DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 6/18/2026 for US Patent Application No. 18/277053 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 10 and 12 are currently pending and have been fully considered. Claims 3, 7, 9 and 11 have been cancelled.
The objection to claim 1 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 6/18/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-12 as being anticipated by Matsuo have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the aforementioned rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kataoka.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuo (US 2012/0021344 A1) in view of Kataoka et al. (US 2021/0311382 A1), herein referred to as Kataoka.
Regarding amended claims 1 and 6, Matsuo teaches (Figures 11, 12, [0103] and [0113]) a reflective photomask (mask) blank comprising a substrate 1; a multi-layered reflection film 2 (reflective part) formed on the substrate and configured to reflect EUV light; and an absorption film and anti-reflection layer 5c (a low reflective part formed on the reflective part and configured to absorb an incident light, wherein the low reflective part is a multi-layer structural body having at least two or more layers including an absorption layer and an outermost layer). With further regard to claim 6, Matsuo also teaches a reflective photomask (mask) 20 comprising the layers discussed above.
With further regard to amended claims 1 and 6, Matsuo teaches [0089] the extinction coefficient of the absorption film is equal to 0.0721 (an extinction coefficient k to a wavelength of 13.5 nm of the absorption layer is k>0.041) and the total film thickness of the absorption film [0031] is configured to be from 25 nm to 45 nm and the anti-reflection layer [0135] has a thickness of 16 nm (a film thickness satisfying 0.5×da+dc≥27.5 nm, wherein the film thickness of the absorption layer is da and the film thickness of the outermost layer is dc, when the absorption film is 25-45 nm, the low end of the absorption film thickness range results in 0.5 x 25 + 16 = 28.5 nm and the high end of the absorption film thickness range results in 0.5 x 45 + 16 = 38.5 nm, therefore the absorption film thickness range satisfies the equation 0.5×da+dc≥27.5 nm).
Matsuo does not appear to explicitly teach the limitations of amended claims 1 and 6 wherein the absorption layer contains at least one or more layers, at least one layer of the absorption layer contains a total of 50 at % or more of one or more kinds of elements selected from a first material group, and the first material group contains tellurium (Te), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni), tin (Sn), platinum (Pt), indium (In), silver (Ag), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), and bismuth (Bi), and oxides, nitrides, and oxynitrides of tellurium (Te), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni), tin (Sn), platinum (Pt), indium (In), silver (Ag), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), or bismuth (Bi). However, from the same field of technology, Kataoka recites the formation of a reflective mask blank and a reflective mask for EUV lithography.
In view of amended claims 1 and 6, Kataoka teaches (Claims 1 and 12) a reflective mask blank and reflective mask comprising a substrate, a multilayer reflective film provided on the substrate and an absorber film provided on the multilayer reflective film. The absorber film is configured to include a high absorption coefficient element selected from the group consisting of cobalt (Co) and nickel (Ni). Kataoka further teaches [0093] the absorber film may include a lower layer (herein defined as an absorption layer) and an upper layer (herein defined as an outermost layer). The lower layer [0114] may be configured to include cobalt (Co) or nickel (Ni) in an amount of 50 atomic percent or less. The compositional limitations taught by Kataoka overlap the range of 50 atomic percent or more recited in amended claims 1 and 6, thereby establishing a prima facie case of obviousness (MPEP Chapter 2144.05).
At the time of the filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reflective mask blank and reflective mask taught by Matsuo to include the teachings of Kataoka directed to configuring an absorber layer to include high absorption coefficient elements such as cobalt (Co) or nickel (Ni) for the purpose of reducing shadowing effects during an EUV lithography exposure process (Kataoka [0084]). By substituting the aforementioned high absorption coefficient elements taught by Kataoka in the absorption film of Matsuo, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to manufacture a reflective mask blank and reflective mask capable of forming improved patterns with greater accuracy and higher resolution during a semiconductor manufacturing process. Therefore, amended claims 1 and 6 would have been obvious at the time the present application was filed.
In view of claim 2, the combination of Matsuo and Kataoka teaches (Kataoka [0084]) the absorption film containing cobalt (Co) or nickel (Ni) can be configured to have a refractive index of less than 0.98 (0.933 for cobalt, 0.948 for nickel) and the extinction coefficient can be configured to be greater than 0.041 (0.066 for cobalt, 0.073 for nickel). Therefore, claim 2 would have been obvious at the time the present application was filed.
In view of claims 5, 10 and 12, the combination of Matsuo and Kataoka teaches (Matsuo [0031]) the total thickness of the absorption film may be from 25 nm to 45 nm which falls within the claimed thickness ranges recited in claims 5, 10 and 12. Matsuo further an optical density (Figure 2 and [0090]) of greater than 1.5 is achieved. Therefore, claims 5, 10 and 12 would have been obvious at the time the present application was filed.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuo (US 2012/0021344 A1) in view of Kataoka et al. (US 2021/0311382 A1), herein referred to as Kataoka as applied to amended claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Hsieh et al. (US 2016/0124297 A1), herein referred to as Hsieh.
In view of amended claims 4 and 8, the combination of Matsuo and Kataoka teaches (Kataoka [0118]) the upper layer (outermost layer) of the absorber film may be configured to include 50 atomic percent or more of tantalum (compounds such as CoTa or NiTa have 50 atomic percent of tantalum).
The combination of Matsuo and Kataoka does not appear to explicitly teach the limitations of amended claims 4 and 8 wherein the absorption layer contains a total of 50 at % or more of one or more kinds of elements selected from indium (In), and oxides, nitrides and oxynitrides of indium (In). However, from the same field of technology, Hsieh teaches the formation of an EUV mask absorber layer comprising an indium tin oxide (ITO) material.
In view of amended claims 4 and 8, Hsieh teaches [0050] the ITO material may be configured to have an indium content of between 45 and 55 percent (which overlaps the claimed range of 50 atomic percent or more) and an oxygen content of between 45 to 50 percent. In view of the aforementioned content ranges taught by Hsieh, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form an absorption layer for a reflective mask blank and reflective mask with 50 percent or more of indium because Hsieh indicates [0053-0054] such ITO materials are able to mitigate the negative impacts of out of band (OOB) radiation and reduce undesirable geometric shadow effects. Therefore, amended claims 4 and 8 would have been obvious at the time the present application was filed.
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 STEWART A FRASER whose telephone number is (571)270-5126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7am-4pm, EST.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/STEWART A FRASER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights