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 .
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)(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) 1-3, 7, 10-13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by US 20240411233 A1 (hereby referred to as De Vries).
The Examiner notes that whilst De Vries was published following the effective filing date of the instant application, the De Vries U.S. patent application was filed prior to the effective filing date of the instant application and thus qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Regarding Claims 1-3 and 7, De Vries teaches a lithographic apparatus and associated methods. The lithographic apparatus is depicted in Fig. 1 (De Vries, paragraph 0192). The lithographic apparatus comprises a top module including a reticle stage (MT) (De Vries, paragraph 0192). The lithographic apparatus is further configured to include a gas nozzle (50), which directs a flow of gas adjacent to the reticle stage (De Vries, paragraph 0230). As shown in Fig. 3B of De Vries, the nozzle is provided under the reticle stage. The nozzle provides hydrogen gas (De Vries, paragraph 0231), which is a shielding gas according to paragraph 0033 of the instant application’s specification. Fig. 4 of De Vries shows a plan view of the reticle stage assembly (De Vries, paragraph 0232) and shows that the flow of gas (52) is contained between a pair of guides extending from opposite sides of the nozzle, such that the gas flows in a cross-flow manner across the surface of the reticle (De Vries, paragraph 0230). The guides extend in the same direction as the gas flow (i.e. the first horizontal direction) and are substantially parallel to each other, thereby forming a gap that is uniform. The guides are also parallel to the outer surfaces of the reticle. Furthermore, De Vries teaches that an optional spoiler that is arranged to guide hydrogen flow near the reticle assembly may be provided (De Vries, paragraph 0313).
Regarding Claims 10-11, De Vries teaches that the lithographic apparatus is provided with four reticle masking blades (De Vries, paragraph 0222). The blades are provided in pairs (reference items 32 and 34 are the first pair, reference items 36 and 38 are the second pair), with one pair provided in a first horizontal direction and the other pair provided in a second horizontal direction (De Vries, paragraph 0222-0223). Refer to Fig. 3A, which shows the pair of blades 32 and 34, and Fig. 3B, which shows the pair of blades 36 and 38. The pair of blades (36 and 38) is formed under the nozzle and extend in the same direction as the flow of the hydrogen gas, as shown in Fig. 3B (De Vries, paragraph 0223 and 0230). As shown in Fig. 4 of De Vries, the two sets of masking blades may be controlled such that an opening having a desired size is formed (De Vries, paragraph 0229).
Regarding Claims 12-13, De Vries teaches a lithographic apparatus and associated methods. The lithographic apparatus is depicted in Fig. 1 (De Vries, paragraph 0192). The lithographic apparatus comprises a top module including a reticle stage (MT) (De Vries, paragraph 0192). The lithographic apparatus is further configured to include a gas nozzle (50), which directs a flow of gas adjacent to the reticle stage (De Vries, paragraph 0230). As shown in Fig. 3B of De Vries, the nozzle is provided under the reticle stage. The nozzle provides hydrogen gas (De Vries, paragraph 0231), which is a shielding gas according to paragraph 0033 of the instant application’s specification. Fig. 4 of De Vries shows a plan view of the reticle stage assembly (De Vries, paragraph 0232) and shows that the flow of gas (52) is contained between a pair of guides extending from opposite sides of the nozzle, such that the gas flows in a cross-flow manner across the surface of the reticle (De Vries, paragraph 0230). The guides extend in the same direction as the gas flow (i.e. the first horizontal direction) and are substantially parallel to each other, thereby forming a gap that is uniform. The guides are also parallel to the outer surfaces of the reticle. Furthermore, De Vries teaches that an optional spoiler that is arranged to guide hydrogen flow near the reticle assembly may be provided (De Vries, paragraph 0313). The lithographic apparatus is provided with four reticle masking blades (De Vries, paragraph 0222). The blades are provided in pairs (reference items 32 and 34 are the first pair, reference items 36 and 38 are the second pair), with one pair provided in a first horizontal direction and the other pair provided in a second horizontal direction (De Vries, paragraph 0222-0223). Refer to Fig. 3A, which shows the pair of blades 32 and 34, and Fig. 3B, which shows the pair of blades 36 and 38. The pair of blades (36 and 38) is formed under the nozzle and extend in the same direction as the flow of the hydrogen gas, as shown in Fig. 3B (De Vries, paragraph 0223 and 0230). As shown in Fig. 4 of De Vries, the two sets of masking blades may be controlled such that an opening having a desired size is formed (De Vries, paragraph 0229). The exposure light applied to the reticle may be extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light (De Vries, paragraph 0192).
Regarding Claims 17-20, De Vries teaches a lithographic apparatus and associated methods. The lithographic apparatus is depicted in Fig. 1 (De Vries, paragraph 0192). The lithographic apparatus comprises a top module including a reticle stage (MT) (De Vries, paragraph 0192). The lithographic apparatus is further configured to include a gas nozzle (50), which directs a flow of gas adjacent to the reticle stage (De Vries, paragraph 0230). As shown in Fig. 3B of De Vries, the nozzle is provided under the reticle stage. The nozzle provides hydrogen gas (De Vries, paragraph 0231), which is a shielding gas according to paragraph 0033 of the instant application’s specification. Fig. 4 of De Vries shows a plan view of the reticle stage assembly (De Vries, paragraph 0232) and shows that the flow of gas (52) is contained between a pair of guides extending from opposite sides of the nozzle, such that the gas flows in a cross-flow manner across the surface of the reticle (De Vries, paragraph 0230). The guides extend in the same direction as the gas flow (i.e. the first horizontal direction) and are substantially parallel to each other, thereby forming a gap that is uniform. The guides are also parallel to the outer surfaces of the reticle. Furthermore, De Vries teaches that an optional spoiler that is arranged to guide hydrogen flow near the reticle assembly may be provided (De Vries, paragraph 0313). The lithographic apparatus is provided with four reticle masking blades (De Vries, paragraph 0222). The blades are provided in pairs (reference items 32 and 34 are the first pair, reference items 36 and 38 are the second pair), with one pair provided in a first horizontal direction and the other pair provided in a second horizontal direction (De Vries, paragraph 0222-0223). Refer to Fig. 3A, which shows the pair of blades 32 and 34, and Fig. 3B, which shows the pair of blades 36 and 38. The pair of blades (36 and 38) is formed under the nozzle and extend in the same direction as the flow of the hydrogen gas, as shown in Fig. 3B (De Vries, paragraph 0223 and 0230). As shown in Fig. 4 of De Vries, the two sets of masking blades may be controlled such that an opening having a desired size is formed (De Vries, paragraph 0229). The exposure light applied to the reticle may be extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light (De Vries, paragraph 0192).
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.
Claim(s) 4-6, 8-9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20240411233 A1 (hereby referred to as De Vries).
Regarding Claims 4-6 and 8-9, De Vries does not explicitly describe the alignment or dimensions according to claims 4-6 and 8-9. However, MPEP 2144.04 IV. (A) states that when the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is a change in size and/or proportion (e.g. changing the height or length of the guides), then the claimed invention is not patentably distinct from the prior art. Similarly, MPEP 2144.04 IV. (B) states that changes in shape (e.g. the shape of the gap between the guides or the alignment of the guides with the reticle stage) are prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, absent of persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant. In this case, changing the dimensions of the guides would allow one having ordinary skill in the art to control the size of the flow channel, thereby providing the shielding gas flow in a desired area or volume. Furthermore, changing the shape or alignment of the guides would allow one having ordinary skill in the art to control the flow behavior, such as the localized flow velocity or the rate at which the gas spreads outwardly from the nozzle, thereby providing control over the removal of contaminants in the shielding gas flow. Therefore, claims 4-6 and 8-9 are obvious in view of the broader disclosure of De Vries.
Regarding Claims 14-16, De Vries does not explicitly describe the alignment or dimensions according to claims 14-16. However, MPEP 2144.04 IV. (A) states that when the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is a change in size and/or proportion (e.g. changing the height or length of the guides), then the claimed invention is not patentably distinct from the prior art. Similarly, MPEP 2144.04 IV. (B) states that changes in shape (e.g. the shape of the gap between the guides or the alignment of the guides with the reticle stage) are prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, absent of persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant. In this case, changing the dimensions of the guides would allow one having ordinary skill in the art to control the size of the flow channel, thereby providing the shielding gas flow in a desired area or volume. Furthermore, changing the shape or alignment of the guides would allow one having ordinary skill in the art to control the flow behavior, such as the localized flow velocity or the rate at which the gas spreads outwardly from the nozzle, thereby providing control over the removal of contaminants in the shielding gas flow. Therefore, claims 14-16 are obvious in view of the broader disclosure of De Vries.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20220365451 A1 (hereby referred to as Cheng) teaches a lithographic apparatus wherein a gas flow is provided to formed a particle shield from the surface of a reticle (Cheng, paragraph 0071). As shown in Fig. 6-8 of Cheng, guides having varying configurations are provided to guide the gas flow. US 20140111782 A1 (hereby referred to as Park) teaches a top module according to instant claim 1, differing only in that Park does not explicitly disclose the guides.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAYSON D COSGROVE whose telephone number is (571)272-2153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00-18:00.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/JAYSON D COSGROVE/Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/NICHOLAS A WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights