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 .
The response of the applicant has been read and given careful consideration. Responses to the arguments of the applicant are presented after the first rejection they are directed to.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philips et al. 20230194997, in view of Fujiwara 20020016015, Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340.
Philips et al. 20230194997 teaches mating patterns which span reticle boundaries to facilitate die to die stitching. Figure 3A (detail reproduced below) shows mating patterns in reticle 1 (R1,108) and reticle 2 (R2,109)which are based upon the overlap of the stair step ends [0007,0040,0044-0049].
PNG
media_image1.png
267
436
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
132
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 3F shows overlap (352) when misaligned [0057].
PNG
media_image3.png
235
397
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Other complementary features are shown in figures 4A and 5A
PNG
media_image4.png
230
432
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
223
409
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Notably, creating features using lithography involves coating a wafer with a photosensitive resist, which is typically sensitive to light of a certain wavelength. The light of this wavelength is then shone through a mask that contains the desired pattern to be transferred to the wafer. Herein, patterns, regions, features and the like are discussed with respect to reticle mask patterns and resultant patterns on the photoresist interchangeably. It is noted that the pattern at the resist level is typically reduced (e.g., by 4×) from the reticle mask level and is invariably an imperfect reproduction. Herein, the discussed patterns, regions, or features may be at the reticle level (i.e., in the reticle mask) or at the resist level (e.g., either pre- or post-development). The region on the wafer that is exposed to the light generates photoacids that break down the resist polymer making it soluble in a developer solution. In reticle stitching contexts, a feature such as a line feature is generated by two different masks (or different regions of the same mask) exposed sequentially such that a portion of the line feature from the first exposure and a portion of the line feature from the second exposure are adjoined at the stitch. As used herein, the term adjoin indicates two features, portions, or regions are in contact with one another [0035]. Exposure 217 continues from reticle 203 through optics 208 to expose a photoresist layer 202 on or over a substrate 201 (e.g., a substrate wafer). As discussed, the resultant exposure generates photoacids that break down the resist polymer of photoresist layer 202, rendering it soluble in a developer solution. As discussed, pattern 206 or 216 is transferred from reticle 203 to photoresist layer 202. The pattern features, regions, etc. discussed herein are applicable to either or both of pattern 206 or 216 of reticle 203 and the resultant pattern of photoresist layer 202. Although illustrated with respect to the pattern being in transparent substrate 204 for use in positive photoresist applications, the pattern may be deployed in negative photoresist contexts [0043]
Fujiwara 20020016015 in figure 5a illustrates the overlap of the stitching element and the widening of the resist feature (transferred image) is illustrated in figure 5d, which is considered a small variation. When the parts are exactly matched as in figure 5b, the pattern transferred to the resist is the desired 100 nm. When the stitching elements are slightly separated as in figure 5c, the transferred pattern is slightly narrower, which is considered a small variation [0048].
PNG
media_image6.png
186
374
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Figure 6 illustrates the rounding /blunting of mating ends and that this can result in mask-fabrication errors (the dashed line shows the desired/mask pattern, while the solid lines show the transferred image). Mating ends with this rounding to the required interconnection accuracy is difficult to impossible [0051].
PNG
media_image7.png
236
358
media_image7.png
Greyscale
The modifications to the patterns of figure 5 are illustrated in figure 7, 11. And 14. [0052-0060,0065].
PNG
media_image8.png
246
356
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
355
406
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
301
384
media_image10.png
Greyscale
The design modification follows the flow chart in figure 8 [0024,0053-0055]. Whenever a subfield of the mask 20 is being illuminated by the illumination beam IB, the resulting patterned beam PB is reduced (demagnified) by the projection lenses 22, 23 and deflected as required to focus an image of the subfield at a specified location on the wafer 24. The surface of the wafer 24, on which an appropriate conductive film or insulating film has been formed, is coated with a suitable resist. In areas of the resist subjected to a patterned-beam dose exceeding a specified threshold, the resist can be made more durable than unexposed resist and caused to remain (in the case of a negative resist) on the wafer after resist development. Thus, the pattern defined by the mask 20 is transferred to the resist on the wafer 24 [0042].
PNG
media_image11.png
605
389
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Laidig et al. 20020028393 discloses the addition of serifs at vertices, where the size of the serifs are chosen independently to low the mask pattern to be reproduced faithfully. Figure 1 illustrates a negative serif (NSW, 13) in an interior corner and a positive serif (PSW, 12) [0050] Figure 5 illustrates (positive) serifs (61,62,66,67,73,76) at the corners and a hammer head (serifs 69/70 touching)
PNG
media_image12.png
251
350
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image13.png
273
382
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Garza et al. 5804340 illustrates a mask design pattern in figure 1 and the resulting chrome pattern with corner rounding shown in figure 2.
PNG
media_image14.png
212
303
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
285
385
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Figure 5A illustrates the shape of the correct photomask with (negative/in) serif (212) and (positive/out) serifs (202,204,206,208,210) to prevent/reduce rounding at the corners (4/.39-51)
PNG
media_image16.png
216
304
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Philips et al. 20230194997 teaches the matching/mating on two different reticles, but does not teaches the mask patterns having a combination of matching/mating surfaces/edges and areas where the mask patterns overlap, rather than match/mate.
With respect to claims 1-6 and 8-10, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the mask sets of Philips et al. 20230194997 with the mating features illustrated in figures 3A, 4A or 5A by adding positive serifs on the outer corners and negative serifs on the inner corners as taught by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 so that the projected patterns are more accurate, noting that correction to mating/complementary stitching patterns to account for rounding of the patterns in known ion the art as evidenced by Fujiwara 20020016015. The use of either polarity of mask is illustrated in figure 3A of Philips et al. 20230194997 and is considered an obvious modification.
With respect to claims 1-7 and 9-10, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the mask sets of Philips et al. 20230194997 with the mating and complementary features illustrated in figure 3A by adding positive serifs on the outer corners and negative serifs on the inner corners as taught by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 so that the projected patterns are more accurate, noting that correction to mating/complementary stitching patterns to account for rounding of the patterns in known ion the art as evidenced by Fujiwara 20020016015. The use of either polarity of mask is illustrated in figure 3A of Philips et al. 20230194997 and is considered an obvious modification. As the patterns are made to mate, the first pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added) where the second pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) and first pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) where the second pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added). The positive serifs are protrusion and negative serifs are the corresponding recesses.
With respect to claims 1-6,8-10 and 20, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the mask sets of Philips et al. 20230194997 with the mating features illustrated in figures 3A, 4A or 5A by adding positive serifs on the outer corners and negative serifs on the inner corners as taught by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 so that the projected patterns are more accurate, noting that correction to mating/complementary stitching patterns to account for rounding of the patterns in known ion the art as evidenced by Fujiwara 20020016015 and to expose a resist with each pattern and develop the composite pattern in the resist as taught in Philips et al. 20230194997 at [0043,0035], noting the teachings of Fujiwara 20020016015 at [0042]. The use of either polarity of mask is illustrated in figure 3A of Philips et al. 20230194997 and is considered an obvious modification. As the patterns are made to mate, the first pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added) where the second pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) and first pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) where the second pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added). The positive serifs are protrusion and negative serifs are the corresponding recesses.
With respect to claims 1-7, 9-10 and 20, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the mask sets of Philips et al. 20230194997 with the mating and complementary features illustrated in figure 3A by adding positive serifs on the outer corners and negative serifs on the inner corners as taught by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 so that the projected patterns are more accurate, noting that correction to mating/complementary stitching patterns to account for rounding of the patterns in known ion the art as evidenced by Fujiwara 20020016015. and to expose a resist with each pattern and develop the composite pattern in the resist as taught in Philips et al. 20230194997 at [0043,0035], noting the teachings of Fujiwara 20020016015 at [0042]. The use of either polarity of mask is illustrated in figure 3A of Philips et al. 20230194997 and is considered an obvious modification. As the patterns are made to mate, the first pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added) where the second pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) and first pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) where the second pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added). The positive serifs are protrusion and negative serifs are the corresponding recesses.
With respect to claims 1-6,8-15 and 17-19, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the mask sets of Philips et al. 20230194997 with the mating features illustrated in figures 3A, 4A or 5A by forming a desired/target pattern as taught in Fujiwara 20020016015 and Garza et al. 5804340 and adding positive serifs on the outer corners and negative serifs on the inner corners as taught by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 so that the projected patterns are more accurate, noting that correction to mating/complementary stitching patterns to account for rounding of the patterns in known ion the art as evidenced by Fujiwara 20020016015. The use of either polarity of mask is illustrated in figure 3A of Philips et al. 20230194997 and is considered an obvious modification. As the patterns are made to mate, the first pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added) where the second pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) and first pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) where the second pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added). The positive serifs are protrusion and negative serifs are the corresponding recesses.
With respect to claims 1-6,8-16 and 18-19, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the mask sets of Philips et al. 20230194997 with the mating and complementary features illustrated in figure 3A by forming a desired/target pattern as taught in Fujiwara 20020016015 and Garza et al. 5804340 and adding positive serifs on the outer corners and negative serifs on the inner corners as taught by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 so that the projected patterns are more accurate, noting that correction to mating/complementary stitching patterns to account for rounding of the patterns in known ion the art as evidenced by Fujiwara 20020016015. The use of either polarity of mask is illustrated in figure 3A of Philips et al. 20230194997 and is considered an obvious modification. As the patterns are made to mate, the first pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added) where the second pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) and first pattern has outer corners (where positive serifs are added) where the second pattern has inner corners (where negative serifs are added). The positive serifs are protrusion and negative serifs are the corresponding recesses.
In the response of 6/10/2026, the applicant argues that the reference does not teach the overlapping as Philips et al. 2023019499 and Fujiwara 20020016015 only teach mating of the patterns. This arguments fails to appreciate that the two patterns are formed by successive exposures and the exposures of resists with the patterns of Philips et al. 2023019499 and Fujiwara 20020016015 result in rounding at the corners as taught by Fujiwara 20020016015 (see the dashed line
PNG
media_image17.png
140
226
media_image17.png
Greyscale
vs the solid lin, but the correction for this rounding using serifs is known in the art as evidenced by Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340. The point is to have the patterns in the resists mate as discussed with respect to figure 7 of Fujiwara 20020016015, but to do this, the patterns on the masks have the desired/target patterns modified with the serifs of Laidig et al. 20020028393 and Garza et al. 5804340 and the overlap of the actual patterns on the masks is at the positive serif regions and adjacent the negative serif regions, which is bounded by the language of the claims. The applicant argues impermissible hindsight but the teachings regarding serifs as a means for correcting rounding clearly antedates the applicants invention and the rounding in the resist images of stitching elements is also a problem in the prior art. The rejection stands.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Martin J Angebranndt whose telephone number is (571)272-1378. The examiner can normally be reached 7-3:30 pm 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, Ching-Yu (Coris) Fung can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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.
MARTIN J. ANGEBRANNDT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1737
/MARTIN J ANGEBRANNDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 June 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights