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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hersft fails to teach a device, being in addition to and different from the atomic force microscopy tool, for qualifying the coordinate reference pattern on the plate. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant’s position on claim interpretation is not consistent with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims in light of the specification. While it is clear that applicant’s specification envisions the device having an embodiment where it is entirely physically independent and non-unitary/non-integral with the AFM instrument, the specification doesn’t establish this interpretation as preclusive. This is in part due to discussion about manual or automatic movement means transferring the plate between the device and AFM conveys they may indeed be incorporated. This incorporation is not uncommon in this technology area, such where tools are integrated into one machine and the workpiece is transported back and forth, but however one might imagine this being done the specification does not preclude incorporation by demanding entirely separate unitary structures. Despite applicant’s argued position that the proper interpretation of the claim language ‘being in addition to and different from the AFM tool’ are entirely unique apparatuses, the examiner must consider the broadest reasonable interpretation allowing for integration. ‘Being in addition to and different’ therefore only requires that the collection of elements attributed to the device be unique and additional to the AFM, however the device and AFM being combined into a single system permits the possibility of some overlap so long as separate elements are still identifiable. In this particular case the separation may be the table of Hersft, as it is an independently movable system with its own translation mechanisms to displace relative to the pattern encoder, displacement measurement systems, etc. Hersft actually envisions a variety of options to construct this ‘device, being in addition to and different’ from the AFM, not limited to laser scanners, and entirely additional AFM tool, stroke recorders, etc. “Preferably, the scannable structure is scannable by said probe tip and said structure forming, but also other scanning means, such as a laser may be used, that is e.g. arranged for scanning a fiducial mark and measuring the probe tip X and Y coordinate. The resulting image is decoded so that position coordinates can be extracted from this. When scannable by the probe tip 18, several material properties may be used for obtaining a coded scanning signal, e.g. a coding provided by provided by varying a local stiffness, magnetic or material type property. Other properties can also be used, e.g. topography, surface potential, hardness, material type. While the scannable structure 40 is shown fixed to the substrate holder 5; it may also integral part of the substrate, e.g. it may be provided as a scannable pattern in silicon. It may also be a separate (silicon) substrate attached to the substrate holder 5… This method requires a displacement encoder for encoding a displacement of said probe tip in one or more directions that the substrate holder moves relative to the sample tip, so that its position is known through a separate set of displacement encoders or sensors.” The applicant may wish to consider claim amendments to ensure the claim scope accurately reflects their preferred interpretation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it is directed to a data file. The applicant may consider amending this claim to ‘a non-transitory computer-readable medium’ to overcome this rejection.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-10,12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Herfst EP 3599470 A1.
Regarding Claim(s) 1, Herfst teaches: A system for performing atomic force microscopy, the system comprising:
an atomic force microscopy tool configured for receiving a plate including a coordinate reference pattern on the plate, for providing a position reference for system elements of the atomic force microscopy tool; and (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
a device, being in addition to and different from the atomic force microscopy tool, for qualifying the coordinate reference pattern on the plate, the device being arranged for receiving the plate such as to perform qualification inspection, and comprising: (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
- a fixed reference frame; - a pattern encoder, arranged for reading the coordinate reference pattern on the plate; - an actuation stage, arranged for moving the plate and the pattern encoder relative to each other in a direction parallel to the plane of the plate; - a displacement measurement system, arranged for measuring a displacement of the plate or the pattern encoder relative to the fixed reference frame; and - a controller, arranged for controlling the actuation stage, the pattern encoder, and the displacement measurement system; (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
wherein, while controlling the actuation stage, the controller is arranged for controlling the pattern encoder to identify imperfections in the coordinate reference pattern; wherein, for each imperfection, the controller is arranged for identifying the location of said each imperfection by controlling the displacement measurement system to measure the displacement of the plate or the pattern encoder relative to the fixed reference frame; and wherein the controller is arranged for storing each imperfection coupled to the location of said each imperfection. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 2, Herfst teaches: wherein the controller is arranged for identifying imperfections in at least a subset of the coordinate reference pattern, to create a pattern correction map. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 3, Herfst teaches: wherein, prior to controlling the pattern encoder to identify imperfections, the controller is arranged for controlling the pattern encoder to identify at least one reference position in the coordinate reference pattern, and, for each reference position, identifying the location of said reference position by controlling the displacement measurement system to measure the displacement of the plate relative to the fixed reference frame, and storing each reference position coupled to the location of said each reference position. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 4, Herfst teaches: wherein, for each imperfection, the controller is arranged for calculating the relative location of said each imperfection relative to at least one reference position, and storing each imperfection coupled to the relative location of said each imperfection. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 5, Herfst teaches: herein, for each imperfection, the controller is arranged for controlling the pattern encoder to identify a type of imperfection and/or to quantify an effect of said each imperfection, and for storing each imperfection coupled to the location of said each imperfection and the type and/or quantified effect of said each imperfection. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 6, Herfst teaches: wherein the controller is arranged for controlling the displacement measurement system to measure the displacement of the plate along an X-axis defined by the fixed reference frame, and along a Y-axis perpendicular to the X-axis. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 7, Herfst teaches: wherein the controller is arranged for controlling the displacement measurement system to measure a rotation of the plate around a Z-axis, perpendicular to the X-axis and the Y-axis. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 8, Herfst teaches: wherein the actuation stage is arranged for adjusting a position of the plate along the Z-axis, and for adjusting an orientation of the plate around the X-axis and around the Y-axis, and wherein the displacement measurement system is additionally arranged for measuring a displacement of the plate along the Z-axis. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 9, Herfst teaches: wherein, while controlling the actuation stage to move the plate and the pattern encoder relative to each other in a direction parallel to the plane of the plate, the controller is arranged for controlling the actuation stage to maintain the position and orientation of the plate along the Z-axis, and around the X-axis and Y-axis, respectively. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 10, Herfst teaches: wherein the displacement measurement system comprises a laser-interferometer system. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 12, Herfst teaches: wherein the actuation stage and the fixed reference frame are mechanically and thermally isolated from each other. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 13, Herfst teaches: comprising an enclosure to provide a conditioned environment for at least the fixed reference frame and the actuation stage. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 14, Herfst teaches: A device for qualifying a coordinate reference pattern on a plate for use in an atomic force microscopy (AFM) tool, wherein the device is different from the AFM tool and is arranged for receiving the plate to perform qualification inspection, said device comprising:- a fixed reference frame;- a pattern encoder, arranged for reading the coordinate reference pattern on the plate;- an actuation stage, arranged for moving the plate and the pattern encoder relative to each other in a direction parallel to the plane of the plate; - a displacement measurement system, arranged for measuring a displacement of the plate or the pattern encoder relative to the fixed reference frame; and- a controller, arranged for controlling the actuation stage, the pattern encoder, and the displacement measurement system; wherein, while controlling the actuation stage, the controller is arranged for controlling the pattern encoder to identify imperfections in the coordinate reference pattern; wherein, for each imperfection, the controller is arranged for identifying the location of said each imperfection by controlling the displacement measurement system to measure the displacement of the plate or the pattern encoder relative to the fixed reference frame; and wherein the controller is arranged for storing each imperfection coupled to the location of said each imperfection. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 15, Herfst teaches: A data file generated by the device according to claim 14, the data file comprising an array of identified imperfections in at least a subset of a coordinate reference pattern on a plate, wherein each identified imperfection is coupled to a location of said identified imperfection relative to at least one reference position on the coordinate reference pattern. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Regarding Claim(s) 16, Herfst teaches: A method of qualifying a coordinate reference pattern on a plate, the method comprising using the device according to claim 14 for performing steps of:- moving, by an actuation stage, the plate and a pattern encoder relative to each other in a direction parallel to the plane of the plate; - identifying imperfections in the coordinate reference pattern by the pattern encoder, arranged for reading the coordinate reference pattern on the plate; - identifying, for each imperfection, a location of said each imperfection by a displacement measurement system, arranged for measuring a displacement of the plate relative to a fixed reference frame; and - storing each imperfection coupled to the location of said each imperfection, to create a pattern correction map. (Herfst [0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herfst EP 3599470 A1 in view of Official Notice.
Regarding Claim(s) 11, Herfst teaches: wherein the actuation stage comprises a precision enhancing means for moving the plate. (Herfst [0003]-[0004],[0006]-[0008],[0010]-[0016],[0019]-[0024])
Herfst does not adequately teach: wherein the precision enhancing means comprises planar air bearings
The examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that planar air bearings are ordinary and well known in the art. Herfst discloses that SPM devices are ultra-high precision instruments for use in sub-nanometer resolution situations such that the elements they are constructed of enable such extreme precision. “Scanning probe microscopy (SPM) devices, such as atomic force microscopy (AFM) devices, are for example applied in the semiconductor industry for scanning of semiconductor topologies on a surface. Other uses of this technology are found in biomedical industry, nanotechnology, and scientific applications. In particular, AFM may be used for critical dimension metrology (CD-metrology), particle scanning, stress- and roughness measurements. AFM microscopy allows visualization of surfaces at very high accuracy, enabling visualization of surface elements at sub-nanometer resolution. As a result of the high accuracy, conventional and available SPM devices are to be controlled precisely, and contain accurate and sensitive measuring equipment, as well as positioning and scanning equipment arranged for supporting the very high (e.g. nanometer) resolution.” The applicant discloses in their specification [0056] that planar air bearings are preferred for moving the plate but can use alternatives for low friction and high accuracy movements like ball bearings or magnetic bearings. Both references teach highly precise movement is known in the industry as well as the elements that enable it, the difference in teaching is only in the explicitly naming of a well known prior art element that achieves the known function and configuration. Planar air bearings are well known to those of ordinary skill in the art and ordinary to use in the actuation means (including stages) of SPMs for the same purposes mentioned by the applicant and in Herfst, and it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) The applicant does not disclose this element as critical but preferential for reasons well known to those of ordinary skill in the art already and also disclosing well known alternatives as suitable, so lacking criticality the choice of a prior art element is obvious for the skill in the art.
Conclusion
1. 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 SEAN LUCK whose telephone number is (571)272-6493. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 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, Georgia Epps can be reached at (571) 272-2328. 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.
SEAN LUCK
Examiner
Art Unit 2878
/SEAN LUCK/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights