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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed , with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-23 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nozawa US 2020064725.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-8, 10-12 and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Nozawa US 2020/0064725.
Regarding claim 1, Nozawa teaches method comprising: providing a hardmask (fig. 2 hard mask film 3) layer on a layer composed of a high refractive index material (light shielding film 2 [0173]), the high refractive index material having a refractive index in a range of 2 to 4 [0145], the layer composed of the high refractive index material being supported by a substrate; depositing a resist layer (resist film 43) on the hardmask layer. While Nozawa teaches an etching method as the exemplary embodiment Nozawa discloses a similar process involving a imprint mold can also be used [0135]. Therefore the limitations of pressing a surface of a tool into the resist layer, wherein the surface of the tool includes features that are imprinted into the resist layer; and releasing the tool from the resist layer would be considered obvious in an imprint mold method. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention implement an imprint mold method as Nozawa discloses they are known substitutes.
Regarding claim 2, Nozawa teaches an imprint mold process of claim 1 but while not explicitly teach further including: after releasing the tool form the resist layer, removing portions of a residual resist layer that is on the hardmask layer, so as to expose first portions of the hardmask layer. Nozawa does teach removing portions of the residual resist layer that is on the hardmask layer so as to expose first portions of the hardmask layer (see fig. 3C to 3D) therefore the limitation are considered obvious.
Regarding claim 3, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 2 wherein the portions of the residual resist layer are removed using a directional oxygen plasma [0076][0077][0122].
Regarding claim 4, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 1 further including: selectively etching the hardmask layer (hard mask film 3) to expose first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material (light shielding film 2) (fig. 3C) ; and selectively etching the exposed first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material to form trenches therein (see fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 6, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 4 wherein selectively etching the exposed first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material includes using an inductively coupled plasma, wherein remaining portions of the resist layer and the hardmask serve as a mask while etching the layer composed of the high refractive index material [0077].
Regarding claim 7, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the layer composed of the high refractive index material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: amorphous silicon, polycrystalline silicon, crystalline silicon, silicon nitride [0163], titanium dioxide, and alumina.
Regarding claim 8, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the hardmask material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: chrome (see claim 20), titanium, aluminum, silicon nitride and silicon dioxide.
Regarding claim 10, Nozawa teaches an apparatus comprising: a substrate (fig. 1 substrate 1); a layer composed of a high refractive index material (light shield 2) and disposed on the substrate, the high refractive index material having a refractive index in a range of 2 to 4; a hardmask (hard mask 3) layer disposed on the layer composed of the high refractive index material; a resist layer (resist 4) disposed on the hardmask layer. Nozawa does not explicitly teach wherein the resist layer has features imprinted therein however does disclose an imprint mold process can also be used [0134] . Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention implement an imprint mold method as Nozawa discloses they are known substitutes.
Regarding claim 11, Nozawa teaches the apparatus of claim 10 wherein the layer composed of the high refractive index material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: amorphous silicon, polycrystalline silicon, crystalline silicon, silicon nitride [0163], titanium dioxide, and alumina.
Regarding claim 12, Nozawa teaches the apparatus of claim 10 wherein the hardmask material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: chrome [0146], titanium, aluminum, silicon nitride and silicon dioxide.
Regarding claim 21, Nozawa teaches an apparatus comprising: a substrate (fig. 3 substrate 1); a layer (light shield 2 SiN [0163]) composed of a high refractive index material and disposed on the substrate, the high refractive index material having a refractive index in a range of 2 to 4; a hardmask (hard mask 3) layer disposed on the layer composed of the high refractive index material; a resist layer (resist 4) disposed on the hardmask layer, wherein the resist layer defines a pattern of features on the hardmask layer.
Regarding claim 22, Nozawa teaches the apparatus of claim 21 wherein the layer composed of the high refractive index material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: amorphous silicon, polycrystalline silicon, crystalline silicon, silicon nitride [0163], titanium dioxide, and alumina.
Regarding claim 23, Nozawa teaches the apparatus of claim 21 wherein the hardmask material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: chrome [0173], titanium, aluminum, silicon nitride and silicon dioxide.
Claim(s) 5 and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Riley US 2019/0064532.
Regarding claim 5, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 4 further including: after selectively etching the hardmask layer (fig. 3 hard mask 3) and selectively etching the exposed first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material (see fig. 3D), removing remaining portions of the resist layer and the hardmask layer so as to expose second portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material (fig. 3E). While Nozawa does not explicitly disclose to define optical meta-atoms on the substrate each individual sub unit 2a can be considered an optical meta atom. Furthermore Riley teaches these photolithography techniques used to form the metasurface features (construed as a meta-atom [0005]) of a meta-surface array to form features smaller than a wavelength of light [0005]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nozawa in view of Riley to form meta-atoms to form features smaller than wavelength of light.
Regarding claim 13, Nozawa teaches a method comprising: providing a hardmask layer (hard mask 3 fig. 3) on a layer composed of a high refractive index material, the high refractive index material having a refractive index in a range of 2 to 4 (SiN [0163]), the layer composed of the high refractive index material being supported by a substrate; depositing a resist layer (resist 4) on the hardmask layer. Nozawa does not explicitly teach the resist layer is a UV resist; selectively exposing first portions of the UV resist to UV radiation; developing the resist after exposing the first portions of the UV resist to the UV radiation; and selectively removing either the first portions of the UV resist that were exposed to the UV radiation or second portions of the UV resist that were not exposed to the UV radiation. However Nozawa does disclose dry etching as well as a imprint mold process [0133]-[0134]. Riley teaches these can be substituted for UV photolithography [0214] which would render obvious he resist layer is a UV resist; selectively exposing first portions of the UV resist to UV radiation; developing the resist after exposing the first portions of the UV resist to the UV radiation; and selectively removing either the first portions of the UV resist that were exposed to the UV radiation or second portions of the UV resist that were not exposed to the UV radiation as these steps would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photolithography. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nozawa to implement a UV photolithographic technique as the are considered known substitutes.
Regarding claim 14, Nozawa in view of Riley discloses the method of claim 13, Riley further teaches including using a deep ultra-violet lithography tool [0216] to selectively expose the first portions of the UV resist to the UV radiation.
Regarding claim 15, Nozawa in view of Riley teach the method of claim 13 further including: selectively etching the hardmask layer to expose first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material (See Nozawa fig. 3B-3C); and selectively etching the exposed first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material to form trenches therein (See Nozawa fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 16, Nozawa teaches the method of claim 15 further including: after selectively etching the hardmask layer and selectively etching the exposed first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material, removing remaining portions of the resist layer and the hardmask layer so as to expose second portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material, wherein the second portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material (see fig. 3E shows removal). While Nozawa does not explicitly disclose to define optical meta-atoms on the substrate each individual sub unit 2a can be considered an optical meta atom. Furthermore Riley teaches these photolithography techniques used to form the metasurface features (construed as a meta-atom [0005]) of a meta-surface array to form features smaller than a wavelength of light [0005]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nozawa in view of Riley to form meta-atoms to form features smaller than wavelength of light.
Regarding claim 17, Nozawa in view of Riley teach the method of claim 15 wherein selectively etching the exposed first portions of the layer composed of the high refractive index material includes using an inductively coupled plasma, wherein remaining portions of the resist layer and the hardmask serve as a mask while etching the layer composed of the high refractive index material (Nozawa [0077]).
Regarding claim 18, Nozawa in view of Riley teach the method of claim 13 wherein the layer composed of the high refractive index material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: amorphous silicon, polycrystalline silicon, crystalline silicon, silicon nitride (see Nozawa [0163] titanium dioxide, and alumina.
Regarding claim 19, Nozawa in view of Riley teach the method of claim 13 wherein the hardmask material is composed of a material selected from a group consisting of: chrome (Nozawa [0173]), titanium, aluminum, silicon nitride and silicon dioxide.
Claim(s) 5 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Riley and further in view Kim U S2019/0086579.
Regarding claim 5 and 20, Nozawa in view of Riley teach the method of claim 5 / 20, Nozawa and Riley do no teach wherein the meta-atoms and the substrate are composed of a same material as one another. Kim teaches meta atoms (meta surface optical elements [0010]) and a substrate are composed of a same material ([0010]) to reduce cost or expedite fabrication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nozawa and Riley in view of Kim to reduce cost or expedite fabrication.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHU VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1562. The examiner can normally be reached 11:00 - 7:00 M-F.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/PHU VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights