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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Figure 2, the text labeled 110 “electron pre-” appears incomplete, and the label “GP” should be “GPP.”
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 Objections
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Both claim sentences end with “,”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are 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.
Claims 9-11 each recites the limitation “high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitter”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 1 -12 each recites the limitation “high frequency radiation generator”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 12 recites the limitation “electron beam”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites that the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generator is “controllably operated to perform synchronized generation of said high-frequency electromagnetic radiation towards at least one interaction region….” Claim 17 uses substantially the same “synchronized generation” language. The term “synchronized generation” is unclear because the claim does not specify what is being synchronized with what (e.g., synchronized with (i) arrival of charged particles at the interaction region, (ii) an external laser pulse, (iii) a clock/control signal, and/or (iv) a pulse train repetition rate). As written, the scope is uncertain because different synchronization references would materially change the timing/operation requirements of the generator. While the specification discusses that a THz pulse may be “properly synchronized (in space and time) with the electron pulse” and discusses controlling time delay to obtain overlap, the claims do not recite such objective synchronization relationship, leaving “synchronized generation” as a relative/functional phrase with ambiguous boundaries.
Claim 9 recites that “the … radiation emitter is configured to generate said radiation with varying efficiency.” The phrase “varying efficiency” is indefinite because it does not provide an objective meaning for (i) efficiency of what (e.g., conversion efficiency from pump/drive energy to THz radiation, radiation output per unit input power, or coupling efficiency into the interaction region), (ii) varying with respect to what variable (time, frequency, drive level, temperature, different emitters in an array, etc.), and/or (iii) how the variation is characterized (range, threshold, controlled vs. inherent variability). The specification similarly states only that “any … generator capable of generating THz radiation with varying efficiency can be used,” without defining what “efficiency” refers to in this context. Accordingly, the scope of claim 9 is unclear because a person of ordinary skill would not know the metes and bounds of “varying efficiency.”
Claims 6 and 7 each recites that a “spatio-temporal shape” of the radiation pulse is configured “to reduce spatial distribution of the charged particles beam.” The term “spatial distribution” is indefinite because it does not specify which spatial characteristic is being reduced (e.g., beam spot size, transverse beam width/profile, divergence/angular spread, emittance, spatial coherence, spatial distribution at the interaction region vs. at the sample plane, etc.). Different interpretations materially change the scope of the claim. Although the specification generally states that the THz field may compress “spatial distribution” and mentions “electron spot sizes,” it does not provide an objective definition or claim-anchoring metric/plane for the claimed “spatial distribution” reduction. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the limitation are unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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 1-2, 4, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2021046187A1 [hereinafter Duncan].
Regarding Claim 1:
Duncan teaches a charged particles beam column for inspecting a sample in a sample plane (para. [0026] and claim 24: teaches a monochromator device “for use in electron transmission microscopes,” and further teaches “An electron transmission microscope comprising the monochromator device….”), the charged particles beam column comprising:
a charged particles source (Fig. 1 -12) generating a charged particles beam propagating along a general propagation path towards the sample plane (Fig. 1 and paras. [0009, 0028]: teaches an electron source 12 (electron gun in one example) that provides an output beam 24, and shows the beam propagating through an optical column 14 (beam path/propagation path) downstream toward the microscope target); and
at least one charged particles beam shaping unit comprising at least one high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generator (Fig. 1-18(1) and 18(2)) located in a vicinity of said general propagation path of the charged particles beam (Fig. 1 and paras. [0027-0028]: teaches first and second radiofrequency (rf) cavities 18(1), 18(2) (the structure encompasses both cavities corresponds to the “charged particle beam shaping unit”) disposed in the optical column and “positioned to receive” the output beam. The rf cavities necessarily generate time-varying electromagnetic fields at radiofrequency, i.e., high-frequency electromagnetic radiation) and
controllably operated to perform synchronized generation of said high-frequency electromagnetic radiation towards at least one interaction region in said general propagation path, to cause interaction between said radiation and the charged particles (paras. [0010, 0029-0030, 0083]: teaches resonant rf cavities that are driven (via a “driving oscillator”) to produce an RF electromagnetic field (i.e., high-frequence electromagnetic radiation) and are enable “time-energy control of electron beams when synchronized with laser driven photoemission,” such that the “rf acceleration phase” is correlated with electron arrival, thereby applying RF radiation in the cavity region where the beam passes and interacts with the RF field),
thereby directly affecting energy properties of the charged particles passing through said at least one interaction region in the general propagation path (paras. [0029-0030, 0049]: teaches the rf cavities “correct one or more energy deviations in time and space of the output beam” and further describes “time-correlated acceleration in the … rf cavities … equalizes the energies” of the beam, also characterizes the result as “lossless energy spread reduction,” which directly affects beam energy properties)
and directly affecting spectral resolution of the charged particles beam at said sample plane (para. [0029]: teaches “improved energy resolution” without loss of average current in the electron microscopy context. Because energy spread/energy resolution of the incident electron beam is a determining factor for spectroscopy performance (e.g., EELS) at the specimen plane in an electron microscope, the disclosed energy spread reduction/improved energy resolution inherently improved the spectral/energy resolution achievable at the sample plane).
Regarding Claim 2:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. Duncan further teaches wherein said charged particles beam is an electron beam (para. [0009]: teaches an electron-beam device, it includes an “electron source” and is “for use in electron transmission microscopes”).
Regarding Claim 4:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. Duncan further teaches a high frequency electromagnetic field produced by said radiation is configured to compress energy-width of the charged particles beam (paras. [0029-0030]: teaches the rf electromagnetic field in the cavities provide “lossless energy spread reduction,” and the cavities “correct … energy deviations” and “equalizes the energies” of the beam via time-correlated acceleration, i.e., “energy spread” in Duncan corresponds to the claimed “energy-width” (width of the energy distribution)).
Regarding Claim 14:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. Duncan further teaches the charged particles beam column configured as a scanning electron microscope (SEM) (paras. [0006, 0008]: recognizes that “Chromatic aberration is the barrier to achieving atomic diameter probes at low primary energies of less than 5 keV, a commonplace regime for scanning electron microscopy... The present technology is directed to overcoming these and other deficiencies in the art).
Regarding Claim 15:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. Duncan further teaches the charged particles beam column configured as transmission electron microscope (TEM) (para. [0003]: teaches “a monochromator device for use in electron transmission microscopes).
Regarding Claim 16:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. Duncan further teaches the charged particles beam column configured as Ultrafast Transmission Electron Microscope (UTEM) (para. [0028]: explicitly states the rf cavities “can be incorporated into an existing ultra-fast electron transmission microscope (UEM) ….”).
Regarding Claim 17:
Duncan teaches a monochromator configured for integration in a charged particles beam column for inspecting a sample in a sample plane (para. [0026]: teaches a monochromator device “for use in electron transmission microscopes,” i.e., configured for integration in an electron-beam column used to inspect a specimen/sample), the monochromator comprising
at least one charged particles beam shaping unit comprising at least one high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generator located in a vicinity of a general propagation path of a charged particles beam emitted by a charged particles source (paras. [0027-0028]: teaches first and second radiofrequency (rf) cavities 18(1), 18(2) disposed in the optical column and “positioned to receive” the output beam 24 that is generated by the electron source 12. The rf cavities necessarily generate time-varying electromagnetic fields at radiofrequency, i.e., high-frequency electromagnetic radiation),
each of said at least one high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generator being configured and controllably operated to perform synchronized generation of said high-frequency electromagnetic radiation towards an interaction region in said general propagation path, to cause interaction between said radiation and the charged particles (paras. [0010, 0029]: teaches resonant rf cavities enable “time-energy control of electron beams when synchronized with laser driven photoemission,” i.e., the rf field operation is synchronized relative to electron emission/arrival timing, and explains the device achieves lossless energy spread reduction because “time of arrival, and therefore rf accelerating phase, is tightly correlated with the energy” of the particles, i.e., the rf field is applied with a controlled timing/phase relationship at the time electrons traverse the cavity field region (interaction region)),
thereby directly affecting energy properties of the charged particles passing through said at least one interaction region in the general propagation path and directly affecting spectral resolution of the charged particles beam at said sample plane (paras. [0029-0030, 0049]: teaches the rf cavities “correct one or more energy deviations in time and space of the output beam” and further describes “time-correlated acceleration in the … rf cavities … equalizes the energies” of the beam, also characterizes the result as “lossless energy spread reduction,” which directly affects beam energy properties; and further teaches “improved energy resolution” without loss of average current in the electron microscopy context. Because energy spread/energy resolution of the incident electron beam is determining factor for spectroscopy performance (e.g., EELS) at the specimen plane in an electron microscope, the disclosed energy spread reduction/improved energy resolution inherently improved the spectral/energy resolution achievable at the sample plane).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3, and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Zhang, et al., Segmented terahertz electron accelerator and manipulator (STEAM). Nature Photonics, 12(6), 336–342(2018) [hereinafter Zhang].
Regarding Claim 3:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. However, Duncan does not specifically note the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generator is configured to produce pulsed THz radiation. Zhang teaches the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generator is configured to produce pulsed THz radiation (Abstract: teaches that the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation can be pulsed THz (single-cycle terahertz pulses, e.g., 0.3 THz) coupled into an interaction region for manipulating electron pulses).
Duncan teaches shaping an electron beam in a column using a controllable high-frequency electromagnetic interaction (RF cavities) to affect the beam’s energy properties and improve energy/energy-resolution performance. Zhang teaches that pulsed THz radiation is a known high-frequency electromagnetic interaction source for electron-beam manipulation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to replace or incorporate pulsed THz generation as an alternative high-frequency electromagnetic field source in Duncan’s beam-shaping context because THz pulses are a known substitute for high-frequency EM interactions with electrons, and using a known high-frequency source to interact with an electron beam would predictably provide electron-beam energy manipulation consistent with the purposes already taught by Duncan.
Regarding Claim 5:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 4. Specifically, Duncan teaches compress the energy width of the charged particle beam (paras. [0028-0029]: “Monochromator device 10 … providing lossless energy spread reduction” by applying a controlled time-varying electromagnetic interaction to the electron beam in an interaction region (RV cavities)). However, Duncan does not specifically note the energy width compression can be performed by a spatio-temporal shape of a pulse of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation. Zhang teaches a spatio-temporal shape of a pulse of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation as an alternative interaction waveform source (Abstract and Pages 3-4 of 16: teaches using “single-cycle, 0.3 THz pulses” and configuring the spatio-temporal characteristics of a high frequence pulse (THz waveform timing/phase is adjusted layer-by-layer across the interaction volume so the field seen by electrons is shaped in both space (layers) and time(delays)) to control the time-dependent energy modulation (chirp) imparted to electrons, i.e., the beam’s energy width/spread is governed by the spatio-temporal pulse shape at the interaction region).
Duncan teaches compressing the energy width (energy spread reduction) of a charged particle beam by applying a controlled time-varying electromagnetic interaction to the beam in an interaction region (e.g., RF cavity interaction region). Zhang teaches using single-cycle, 0.3THz pulses and configuring the interaction waveform in the interaction region via segmentation into multiple layers and dielectric delays that “delay the arrival time of the THz waveform to coincide with the arrival of the electrons,” i.e., phase-matching the interaction, and further teaches selecting operation “by tuning the relative delay of the two THz pulses and the electrons,” with the temporal field gradients determining the beam energy distribution (energy chirp/energy spreads). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate Zhang’s spatio-temporally shaped THz pulse interaction waveform into Duncan’s beam-column interaction region to provide an alternative high-frequency interaction waveform source whose spatio-temporal pulses shape governs the time-dependent energy modulation used for energy-width compression, because Zhang expressly teaches the shaping/timing the THz waveform at the interaction region controls the energy modulation (chirp) and energy spread behavior of the electron beam.
Regarding Claim 6:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 4. However, Duncan does not specifically note that a spatio-temporal shape of a pulse of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation is configured to reduce spatial distribution of the charged particles beam. Zhang teaches wherein a spatio-temporal shape of a pulse of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation is configured to reduce spatial distribution of the charged particles beam (Abstract, Pages 4 and 6 of 16 : teaches using “single-cycle, 0.3 THz pulses” and that the electron-field interaction is configured “by tuning the relative delay of the two THz pulses and the electrons;” further teaches “By placing the electrons at the zero crossing in the electric mode … the STEAM device can operate as a focusing or defocusing element…” and under “the focusing configuration, which corresponded to the longitudinal decompression condition…the electron beam diameter was reduced by 2 × compared to its input value”).
Duncan teaches a charged-particle beam column using controlled high-frequency electromagnetic interaction to improve beam properties, including correcting deviations in time and space. Zhang teaches that timed THz electromagnetic fields can provide focusing of electron bunches (a known mechanism for reducing spatial spread/beam size). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate Zhang’s THz-field focusing technique into Duncan’s beam column because focusing is a known, predictable way to reduce beam spatial distribution in charged-particle optics, and applying a known high-frequency electromagnetic beam-manipulation technique to a similar beam column predictably improves beam spatial characteristics.
Regarding Claim 7:
Duncan in view of Zhang teach the charged particles beam column according to claim 5. Zhang further teaches wherein a spatio-temporal shape of a pulse of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation is configured to reduce spatial distribution of the charged particles beam (Abstract, Pages 4 and 6 of 16 : teaches using “single-cycle, 0.3 THz pulses” and that the electron-field interaction is configured “by tuning the relative delay of the two THz pulses and the electrons;” further teaches “By placing the electrons at the zero crossing in the electric mode … the STEAM device can operate as a focusing or defocusing element…” and under “the focusing configuration, which corresponded to the longitudinal decompression condition…the electron beam diameter was reduced by 2 × compared to its input value”).
Regarding Claim 8:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. However, Duncan does not specifically note that said radiation is a pulsed radiation, and a time delay between a time of the generation of the radiation pulse and a time of arrival of the charged particles to the interaction region are controlled to provide temporal overlap between the charged particle and said radiation in the interaction region. Zhang teaches wherein said radiation is a pulsed radiation, and a time delay between a time of the generation of the radiation pulse and a time of arrival of the charged particles to the interaction region are controlled to provide temporal overlap between the charged particle and said radiation in the interaction region (Abstract, Pages 3-4 of 16: teaches using “single-cycle, 0.3 THz pulses,” and describes “Dielectric slabs of varying length were inserted into each layer to delay the arrival time of the terahertz waveform to coincide with the arrival of the electrons, effectively phase-matching the interaction,” i.e., “controlled time delay for temporal overlap,” and further explains “The function of the device was thus selected by tuning the relative delay of the two terahertz pulses and the electrons”).
Duncan teaches that the effectiveness of high-frequency electromagnetic interaction depends on proper timing/phase alignment between the electrons and the applied field (time-energy control). Zhang explicitly teaches controlling delay/phase matching so the THz waveform arrival coincides with electron arrival through the interaction region, i.e., ensuring temporal overlap. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate Zhang’s explicit delay/overlap control into Duncan’s beam-shaping interaction because temporal overlap is a known need for achieving the intended beam manipulation, and implementing a known delay-control technique to ensure overlap predictably improves the reliability and effectiveness of the interaction without changing the underlying purpose of Duncan.
Claims 9 -10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Reklaitis, Terahertz emission from InAs induced by photo-Dember effect: Hydrodynamic analysis and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Applied Physics, 108(5), 053102 (2010) [hereinafter Reklaitis].
Regarding Claim 9:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. However, Duncan does not specifically note that the at least one high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitter is configured to generate said radiation with varying efficiency. Reklaitis teaches the at least one high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitter is configured to generate said radiation with varying efficiency (Page 1 of 9 Abstract and Introduction: teaches THz emitters generates THz radiation/emission, “At low intensities of the optical pulse, the emitted terahertz energy is proportional to the power ranging between 3/1 and 2 of the optical pulse. The emitted terahertz energy saturates at high intensities of the optical pulse,” i.e., showing the THz output (and thus conversion efficiency) changes with operating condition (pump fluence /intensity)).
Duncan teaches an electron-beam monochromator/beam conditioning arrangement in an electron transmission microscope in which a time-varying electromagnetic interaction is applied to the electron beam to reduce energy spread and improve energy resolution. Reklaitis teaches a photo-Dember THz emitter (InAs) whose THz emission output depends on excitation conditions (e.g., optical fluence/ intensity) and exhibits different regimes (scaling and saturation), i.e., the emitter can operate with varying conversion effectiveness/efficiency under different operating parameters. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to configure/operate the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitter in the Duncan beam-conditioning column so that it generates radiation with varying efficiency taught by Reklaitis, because adjusting emitter operating conditions to vary output is a known technique to tune the field strength delivered to the interaction region, thereby providing predicable control over the strength of the electron-field interaction and the resulting beam-conditioning effect.
Regarding Claim 10:
Duncan in view of Reklaitis teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 9. Reklaitis further teaches wherein the at least one high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitter comprises a structure configured to generate said radiation based on at least one of the following effects: photo-Dember effect, optical rectification effect (Page1 of 9 Introduction: teaches the THz emission from THz emitters (e.g., InAs surface emitter),which have a semiconductor structure (e.g., InAs cystal), including nonlinear optical rectification, arises due to photocurrent induced the photo-Dember effect).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Li, et al., RF Delecting Cavity Design For Berkeley Ultrafast X Ray Source. Proceedings of EPAC (2002) [hereinafter Li].
Regarding Claim 11:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. However, Duncan does not specifically note wherein the high frequency radiation generator comprises an array of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitters producing said radiation towards an array of spaced-apart interaction regions spaced-apart along the general propagation path of the charged particles beam.
Li teaches:
wherein the high frequency radiation generator comprises an array of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitters (page 1 of 22 Abstract and Section 2 THE DEFLECTING CAVITIES: teaches a high-frequency radiation generator comprising a multi-cell RF cavity (e.g., a 7-cell structure), i.e., a plurality of cavity cells each providing RF field/voltage contribution (“effective voltage per cell”), thereby providing an array of radiation-emitting sections)
producing said radiation towards an array of spaced-apart interaction regions spaced-apart along the general propagation path of the charged particles beam (pages 1 and 2 of 22 Section 2.1 Shunt Impedance and Table 1: teaches “A beam passing through the cavity on-axis will not just experience transverse forces from the magnetic fields, but also from the transverse electric fields near the irises.” In a multi-cell cavity having defined “cell length” and “phase advance per cell,” these field/iris regions occur repeatedly per cell and are therefore spaced along the beam propagation path, forming an array of spaced-apart interaction regions).
Duncan teaches a charged particle beam column/monochromator device including a first radiofrequency cavity positioned to receive an output beam from an electron source.Li teaches using multi-cell (e.g., seven-cell) RF cavities to provide the required deflecting voltage and describes the beam passing through the cavity experiencing transverse forces from RF magnetic fields and traverse electric fields near the irises. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate Li’s multi-cell RF cavity architecture into the Duncan beam column to implement the multiple repeated RF-field-interaction sections (per cell) along the beam propagation direction, motivated by Li’s stated benefits (e.g., minimizing RF power requirements and reducing wake-field effects).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Li, further in view of US 20110164251 A1 [hereinafter Richter].
Regarding Claim 12:
Duncan in view of Li teach the charged particles beam column according to claim 11. Li further teaches said array of the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation emitters being defined by an array of locations of said high frequency radiation generator arranged in a spaced-apart relationship along the general propagation path (Pages 1 and 2 of 22 Section 2 and 2.1, Table 1: teaches a RF radiation generator comprising a multi-cell RF cavity, i.e., a plurality of cavity cells, each providing an RF field/voltage contribution, thereby defining an array of locations of the RF radiation generator, and further teaches per-cell geometry (such as “cell length,” “phase advance per cell”) and a “7-cell structure,” evidencing that the cell locations are arranged in a spaced-apart relationship along the cavity/beam axis, i.e., along the general propagation path of the charged particle beam).
However, the combined references do not specifically note that wherein the charged particles beam shaping unit comprises a reflector extending along the general propagation path and being spaced-apart from the general propagation path, said locations being sequentially excited to generate the high frequency radiation by sequential reflections of exciting radiation from an array of spaced-apart locations along said reflector, thereby providing the array of said spaced- apart interaction regions through which the electron beam successively passes while propagating along the general propagation path.
Richter teaches:
wherein the charged particles beam shaping unit comprises a reflector extending along the general propagation path and being spaced-apart from the general propagation path (para. [0006]: discloses a multi-pass cell with first and second end mirrors (reflectors) and additional relay mirror(s) positioned to intercept and reflect the beam; these mirrors “are separated by a distance, L, and face one another coaxially to an optical axis” (“propagation path”), and “configured to reflect a beam of light directed at one of the first or second end mirrors off-axis from the optical axis one or more times between the first and second end mirrors,” since the first and second mirrors are “off-axis,” they are spaced-apart from the general propagation path),
Accordingly, Richter in view of Li teaches said locations being sequentially excited to generate the high frequency radiation by sequential reflections of exciting radiation from an array of spaced-apart locations along said reflector:
Richter teaches sequential reflections from an array of spaced-apart locations along said reflector (paras. [0006, 0019, 0021-0021]: teaches a multi-pass reflector arrangement with end mirrors, “first and second end mirrors…separated by a distance, L, and face one another coaxially to an optical axis” and are configured to reflect a beam “off-axis…one ore more times between the first and second end mirrors,” and further teaches sequential reflections as “upon reaching the second mirrors…light is reflected back towards the first end mirror…The light travels in this manner around the first and second end mirrors … creating a distinct beam pattern,” also confirms that the reflections create multiple spaced reflection points on the reflector, e.g., “distance between the beam spots on a specific end mirror…” accordingly, Richter teaches a sequential reflections occurring at an array of spaced-apart locations along the reflector (the spaced “beam spots” on the mirror surface).
Li teaches the said location being excited to generate the high frequency radiation (Page 1 and 2 of 3- Section 2 and 2.3: teaches a multi-cell RF cavity that is RF-source driven and supports an electric field distribution of a deflecting mode, i.e., the array of locations defined by the cavity cells are excited to produce RF electromagnetic field).
Therefore, by incorporating a reflector-based sequential reflection delivery scheme (Richter) into the excitation path supplying drive energy to Li’ s generator, the generator locations (cells) are sequentially excited (in time) to generate RF electromagnetic radiation at successive locations along the propagation path, thereby providing the spaced interaction regions through which the electron beam successively passes.
In addition, Duncan in view of Richter teach:
thereby providing the array of said spaced-apart interaction regions through which the electron beam successively passes while propagating along the general propagation path (Duncan teaches the electron-beam column context (beam from electron source and RF cavities positioned to act on it along the path, while Richter teaches the multi-pass arrangement necessarily causes the propagating beam to traverse multiple distinct passes/segments between reflections (successive passes), i.e., successive propagation through multiple spaced regions in the cavity volume. Therefore, applying Richter’s sequential-reflection scheme to the high frequency radiation generation/beam-column context yields multiple successively encountered, spaced-apart interaction regions (each corresponding to a successive excitation/reflection-defined region), through which the charged-particle beam successively passes along its propagation path).
Duncan teaches a charged particle beam column having an electron source and downstream RF-cavity interaction in the beam path. Li teaches a high-frequency generator implemented as a multi-cell RF cavity having multiple cell locations arranged serially along the beam axis (defining an array of generator/emitter locations along the propagation path). Richter teaches a reflector-based multi-pass arrangement in which radiation is sequentially reflected between end mirrors, creating a distinct beam pattern with multiple beam spots/locations on a mirror. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate Richter’s sequential reflection excitation scheme with Li’s multi-location high-frequency radiation generator into the Duncan beam column to provide time-sequence excitation of spaced generator locations, thereby enabling generation of high-frequency radiation at multiple spaced locations along the propagation path with improved excitation efficiency/controlled delivery of excitation energy.
Claims 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of WO2017076696A1 [hereinafter ASML].
Regarding Claim 13:
Duncan teaches the charged particles beam column according to claim 1. Duncan further teaches at least one interaction region (the region where “first radiofrequency cavity positioned to receive an output beam from an electron source”). However, Duncan does not specifically note that a pre-shaping assembly at output of the charged particles beam source, said pre-shaping assembly being configured and operable to tune the charged particles beam flow having initial continuous wave form into pulses propagating towards said at least one interaction region.
ASML teaches:
a pre-shaping assembly at output of the charged particles beam source (para. [0027]: teaches a source + downstream chopper assembly (“a source for producing a bunched beam of electrons, the source comprising: an electron source ... and an electron beam chopper”, where “the deflector of the electron beam chopper is arranged to receive the beam of electrons produced by the electron source”, i.e., positioned at the output of the source as the first downstream conditioning stage).
said pre-shaping assembly being configured and operable to tune the charged particles beam flow having initial continuous wave form into pulses propagating towards said at least one interaction region (paras. [0008, 0072]: teaches a beam flow conversion starts from a continuous electron beam (“using the deflector to move a continuous electron beam relative to the blocking member”) and then forms temporally discrete bunches, i.e., pulses, (“portions of the electron beam that pass through the aperture 122 form temporally discrete bunches 134 of electrons”)
As such, the combined references teach “… pulses propagating towards said at least one interaction region” (AMSL para. [0027]: “the electron beam chopper is arranged to output a bunched beam of electrons” downstream of the chopper; Duncan has an RF cavity “positioned to receive” the beam from the source. Accordingly, the combined references teach pulses leaving the chopper propagate along the column toward Duncan’s downstream RF cavity interaction region).
Duncan teaches a charged particle beam column including an electron source and a radiofrequency cavity “positioned to receive” the output beam from the electron source. ASML teaches a “pre-shaping” stage in the form of an electron beam chopper arranged to receive the beam from the electron source and output a bunched (pulsed) beam, where “a continuous electron beam” is converted into “temporally discrete bunches.” Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate the ASML electron beam chopper (pre-shaping assembly) at the output of the Duncan electron source to tune an initially continuous beam into pulses propagating toward Duncan’s downstream RF-cavity interaction region, because Duncan itself recognizes RF-cavity systems have applications including “chopping continuous beams into short-pulses.”
Regarding Claim 18:
Duncan teaches a method for controlling inspection of a sample by interaction with a charged particles beam (para. [0003]: method of using monochromator device in electron transmission microscopes), the method comprising:
affecting energy properties of the pulses of the charged particles beam by interaction with high-frequency electromagnetic radiation in at least one second interaction region within said general propagation path downstream of said first interaction region with respect to a direction of propagation of the charged particles beam along said path towards the sample (paras. [0009 and 0049]: “A second radiofrequency cavity is positioned to receive the output beam from the first radiofrequency cavity, “ the first and second cavities are placed along the beam path, e.g., “at z = 160 mm and z = 240 mm”; “The first radiofrequency cavity and the second radiofrequency cavity are configured to, in combination, correct one or more energy deviations in time and space of the output beam,” accordingly, a “second interaction region” is defined as the RF cavity stage(s) downstream that correct energy deviations/reduce energy spread of that (now pulsed) beam),
thereby directly affecting spectral resolution of the charged particles beam at the sample location (paras. [0006, 0009]: the downstream RF cavities “correct … energy deviations”, that reduces energy spread / improves energy definition of the beam, “enabled measurements of phonon spectra with atomic spectral resolution,” i.e., the energy conditioning step directly affects spectral resolution at the sample).
However, Duncan does not specifically note tuning a charged particles beam flow having initial continuous wave form into pulses by interaction of said charged particles beam with RF radiation in a first interaction within a general propagation path of the charged particles beam towards the sample.
ASML teaches tuning a charged particles beam flow having initial continuous wave form into pulses by interaction of said charged particles beam with RF radiation in a first interaction within a general propagation path of the charged particles beam towards the sample (paras. [0008, 0070-0071, 0074]: teaches a resonant cavity 110 provides the first interaction region where the electron beam interacts with RF electromagnetic fields (TM1 10 mode) to time-vary its trajectory, and “a continuous electron beam” passes the screen aperture to form temporally discrete bunches 134 of electrons,” i.e., pulses)
Duncan teaches RF-cavity systems have applications including “chopping continuous beams into short-pulse,” and teaches downstream RF cavities that correct energy deviations and improve spectral resolution. ASML teaches a specific FR-based chopper that converts a continuous electron beam into temporarily discrete bunches using a resonant cavity deflector and a screen/aperture. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to incorporate the ASML RF-chopper upstream of Duncan’s downstream RF-cavity energy-conditioning stage to implement Duncan’s recognized beam-chopping function in a concrete manner, thereby providing a pulsed beam that can then be energy-conditioned downstream to improve spectral resolution at the sample.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2504. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:00.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/JING WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881