Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/291,534

METROLOGY METHOD AND METROLOGY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 23, 2024
Priority
Jul 23, 2021 — EU 21187352.6 +2 more
Examiner
SMITH, MAURICE C
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
ASML Holding N.V.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
609 granted / 721 resolved
+24.5% vs TC avg
Minimal -4% lift
Without
With
+-4.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
751
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
32.3%
-7.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 721 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . 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 “one passive dispersive element” 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 § 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 16, 17, 21, 22, 25, & 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PANDEY US 20180059552. With respect to claim 16, Pandey teaches a metrology device comprising: an illumination branch (fig 3, 11-14) operable to propagate measurement radiation to a sample (fig 3, W); a detection branch (fig 3, 18-19) operable to propagate one or more components (fig 3, +1 & -1) of scattered radiation, scattered from the sample as a result of illumination of the sample by the measurement radiation; and a dispersive arrangement (fig 3c, 24) in either of the illumination branch or the detection branch (fig 3, W), wherein the dispersive arrangement is arranged to maintain the one or more components of the scattered radiation at substantially a same respective location “on first sensor” in a detection pupil plane “forms a diffraction spectrum (pupil plane image)” (0044, lines 3-5) over a range of wavelength values for the measurement radiation “normalizing intensity measurements” (0044, lines 10-11). With respect to claim 17 according to claim 16, Pandey teaches the metrology device wherein the dispersive arrangement comprises at least one passive dispersive element (fig 3a, objective lens). With respect to claim 21 according to claim 16, Pandey teaches the metrology device wherein the one or more components of the scattered radiation comprise at least a pair of complementary diffraction orders (fig 3, +1 & -1) (0042, lines 4-7) of the scattered radiation. With respect to claim 22 according to claim 16, Pandey teaches the metrology device wherein the one or more components of the scattered radiation comprise at least two pairs of complementary diffraction orders “2nd, 3rd and higher order beams…addition to the first order beams” (0047, lines 5-8) of the scattered radiation. With respect to claim 25 according to claim 16, Pandey teaches the metrology device wherein: the dispersive arrangement (fig 3c, 24) comprises at least one diffractive optical element (fig 3c, 25a-d) operable to generate at least one illumination diffraction order (fig 3, +1 & -1), and the metrology device is operable to use the at least one illumination diffraction order as the measurement radiation “normalizing intensity measurements” (0044, lines 10-11). With respect to claim 28 according to claim 16, Pandey teaches the metrology device wherein the dispersive arrangement comprises at least one non-diffractive dispersive element, the non-diffractive dispersive arrangement comprising one or more prism (fig 13, 15 & 17) “beam splitter” (0043, lines 1-2). With respect to claim 29 according to claim 16, Pandey teaches the metrology device wherein the dispersive arrangement further comprises: an optical element operable (fig 3, objective) to translate any change in beam angle imposed by the diffractive optical element or non-diffractive optical element to a displacement in an illumination pupil plane or the detection pupil plane. PNG media_image1.png 404 652 media_image1.png Greyscale With respect to claim 30, Pandey teaches a method comprising: propagating measurement radiation (fig 3, 11-14) to a sample (fig 3, W); capturing one or more components of scattered radiation (fig 3, +1 & -1), scattered from the sample as a result of illumination of the sample by the measurement radiation; and dispersing (fig 3c, 24) the measurement radiation or the scattered radiation so as to maintain the one or more components (fig 3, +1 & -1) of the scattered radiation at substantially a same respective location “on first sensor” in a detection pupil plane over a range of wavelength values “forms a diffraction spectrum (pupil plane image)” (0044, lines 3-5) for the measurement radiation “normalizing intensity measurements” (0044, lines 10-11). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 18-20, 23, 24, 26, & 27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims or to include the limitation(s) and any intervening claims into the base claim. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 18, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “a fixed detection aperture stop; wherein the dispersive arrangement is arranged such that the one or more components of the scattered radiation are maintained within at least one detection region defined by the fixed detection aperture stop”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 18. As to claim 24, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “ and the dispersive arrangement is arranged to receive the input radiation and generate at least one beam of the measurement radiation at a location in the illumination pupil plane which varies with the wavelength, such that the one or more components of the scattered radiation are maintained at substantially a same respective location in the detection pupil plane”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 24. As to claim 26, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the diffractive optical element comprises an adjustable pitch modulation element, wherein the adjustable pitch modulation element comprises an acousto-optical modulator, an electro-optical modulator or a spatial light modulator”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 26. As to claim 27, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the diffractive optical element is operable to generate two complementary illumination diffraction orders; and the metrology device is operable to use each of the two complementary illumination diffraction orders as a respective beam of measurement radiation of a pair of beams of measurement radiation for simultaneous measurement of the sample from two different directions”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 27. As to claim 30, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the diffractive optical element comprises an adjustable pitch modulation element, wherein the adjustable pitch modulation element comprises an acousto-optical modulator, an electro-optical modulator or a spatial light modulator”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 30. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAURICE C SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-2526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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, 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. /MAURICE C SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704462
METHOD OF DETECTING THE PRESENCE OF A PATHOGEN IN A BIOLOGICAL LIQUID
3y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12697441
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR ASPECTS OF A DOSE DETECTION SYSTEM
4y 5m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12680870
Ultra-Miniature Spatial Heterodyne Spectrometer
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674703
Using a Strong Optical Beam to Detect a Weak Optical Beam
1y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12663373
DEVICE FOR INSPECTING A HUMAN BODY PORTION AND ASSOCIATED METHOD
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (-4.2%)
2y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 721 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month