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 pages 7-9, filed on 12/24/2025, with respect to claims 1-7 and 10-18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C 103 rejections of claims 1-7 and 10-18 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites at lines 12-15 “the design information including at least information of: a boundary position of the film forming region and information of a position; and a shape of a mark portion in the film forming region.”. The above recital “information of a position of ??????” is missing in the claim rendering the claim indefinite.
Specification as filed paras 0066-0067 recites “[0066] To cope with this problem, in this embodiment, abnormality detection using design information representing the geometrical feature of a shot region is performed. The geometrical feature of a shot region can include pieces of information that specify the boundary position of the shot region and the position and the shape of each mark in the shot region, as will be described later. These pieces of information will be referred to as "design information" hereinafter. Fig. 9A shows an image representing design information corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 6A is captured. The image in Fig. 9A shows to which extent the imprint material IM in Fig. 6A should be filled. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10A, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6A obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9A representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to recognize the boundary of the shot region and correctly detect the position and the size of unfilling or extrusion. [0067] The image shown in Fig. 9B is an image representing design information (the positions and the sizes) of marks corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 7A is captured. The image in Fig. 9B shows the correct shapes and the positions of the marks shown in Fig. 7A. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10B, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6B obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9B representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to correctly detect an unfilled region of each mark portion.”. Specification therefore recites the design information including “the position and the size of the unfilling or extrusion’ and also “the position of the shot region and the position and shape of each mark in the shot region”. Claim 1 is indefinite because it is missing the information of a position of ????? what? Amendments are required. Claims 2-7, 10-12 and 16-18 depends directly or indirectly on claim 1, therefore they are rejected.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 13 recites at lines 13-16 “the design information including at least information of: a boundary position of the film forming region and information of a position; and a shape of a mark portion in the film forming region.”. The above recital “information of a position of ??????” is missing in the claim rendering the claim indefinite.
Specification as filed paras 0066-0067 recites “[0066] To cope with this problem, in this embodiment, abnormality detection using design information representing the geometrical feature of a shot region is performed. The geometrical feature of a shot region can include pieces of information that specify the boundary position of the shot region and the position and the shape of each mark in the shot region, as will be described later. These pieces of information will be referred to as "design information" hereinafter. Fig. 9A shows an image representing design information corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 6A is captured. The image in Fig. 9A shows to which extent the imprint material IM in Fig. 6A should be filled. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10A, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6A obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9A representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to recognize the boundary of the shot region and correctly detect the position and the size of unfilling or extrusion. [0067] The image shown in Fig. 9B is an image representing design information (the positions and the sizes) of marks corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 7A is captured. The image in Fig. 9B shows the correct shapes and the positions of the marks shown in Fig. 7A. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10B, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6B obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9B representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to correctly detect an unfilled region of each mark portion.”. Specification therefore recites the design information including “the position and the size of the unfilling or extrusion’ and also “the position of the shot region and the position and shape of each mark in the shot region”. Claim 13 is indefinite because it is missing the information of a position of ????? what? Amendments are required.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 14 recites at lines 5-8 “the design information including at least information of: a boundary position of the film forming region and information of a position; and a shape of a mark portion in the film forming region.”. The above recital “information of a position of ??????” is missing in the claim rendering the claim indefinite.
Specification as filed paras 0066-0067 recites “[0066] To cope with this problem, in this embodiment, abnormality detection using design information representing the geometrical feature of a shot region is performed. The geometrical feature of a shot region can include pieces of information that specify the boundary position of the shot region and the position and the shape of each mark in the shot region, as will be described later. These pieces of information will be referred to as "design information" hereinafter. Fig. 9A shows an image representing design information corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 6A is captured. The image in Fig. 9A shows to which extent the imprint material IM in Fig. 6A should be filled. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10A, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6A obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9A representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to recognize the boundary of the shot region and correctly detect the position and the size of unfilling or extrusion. [0067] The image shown in Fig. 9B is an image representing design information (the positions and the sizes) of marks corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 7A is captured. The image in Fig. 9B shows the correct shapes and the positions of the marks shown in Fig. 7A. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10B, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6B obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9B representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to correctly detect an unfilled region of each mark portion.”. Specification therefore recites the design information including “the position and the size of the unfilling or extrusion’ and also “the position of the shot region and the position and shape of each mark in the shot region”. Claim 14 is indefinite because it is missing the information of a position of ????? what? Amendments are required.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 15 recites at lines 7-10 “the design information including at least information of: a boundary position of the film forming region and information of a position; and a shape of a mark portion in the film forming region.”. The above recital “information of a position of ??????” is missing in the claim rendering the claim indefinite.
Specification as filed paras 0066-0067 recites “[0066] To cope with this problem, in this embodiment, abnormality detection using design information representing the geometrical feature of a shot region is performed. The geometrical feature of a shot region can include pieces of information that specify the boundary position of the shot region and the position and the shape of each mark in the shot region, as will be described later. These pieces of information will be referred to as "design information" hereinafter. Fig. 9A shows an image representing design information corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 6A is captured. The image in Fig. 9A shows to which extent the imprint material IM in Fig. 6A should be filled. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10A, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6A obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9A representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to recognize the boundary of the shot region and correctly detect the position and the size of unfilling or extrusion. [0067] The image shown in Fig. 9B is an image representing design information (the positions and the sizes) of marks corresponding to a position where the image shown in Fig. 7A is captured. The image in Fig. 9B shows the correct shapes and the positions of the marks shown in Fig. 7A. In this embodiment, as shown in Fig. 10B, two images, that is, the image shown in Fig. 6B obtained by imaging and the image shown in Fig. 9B representing the design information are input as feature amounts to the machine learned model. This allows the machine learned model to correctly detect an unfilled region of each mark portion.”. Specification therefore recites the design information including “the position and the size of the unfilling or extrusion’ and also “the position of the shot region and the position and shape of each mark in the shot region”. Claim 15 is indefinite because it is missing the information of a position of ????? what? Amendments are required.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the film forming process" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an obtaining unit, a learning unit” in claims 1 and 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7, 10-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
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 JAYESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1227. The examiner can normally be reached IFW Mon-FRI.
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, Andrew Bee can be reached at 571-270-5183. 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.
JAYESH PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2677
/JAYESH A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677