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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A1, B1, and C1 in the reply filed on 06/05/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 3-5, 10-15, 17, and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/05/2026.
Applicant has indicated that claim 16 is directed to an elected species. However, claim 16 requires monitoring
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/07/2023 was filed after the filing date of this application on 06/09/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 7 ends in a comma instead of a period. Appropriate correction is required.
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 details of claim 16 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 § 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.
Claims 1, 2, 6-9, 16, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to claims that encompass a human performing the steps mentally with or without a physical aid without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
A control method of a laser system which comprises an oscillation stage laser configured to output first laser light, and an amplification stage laser configured to amplify the first laser light and output second laser light, the control method comprising: determining a condition under which an amplification characteristic of the amplification stage laser changes; acquiring relationship between pulse energy of the first laser light and a parameter of the second laser light when the condition is determined to be satisfied; and setting target pulse energy of the first laser light based on the relationship.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim encompasses a human performing the steps mentally with or without a physical aid, the non-human elements recited in the claim are purely generic elements common to all master oscillator power amplifier devices, the non-human elements of the claim do not perform any of the steps of the control method, and the use of the machine does not significantly affect the execution of the claimed method. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the non-human elements recited in the claim are purely generic elements common to all master oscillator power amplifier devices. See, e.g., US20180375283A1 Figs. 2 and 3.
Claims 2, 6-9, and 16 do not appear to add any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the non-human elements recited in the claim are purely generic elements.
Claim 19 is directed to a device where the method is carried out on a generic processor and the generic processor is merely a tool to perform the metal process.
Claim 20 is “an electronic device manufacturing method” that includes the further steps of outputting the laser light to an exposure apparatus and exposing a photosensitive substrate to the laser light to manufacture an electronic device. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the non-human elements recited in the claim are purely generic elements common to electronic device manufacturing methods. See, e.g., US20170237224 [0003]-[0004].
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.
Claims 1, 8, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aggarwal (US20170237224A1), hereafter Aggarwal.
Regarding claims 1 and 19, Aggarwal discloses a control method of a laser system (Title; Fig. 4) which comprises an oscillation stage laser configured to output first laser light (Fig. 4 element 435 emits light 470), and an amplification stage laser configured to amplify the first laser light and output second laser light (Fig. 4 element 440 amplifies light 470 and emits light 475; see also [0071]), the control method comprising: determining a condition under which an amplification characteristic of the amplification stage laser changes ([0094]); acquiring relationship between pulse energy of the first laser light and a parameter of the second laser light when the condition is determined to be satisfied ([0094]); and setting target pulse energy of the first laser light based on the relationship ([0094]; [0103]; [0066] discusses carrying out the method using a processor).
Regarding claim 7, Aggarwal further discloses the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which the characteristic of the second laser light falls within an allowable range ([0103]).
Regarding claim 8, Aggarwal further discloses the parameter is pulse energy of the second laser light ([0103]).
Regarding claim 20, Aggarwal further discloses an electronic device manufacturing method (Fig. 1; Fig. 2; [0050]), comprising: generating laser light using a laser system (Fig. 1 element 175); outputting the laser light to an exposure apparatus (Fig. 1 element 125; Fig. 2; [0050]); and exposing a photosensitive substrate to the laser light in the exposure apparatus to manufacture an electronic device ([0050]), the laser system including: an oscillation stage laser configured to output first laser light (Fig. 1 element 135 emits light element 170); an amplification stage laser configured to amplify the first laser light and output second laser light (Fig. 1 element 140 takes light 170 as an input and outputs element 175); and a processor (Fig. 1 element 165; [0066]) configured to determine a condition under which an amplification characteristic of the amplification stage laser changes ([0094]), acquire relationship between pulse energy of the first laser light and a parameter of the second laser light when the condition is determined to be satisfied ([0094]), and set target pulse energy of the first laser light based on the relationship ([0094]; [0103]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aggarwal in view of Fujimoto et al. (US20080115342A1), hereafter Fujimoto.
Regarding claim 2, Aggarwal does not explicitly disclose wherein the condition includes that one of a number of oscillation pulses and an elapse time after the target pulse energy of the first laser light is previously set reaches a corresponding set value. However, Fujimoto discloses the condition includes that one of a number of oscillation pulses and an elapse time after the target pulse energy of the first laser light is previously set reaches a corresponding set value (Fig. 3 relating the output energy of the amplifier to the number of oscillation pulses). An advantage is to indicate when replacement is necessary after the output energy of the amplifier has reached the deterioration limit ([0015]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Aggarwal with the condition includes that one of a number of oscillation pulses and an elapse time after the target pulse energy of the first laser light is previously set reaches a corresponding set value as disclosed by Fujimoto in order to indicate when replacement is necessary after the output energy of the amplifier has reached the deterioration limit.
Claim(s) 6, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aggarwal in view of Watanabe et al. (US20120236885A1), hereafter Watanabe.
Regarding claim 6, Aggarwal further discloses the laser system is connected to an exposure apparatus (Fig. 1 element 125; [0050]), and is configured to output the second laser light to the exposure apparatus (Fig. 1 element 120), and the relation is acquired ([0094]), when the condition is determined to be satisfied, by measuring the pulse energy of the first laser light and the parameter of the second laser light ([0094]; [0103]). Aggarwal does not explicitly disclose while outputting the second laser light to the exposure apparatus is stopped. However, Watanabe discloses stop outputting the second laser light to the exposure apparatus during adjustment periods ([0054]). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to allow light with the desired properties to be achieved prior to exposing the substrate. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Aggarwal with acquiring the relationship while outputting the second laser light to the exposure apparatus is stopped as disclosed by Watanabe in order to allow light with the desired properties to be achieved prior to exposing the substrate.
Regarding claim 9, Aggarwal does not explicitly disclose the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which a rate of a change in the pulse energy of the second laser light with respect to a change in the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a first predetermined value. However, Watanabe discloses the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which a rate of a change in the pulse energy of the second laser light with respect to a change in the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a first predetermined value (Fig. 2). An advantage is to prevent variation in the output of the pulse ([0057]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Aggarwal with the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which a rate of a change in the pulse energy of the second laser light with respect to a change in the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a first predetermined value as disclosed by Watanabe in order to prevent variation in the output of the pulse.
Regarding claim 16, Aggarwal discloses the parameter includes two or more parameters ([0103]). Aggarwal does not explicitly disclose the parameter includes two or more of pulse energy of the second laser light, pulse energy variation of the second laser light, and a contrast of the interference fringes measured as causing the second laser light to enter a Fabry-Perot interferometer, and the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a maximum value among: a first candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the pulse energy of the second laser light, the first candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which a rate of a change of the pulse energy of the second laser light with respect to a change of the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a first predetermined value, a second candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the pulse energy variation of the second laser light, the second candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which an absolute value of a rate of a change of the pulse energy variation of the second laser light with respect to the change of the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a second predetermined value, and a third candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the contrast, the third candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which the contrast is equal to or more than a third predetermined value. However, Watanabe discloses the parameter includes two or more of pulse energy of the second laser light (Fig. 2 element E), pulse energy variation of the second laser light (Fig. 2 element sigma), and a contrast of the interference fringes measured as causing the second laser light to enter a Fabry-Perot interferometer, and the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a maximum value among: a first candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the pulse energy of the second laser light, the first candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which a rate of a change of the pulse energy of the second laser light with respect to a change of the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a first predetermined value (Fig. 2 shows the acceptable range and a specific lower value of the pulse energy at which the rate of change of the pulse energy is equal to or less than a predetermined value), a second candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the pulse energy variation of the second laser light, the second candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which an absolute value of a rate of a change of the pulse energy variation of the second laser light with respect to the change of the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a second predetermined value, and a third candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the contrast, the third candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which the contrast is equal to or more than a third predetermined value (See above citations). An advantage is to prevent variation in the output of the pulse ([0057]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Aggarwal with the parameter includes two or more of pulse energy of the second laser light, pulse energy variation of the second laser light, and a contrast of the interference fringes measured as causing the second laser light to enter a Fabry-Perot interferometer, and the target pulse energy of the first laser light is set to a maximum value among: a first candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the pulse energy of the second laser light, the first candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which a rate of a change of the pulse energy of the second laser light with respect to a change of the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a first predetermined value, a second candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the pulse energy variation of the second laser light, the second candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which an absolute value of a rate of a change of the pulse energy variation of the second laser light with respect to the change of the pulse energy of the first laser light is equal to or less than a second predetermined value, and a third candidate value calculated when the parameter includes the contrast, the third candidate value being a minimum value of the pulse energy of the first laser light at which the contrast is equal to or more than a third predetermined value as disclosed by Watanabe in order to prevent variation in the output of the pulse.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/Joshua King/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 09/05/2026
Prosecution Insights