-filed specification that the embodiment of Fig. 4 is intended to further include a pump upstream of the one or more optical elements, and a flow restrictor between the pump and the one or more optical elements. Additionally, the Applicant has not specifically pointed out where the amended claim is supported. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have reasonably concluded that the inventor had possession, at the time the application was filed of the invention of claim 22 as currently drafted. Claim 22 is rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 27, the claim recites “wherein the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir is connected to a vacuum pump and/or a gas inlet” in lines 1-3, and depends from amended claim 24, which recites “a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas” in lines 3-5. The conditioning system requiring both a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas and wherein the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir is connected to a vacuum pump and/or a gas inlet was not described in the specification to reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Although Fig. 4 and para. [0056] of the published specification does describe a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, this embodiment is silent regarding the wherein the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir is connected to a vacuum pump and/or a gas inlet. There is no evidence or suggestion from the originally-filed specification that the embodiment of Fig. 4 is intended to include wherein the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir is connected to a vacuum pump and/or a gas inlet and para. [0056] states the “separator 23 prevents evaporation of any of the conditioning fluid and therefore avoids the loss of conditioning fluid and also avoids the need to have a vacuum pump or controlled gas inlet.” Additionally, the Applicant has not specifically pointed out where the amended claim is supported. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have reasonably concluded that the inventor had possession, at the time the application was filed, of the invention of claim 27 as currently drafted. Claim 27 is rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 28, the amended claim recites the subject matter “a conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas” and “wherein the conditioning fluid reservoir is disposed below the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference between the one or more optical elements and the conditioning fluid reservoir reduces the pressure at the one or more optical elements to below atmospheric pressure” in lines 2-4 and 12-15. The conditioning system requiring both a conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas and wherein the conditioning fluid reservoir is disposed below the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference between the one or more optical elements and the conditioning fluid reservoir reduces the pressure at the one or more optical elements to below atmospheric pressure was not described in the specification to reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Although Fig. 4 and para. [0056] of the published specification does describe a conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, this embodiment is silent regarding the arrangement of the conditioning fluid reservoir such that it is disposed below the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference between the one or more optical elements and the conditioning fluid reservoir reduces the pressure at the one or more optical elements to below atmospheric pressure. There is no evidence or suggestion from the originally-filed specification that the embodiment of Fig. 4 is intended to include the conditioning fluid reservoir comprising the deformable separator disposed below the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference between the one or more optical elements and the conditioning fluid reservoir reduces the pressure at the one or more optical elements to below atmospheric pressure. A separate embodiment described in Fig. 7 and para. [0059] of the published specification describes the conditioning fluid reservoir disposed below the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference between the one or more optical elements and the conditioning fluid reservoir reduces the pressure at the one or more optical elements to below atmospheric pressure, but Fig. 7 and para. [0059] are silent regarding any deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas. There is no evidence or suggestion from the originally-filed specification that the embodiment of Fig. 7 is intended to include the conditioning fluid reservoir comprising the deformable separator. Additionally, the Applicant has not specifically pointed out where the amended claim is supported. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have reasonably concluded that the inventor had possession at the time the application was filed of the invention of claim 28 as currently drafted. Claim 28 is rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 29, the amended claim recites the subject matter “a first conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a first deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a first gas,” “a second conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a second deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a second gas,” and “wherein the first conditioning fluid reservoir and the second conditioning fluid reservoir are in fluid connection with one another via a valve that is operable to control a level of conditioning fluid in the first conditioning fluid reservoir that is in fluid communication with the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference is achieved between the one or more optical elements and the second conditioning fluid reservoir” in lines 2-8 and 16-21. The conditioning system comprising both “a first conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a first deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a first gas” and “a second conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a second deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a second gas,” and further requiring “wherein the first conditioning fluid reservoir and the second conditioning fluid reservoir are in fluid connection with one another via a valve that is operable to control a level of conditioning fluid in the first conditioning fluid reservoir that is in fluid communication with the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference is achieved between the one or more optical elements and the second conditioning fluid reservoir” was not described in the specification to reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Although Fig. 4 and para. [0056] of the published specification does describe a conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, this embodiment is silent regarding a second conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a second deformable separator and is further silent regarding wherein the first conditioning fluid reservoir and the second conditioning fluid reservoir are in fluid connection with one another via a valve that is operable to control a level of conditioning fluid in the first conditioning fluid reservoir that is in fluid communication with the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference is achieved between the one or more optical elements and the second conditioning fluid reservoir. There is no evidence or suggestion from the originally-filed specification that the embodiment of Fig. 4 is intended to include the conditioning system comprising a second conditioning fluid reservoir comprising a second deformable separator and the comprises wherein the first conditioning fluid reservoir and the second conditioning fluid reservoir are in fluid connection with one another via a valve that is operable to control a level of conditioning fluid in the first conditioning fluid reservoir that is in fluid communication with the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference is achieved between the one or more optical elements and the second conditioning fluid reservoir. A separate embodiment described in Fig. 8 and para. [0060] of the published specification describes the conditioning fluid system comprising two conditioning fluid reservoirs, but Fig. 8 and para. [0060] are silent regarding any deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas in either reservoir. There is no evidence or suggestion from the originally-filed specification that the embodiment of Fig. 8 is intended to include the conditioning fluid reservoirs comprising the deformable separators as claimed. Additionally, the Applicant has not specifically pointed out where the amended claim is supported. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have reasonably concluded that the inventor had possession at the time the application was filed of the invention of claim 29 as currently drafted. Claim 29 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-21, 24, 34-38 are allowed.
Claims 22, 27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 28-33 and 39 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 20, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, wherein the one or more optical elements are conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas, wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements, wherein the liquid conditioning fluid is water. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 20 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 24, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a liquid conditioning fluid comprising water; a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas; a flow restrictor, and a pump, wherein the one or more optical elements are conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas, wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements, wherein the pump is downstream of the one or more optical elements, and wherein the flow restrictor is upstream of the one or more optical elements. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 24 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 28, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas; wherein the one or more optical elements are conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas; wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements, and wherein the conditioning fluid reservoir is disposed below the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference between the one or more optical elements and the conditioning fluid reservoir reduces the pressure at the one or more optical elements to below atmospheric pressure. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 28 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 29, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a first conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a first deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a first gas; a second conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a second deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a second gas; wherein the one or more optical elements are conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas, wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements, and wherein the first conditioning fluid reservoir and the second conditioning fluid reservoir are in fluid connection with one another via a valve that is operable to control a level of conditioning fluid in the first conditioning fluid reservoir that is in fluid communication with the one or more optical elements such that a hydrostatic pressure difference is achieved between the one or more optical elements and the second conditioning fluid reservoir. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 29 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 34, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, wherein the one or more optical elements are conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas, and wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 34 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 35, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious using a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements, using water as a liquid conditioning fluid, and storing at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid in a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir, wherein the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 35 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 36, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious using a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements; using water as a liquid conditioning fluid; and storing at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid in a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir, wherein the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 36 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 38, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir that is configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas, wherein the at least one optical element is conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas, wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the at least one optical element, and wherein the liquid conditioning fluid is water. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 38 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
The dependent claims are likewise allowable by virtue of their dependency upon an allowable independent claim as stated above.
Novak (US Patent No. 5,998,889) discloses storing at least part of the liquid conditioning fluid in a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir (Fig. 10, col. 4, lines 2-3, col. 4, lines 24-63, the coolant fluid recirculating system 50 and tanks 51 and 52 are held at below atmospheric pressure. The tanks 51 and 52 store coolant liquid), but Novak fails to describe or suggest the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprises a deformable separator, and the deformable separator is disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas.
Nomoto (US PGPub 2010/0073649) discloses a conditioning fluid reservoir (Figs. 1-4, para. [0040], a reservoir 16 stores cooling medium 15), but Novak fails to describe or render obvious the sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir comprises deformable separator, and the deformable separator is disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas.
Van Berkel et al. (US PGPub 2019/0033499, Van Berkel hereinafter) discloses a conditioning system for a lithographic apparatus (Figs. 1-6, paras. [0019]-[0029], [0031]-[0032], [0041], [0048]-[0055], [0062], the coolant supply system is used to cool a mirror in a lithographic apparatus LA), wherein the conditioning system is configured to condition one or more optical elements of the lithographic apparatus (Figs. 1-6, paras. [0019]-[0029], [0031]-[0032], [0041], [0048]-[0055], [0062], the coolant supply system is used to cool a mirror), wherein the one or more optical elements are conditioned under vacuum or a low pressure of gas (Figs. 1-6, abstract, paras. [0020], [0030]-[0031], [0068], a reflector for EUV radiation in lithographic apparatus LA is in a vacuum environment and is cooled); wherein the conditioning system is configured to have a sub-atmospheric pressure at the one or more optical elements (Figs. 1-6, paras. [0020], [0041], [0048]-[0055], [0062], claim 24, a coolant supply unit 43 supplies fluid to the reflector 13 in a range including sub-atmospheric pressure, 0.001 bar to below 1 bar), and wherein the liquid conditioning fluid is water (Figs. 1-6, paras. [0040]-[0041], [0048]-[0055], [0062], the coolant supply system supplies water as a coolant). Van Berkel does not appear to explicitly describe a sub-atmospheric pressure conditioning fluid reservoir configured to operate at sub-atmospheric pressure and to store at least part of a liquid conditioning fluid and that comprises a deformable separator, and the deformable separator is disposed between the liquid conditioning fluid and a gas.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 7/6/2026, with respect to the objection to claim 38 have been fully considered and are persuasive owing to the amendments to the claim. The objection to claim 38 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 7/6/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections of claims 28-33 and 39 as previously set forth have been fully considered and are persuasive owing to the amendments to the claim. The prior 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections of claims 28-33 and 39 have been withdrawn; however, claims 22, 27, 28-33, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as set forth above.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 7/6/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 25 have been fully considered and are persuasive owing to the cancellation of the claim. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 11, filed 7/6/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 20-22, 24, 27-33, 34-39 have been fully considered and are persuasive owing to the amendments to the claims. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 20-22, 24, 27-33, 34-39 have been withdrawn.
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 CHRISTINA A. RIDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7538. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30AM-5PM.
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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at (571)272-2303. 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.
/CHRISTINA A RIDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights