DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0145668 (hereinafter referred to as Riege).
Riege, in [0060], and in figures 9-10, discloses a reticle (photomask structure), that comprises a layout pattern (that defines the structure to be printed on the resist once exposed) that has the three edges (first, second and third edges) and are connected to each edge in the claimed manner, and are surrounded by L shaped (L-type) opaque or transparent bands that have widths and spacings below the resolution limit and are sub-resolution assist features (claimed first and second L-type assist features) wherein the transparent/opaque bands are not in surface contact with each other (see [0042], and [0045] have a spacing between them of about 0.1 micron), and is illustrated below,
PNG
media_image1.png
482
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
507
746
media_image2.png
Greyscale
i.e., the first and second bands (claimed L-type assist patterns) surround the edges of the main pattern (902) (claim 1).
Riege, in figure 10, and in [0060], discloses the positioning of the assist features that surround the main pattern (structure 1002), in the claimed manner wherein the assist features (first and second, bands 1004, and 1006) are positioned in the same claimed manner, see below,
PNG
media_image3.png
497
621
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
As illustrated above, and on page 3, 4th edge of the assist pattern and sixth edge of the assist pattern (bands 1004, and 1006 respectively) is adjacent to the second edge of the pattern (polygon structure, 1002) and the 7th edge and 5th edge of the assist patterns (bands) are adjacent to the third edge of the structure (1002), wherein the 4th edge and 5th edge are opposite ends of the band 1004 (first L-type assist pattern) and the sixth and seventh edges are opposite ends of the band 1006 (second L-type assist pattern) and at the same time 4th and 6th edges are flush with each other, and fifth and seventh are substantially flush with each other (claims 2-4). Riege, in [0060], and in figure 10, discloses that band 1004 (first L-type assist pattern) has a first main portion that is adjacent in proximity to the 1st edge of the structure 1002 (pattern) and has a first extension portion that is proximal to the second edge of the structure 1002 (pattern), and Riege also illustrates that the band 1006 (second L-type assist pattern) has a second main portion that is closer in position to the first edge of the pattern structure 1002, and has a second extension portion that is closer in proximity to the third edge of the pattern structure 1002, wherein in the band 1004, the first main portion is connected to the first extension portion and in band 1006, the second main portion is connected to the second extension portion, and is illustrated, see below,
PNG
media_image4.png
497
621
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and as disclosed above has the same positioning of the assist patterns with respect to the pattern structure (layout pattern) as recited in claim 5. Riege, in [0042], discloses that the bands positioned around the pattern can have equal width (both bands with 0.15 micron width) or unequal width (one band at 0.15 micron and the second band at 0.3 micron) and applies to both the first and second extension portion of the bands and the first and second main portions of the bands, and as illustrated in figure 10, the widths of the main portion and extension portion of the same band can also be different (claims 6-13). Riege, in figure 10 illustrates the positioning and direction as shown below and is the same as the claimed first and second direction and positioning of the pattern structure (polygon structure 1002) with respect to the bands 1004 and 1006 (L-type assist features), see below,
PNG
media_image5.png
497
690
media_image5.png
Greyscale
.
As illustrated above, the pattern structure portion 1002 that has the first edge extends in the first direction and the first edge is perpendicular to the first direction, and the second and third edges of the pattern structure portion are parallel to the first direction. Also, the second extension portion of the band 1006 (second L-type assist pattern) and the first extension portion of the band 1004 (first L-type assist pattern) extend in a direction that is parallel to the first direction, and the main portions (first and second main portions) of the band 1006, and band 1004 are position perpendicular to the first direction (claims 14-18). Riege, in [0042], and [0060], discloses that the spacing between the first band and second band that surround the pattern structure and the spacing between the band and the pattern structure are less than a wavelength used for the exposure i.e., the claimed minimum spacing as defined by a design rule such that that the bands will not be resolved in the resist upon exposure (the bands are the same as the claimed assist features) (claims 19-20).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 416,855. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,416,855 (Sun) discloses a photomask structure that has a layout pattern with corners, and is surrounded by L-shaped assist pattern features (claim 7 of Sun) wherein at least one i.e., includes at least two assist patterns wrap the edges of the layout pattern and wrap at least one corner i.e., both the assist patterns has the same claimed first and second extensions and the first and second main portions, and wrap the edges of the layout pattern in the claimed manner and Claim 2 of Sun, discloses that the assist patterns are not in surface contact with each other or the layout pattern and are positioned in a minimum spacing as specified by a design rule, and in light of the disclosure of U. S. Patent No. 12,416,855 (Sun), fully encompasses claims 1-20 of the instant application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daborah Chacko-Davis whose telephone number is (571) 272-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30AM-6:00PM EST Mon-Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark F. Huff can be reached on (571) 272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. 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.
/DABORAH CHACKO-DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 March 26, 2026.
Prosecution Insights