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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/18/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 6 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vaez-Iravani et al. (US Pub 2002/0145732 A1 )(hereinafter, “Vaez-Iravani ”).
Regarding claim 1, Vaez-Iravani teaches a particle inspection device (10) that inspects a particle adhering to a substrate on which a pattern is formed ([0056]), comprising:
a light irradiation unit (illumination beams 22, 24 and scanning of spot 20a, [0050]) that linearly scans (discloses spot 20a moved across wafer, spiral scan, [0050]) and irradiate the substrate (20) with a laser beam(discloses wafer 20 is illuminated, [0050]);
a first light detection unit (206) and a second light detection unit (208) that detect light reflected by the substrate (discloses both 206 and 208 detect scattered light including from wafer surface and patterns, [0061]); and
a particle detection unit (computer 62) that detects the particle based on output signals of the first light detection unit and the second light detection unit (discloses algorithm #1 and #2 classify defects using output signals from the channels, [0075] and [0082]), wherein
the first light detection unit (206) and the second light detection unit (208) are arranged such that a light reception elevation angle with respect to a surface of the substrate and a light reception horizontal angle with respect to a scanning direction of the laser beam are different from each other(discloses DWO/DNO channels collect scattered light at different azimuthal angles; DNN/DWN ),
the first light detection unit (206) detects diffracted light (discloses receiving Fourier pattern scatter, [0047] and [0068]) from the pattern of which an angle with the scanning direction (discloses azimuthal angle relative to beam and wafer motion, [0056] and [0060]) is a predetermined angle(discloses detector placement is fixed at predefined azimuthal angels, [0060] and [0064]), and
the second light detection unit (208) detects diffracted light from the pattern of which an angle with the scanning direction is other than the predetermined angle(discloses 208 is positioned at a different angular location, [0060]), wherein
the diffracted light detected by the first light detection unit is either undetected by the second light detection unit (discloses that Fourier scatter appears in some detectors but not others, [0047]), or the second light detection unit receives an amount of the diffracted light detected by the first light detection unit that is less than a predetermined detection threshold, and
wherein the particle detection unit (computer 62) determines whether detected light is scattered light from the particle (“the outputs of detectors 40, 60 are supplied to a computer 62 for processing the signals and determining the presence of anomalies and their characteristics”, “…distinguishing between micro-scratches and particles”, [0042] and [0055] ) or scattered light from the pattern based on output signals of the first light detection unit and output signals of the second light detection unit.
Regarding claim 2, Vaez-Iravani teaches wherein the particle detection unit determines that an object is the particle only when each of the output signals of the first light detection unit (206) and the second light detection unit (208) is greater than or equal to the predetermined detection threshold (discloses PMT40 with lens collector 38 and PMT 60 with ellipsoidal collector 52 are two separate detector channels that independently collect scattered/reflected light from the wafer, and their outputs are evaluated by computer 62 to determine whether detected signals correspond to particles, [0041-0042]).
Regarding claim 3, Vaez-Iravani teaches wherein the particle detection unit (computer 62) determines that detected light is diffracted light from the pattern (discloses identifies pattern-generated diffracted light, [0045] and [0047]) in a case where any of the output signals ([0059]) of the first light detection unit (PMT 40) and the second light detection unit (PMT 60) is less than the predetermined detection threshold (discloses a binary signal evaluation in which detector outputs are classified as wither “saturated” or “not detecting such diffraction”, corresponds to signal levels above and below a predetermined detection threshold, inherently disclosed, [0056] and [0068]).
Regarding claim 4, Vaez-Iravani teaches wherein a polarizing plate (S-and P- polarization selective detection, [0082-0084]) is provided in front of each of the first light detection unit (206) and the second light detection unit (208).
Regarding claim 5, Vaez-Iravani teaches wherein
each of the first light detection unit (206) and the second light detection unit (208) includes a plurality of light detectors (206a, 208a, [0060]) paired with each other (discloses detectors are indexed, grouped, and correspond spatially, [0063]), and
each of the plurality of light detectors paired with each other detects light from different positions in the laser beam that scans linearly (discloses during scanning illumination of the wafer, scattered light from different spatial positions of the scanning laser beam is received by different detector elements over time, with each detector element collecting light from a distinct angular sector, [0060] and [0068-0069]).
Regarding claim 6, Vaez-Iravani teaches a particle inspection method for inspecting a particle adhering to a substrate on which a pattern is formed ([0056]), comprising
linearly scanning (discloses spot 20a moved across wafer, spiral scan, [0050]) and irradiating the substrate (20) with a laser beam (discloses wafer 20 is illuminated, [0050]) and detecting light reflected by the substrate by a first light detection unit (206) and a second light detection unit (208, discloses both 206 and 208 detect scattered light including from wafer surface and patterns, [0061]) to detect the particle based on output signals of the first light detection unit and the second light detection unit(discloses algorithm #1 and #2 classify defects using output signals from the channels, [0075] and [0082]), wherein
the first light detection unit (206) and the second light detection unit (208) are arranged such that a light reception elevation angle with respect to a surf ace of the substrate and a light reception horizontal angle with respect to a scanning direction of the laser beam are different from each other (discloses DWO/DNO channels collect scattered light at different azimuthal angles; DNN/DWN ),
diffracted light from the pattern of which an angle with the scanning direction (discloses azimuthal angle relative to beam and wafer motion, [0056] and [0060]) is a predetermined angle(discloses detector placement is fixed at predefined azimuthal angels, [0060] and [0064]) is detected by the first light detection unit (206), and
diffracted light from the pattern of which an angle with the scanning direction is other than the predetermined angle is detected by the second light detection unit (discloses 208 is positioned at a different angular location, [0060]), wherein
the diffracted light detected by the first light detection unit is either undetected by the second light detection unit (discloses that Fourier scatter appears in some detectors but not others, [0047]), or the second light detection unit receives an amount of the diffracted light detected by the first light detection unit that is less than a predetermined detection threshold, and
wherein the particle detection unit (computer 62) determines whether detected light is scattered light from the particle (“the outputs of detectors 40, 60 are supplied to a computer 62 for processing the signals and determining the presence of anomalies and their characteristics”, “…distinguishing between micro-scratches and particles”, [0042] and [0055] ) or scattered light from the pattern based on output signals of the first light detection unit and output signals of the second light detection unit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA XING whose telephone number is (571)270-7743. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9AM - 5 PM.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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 I XING/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877