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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-19 are under consideration
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 2, 5, and 12 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.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, it is unclear what is meant by “longitudinal direction in which the defect avoidance pattern extends”. It is unclear if the instantly claimed longitudinal direction is, for example, a direction parallel with the edge of the reflective multilayer, a direction parallel with thickness of the reflective multilayer, or a direction parallel with the direction of the slope of an edge slope region.
Regarding claim 5, the claim limitation of “the EUV mask further includes a capping layer covering a top surface of the reflective multilayer, an inclined surface of the edge slope area, and a top surface of a portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward an edge of the substrate” is unclear. As written, it is unclear if EUV mask includes: a) a capping layer which only needs to cover a top surface of the reflective multilayer, b) an inclined surface of the edge slope area, and c) a top surface of a portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward an edge of the substrate; or the EUV mask includes a capping layer which covers each of the top surface of the reflective multilayer, the inclined surface, and the top surface of the substrate.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1, 3, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 20220382168 A, published 2022).
Regarding claims 1 and 3,
Chang teaches an EUV mask [abstract], where the mask may be rectangular [0079, fig 12A], and comprise of multiple reflective layers (reflective multilayer) comprising of 30 to 60 alternating layers of two different materials [0030, fig 3], overlapping the instantly claimed dozens of alternating layers. Per MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. The examiner notes that the instant limitation of “dozens” is interpreted as a plurality of 12, where number of alternating layers are a multiple of twelve which is greater than twelve (for example, 24, 36, or 48 layers).
Chang further teaches forming an overlying capping and absorption layer [0031-0033], as well as forming an black border (aligning with the instant defect avoidance pattern) by etching down through the layers to open the substrate below, where the black border is formed as a single pattern stricture in a rectangular ring shape on an outer portion of the EUV mask [0036, 0079, fig 12A], where a sidewall of the reflective multilayer is opened (instant vertical end), reading on instant claims 1 and 3.
Regarding claim 10,
While Chang is silent to the black border having a size equal to or greater than a minimum line width on the EUV mask defined by a resolution of an EUV exposure process, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the black border of Chang, as see in their figure 12A, would have a size equal to or greater than a minimum line width on the EUV mask defined by a resolution of an EUV exposure process, reading on instant claim 10, where the instant size may be broadly interpreted as a size of any portion or dimension of the defect avoidance pattern. For example, the length of the black border from one outer corner to another outer corner would necessarily be equal to or greater than a minimum line width on the EUV mask defined by a resolution of an EUV exposure process, as the length would be significantly greater than the patterns formed within the middle portion of the mask.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 20220382168 A, published 2022) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Amano (US20090233188A1, published 2009).
Regarding claim 6,
Chang teaches the above limitations set forth.
Chang fails to teach the absorption layer includes a first absorption layer covering a portion of the reflective multilayer and a second absorption layer covering a portion of the substrate outside the reflective multilayer, and the defect avoidance pattern is positioned between the first absorption layer and the second absorption layer, and opens a portion of the substrate between the vertical end and the second absorption layer.
Amano, analogous art, teaches an EUV mask comprising of a multilayer (reflective multilayer), intermediate layer (capping layer), and absorber (absorption) layer [abstract]. Amano teaches forming openings at the edge of the wafer as alignment marks, formed in a region of the absorption layer outside of the multilayer region [0039, fig. 2], where the openings align with the black border of Chang.
As both teach similar EUV mask, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the black border region of Chang may similarly be formed in such an edge region, where the black border region may form an opening which opens the vertical end positioned between a first absorption layer and a second absorption layer, forming a comparable and expected EUV mask, reading on instant claim 6.
That is, the substitution of the openings of Amano for the black border of Chang, absent unexpected results, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application with the predictable result of forming an EUV mask. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (See MPEP § 2143, B).
Claims 11, 13, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US20210302825A1, published 2021).
Regarding claims 11, 13, 16, and 19,
Kang teaches a reticle for EUV exposure (EUV mask) [abstract, 0022] where the mask may have a rectangular shape [0012, fig 4]. Kang teaches forming a multilayer structure (reflective multilayer) over a substrate formed from a plurality of alternately stacked layers of two different materials, where the number of layers may be about 20 to 100 [0030-0031], overlapping the instantly claimed dozens of overlapping layers. Per MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. The examiner notes that the instant limitation of “dozens” is interpreted as a plurality of 12, where number of alternating layers are a multiple of twelve which is greater than twelve (for example, 24, 36, or 48 layers).
Kang teaches forming an overlying capping layer and absorber (absorption) layer [0034-0039, fig. 3], where the capping layer includes portions over the reflective multilayer (including an edge slope area) and portions over the substrate outside the reflective multilayer, and the absorption layer is formed over both of the regions of the capping layer, reading on the instant capping layer and absorption layer.
Kang teaches etching an edge portion (instant defect avoidance pattern) of the absorption layer and capping layer [0073, fig 11], revealing a side portion of the underlying capping layer, which is covering the edge slope area, reading on instant claims 11 and 16.
The removed edge portion forms a rectangular ring shape over the underlying substate [fig 4 and 11], reading on instant claim 13.
Kang teaches a shortest distance from an end of the multi-layer structure to an end of the substrate is 1.8 mm to 2.0 mm [0005], reading on instant claim 19.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7-9, 14-15, and 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 depends on claim 1, and further discloses the reflective multilayer includes the edge slope area, the absorption layer includes a first absorption layer covering a portion of the reflective multilayer and a second absorption layer covering a portion of the substrate outside the reflective multilayer, and the defect avoidance pattern opens the edge slope area between the first absorption layer and the second absorption layer, where claim 1 discloses the EUV mask has a defect avoidance pattern which opens the edge slope area or the vertical end.
Claim 7 depends on claim 6, and further discloses the EUV mask further comprises a capping layer having a first capping layer covering a top surface of the reflective multilayer and a second capping layer spaced apart from the vertical end and covering a top surface of an outer portion of the substrate, and the defect avoidance pattern opens a portion of the substrate between the vertical end and the second capping layer.
Claim 8 depends on claim 1, and further discloses the reflective multilayer includes the edge slope area, and the defect avoidance pattern opens an entire portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward an edge of the substrate, where claim 1 discloses the EUV mask has a defect avoidance pattern which opens the edge slope area or the vertical end.
Claim 9 depends on claim 8.
Claim 14 depends on claim 11, and further discloses the reflective multilayer includes the edge slope area, the first capping layer covers a top surface of the reflective multilayer and an inclined surface of the edge slope area, and the second capping layer extending from the first capping layer covers a portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward an edge of the substrate, the first absorption layer covers a portion of the first capping layer on the top surface of the reflective multilayer, and the second absorption layer is spaced apart from the first capping layer and covers an outer portion of the second capping layer, and the defect avoidance pattern opens a portion of the capping layer between the first absorption layer and the second absorption layer.
Claim 15 depends on claim 11, and further discloses the reflective multilayer includes the vertical end; the first capping layer covers a top surface of the reflective multilayer, and the second capping layer is spaced apart from the first capping layer and covers an outer portion of the substrate; the first absorption layer covers the first capping layer, and the second absorption layer covers the second capping layer; and the defect avoidance pattern opens a portion of the substrate between the vertical end and the second capping layer.
Claim 17 depends on claim 16, and further discloses the capping layer includes a first capping layer covering a top surface of the reflective multilayer and an inclined surface of the edge slope area, and a second capping layer extending from the first capping layer and covering a portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward an edge of the substrate, the absorption layer is disposed on a portion of the first capping layer covering the top surface of the reflective multilayer, and the defect avoidance pattern opens a portion of the first capping layer covering the inclined surface of the edge slope area and an entirety of the second capping layer.
Claim 18 depends on claim 16, and further discloses the capping layer is disposed on a top surface of the reflective multilayer, and is not disposed on an inclined surface of the edge slope area and a portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward an edge of the substrate, and the defect avoidance pattern opens the inclined surface of the edge slope area and an entire portion of the substrate outside the edge slope area toward the edge of the substrate.
A search did not find the claimed inventions.
The closest prior arts, Chang and Kang, each teach similar EUV masks as disclosed above.
However, neither Chang nor Kang teach the above additional claim limitations.
Neither Chang, Kang, nor the prior art in general provide sufficient motivation to make it obvious to modify their masks to arrive at the instantly claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20180067390A1 teaches EUV masks with edge dummy hole structures. US20160282711A1 and US20240160095A1 each teach an EUV mask where the reflective multilayer has a sloped edge.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2261. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5:30 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, Keith Walker can be reached at (571) 272-3458. 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.
/Alexander N. Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights