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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9, 14-20 in the reply filed on 02/03/2026 is acknowledged.
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) 1-2, 14-15, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hench et al. (US2019/0049602) in view of Pandev et al. (US2016/0109230).
To claim 1, Hench teach a metrology system comprising:
an x-ray illumination source configured to generate a beam of x-ray illumination light incident on a stacked structure under measurement, the stacked structure including a memory structure stacked with a logic structure at each of a plurality of measurement sites on a semiconductor wafer (paragraph 0118, logic structures; paragraph 0140, memory structures; paragraph 0085, structure stacked; wherein memory structure stacked with logic structure would have been an obvious implementation);
an imaging detector configured to detect an image of light scattered from the stacked structure under measurement in response to the incident illumination beam at each of the plurality of measurement sites (paragraphs 0073, 0083, 0114, 0135), each detected image including a plurality of diffraction orders of scattered light, wherein the beam of x-ray illumination light is incident on a first side of the semiconductor wafer (116 of Fig. 1; paragraphs 0057, 0059, 0066-0067) and the light scattered from the stacked structure is collected from a second side of the semiconductor wafer, the first side opposite the second side (119 of Fig. 1; paragraph 0062, collects x-ray radiation 114 scattered from specimen 101); and
a computing system configured to:
estimate a value of a parameter of interest characterizing the memory structure based on a set of signals indicative of a scattering response of the logic structure without the memory structure and the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure, wherein the estimating of the value of the parameter of interest involves an electromagnetic response model of the memory structure configured to generate the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure (obvious in paragraphs 0023-0025, 0085, a linear relationship exists between scattering and a particular periodic, or nearly periodic, structure. For example, the scattering of two periodic structures stacked on top of one another is a linear combination of the scattering from each individual periodic structure).
In furthering said obviousness, Pandev teach a measurement model is created from spectral measurements of a DOE wafer for both isolated and dense targets, wherein each parameter has its own trained model that calculates the parameter value from the measured spectra or extracted features associated with both isolated and dense targets (paragraphs 0041, 0101, 0103), wherein both training spectra and measurement spectra are combinations of spectra of different targets (paragraphs 0088, 0102-0103), which corresponds to Hench’s teaching on scattering contributions of each of the independently simulated decomposed structures are combined to simulate the actual scattering of the measured structures within the measurement area (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Pandev into the system of Hench, in order to implement structure parameter estimation based on measurements of isolated and/or dense targets.
To claim 15, Hench and Pandev teach a method (as explained in response to claim 1 above).
To claim 20, Hench and Pandev teach a metrology system (as explained in response to claim 1 above).
To claim 2, Hench and Pandev teach claim 1.
Hench and Pandev teach wherein the beam of x-ray illumination light is incident on the logic structure and scatters from the logic structure onto the memory structure or the beam of x-ray illumination light is incident on the memory structure and scatters from the memory structure onto the logic structure (Hench, Figs. 9A-10B; paragraphs 0052, 0082, x-ray source supplies light at wavelengths that allow sufficient transmission through the entire device as well as the wafer substrate).
To claim 14, Hench and Pandev teach claim 1.
Hench and Pandev teach, the computing system further configured to: generate the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure without the memory structure based on a Fourier decomposition of the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure (Hench, paragraph 0092).
Claim(s) 3-9, 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hench et al. (US2019/0049602) in view of Pandev et al. (US2016/0109230) and Liman et al. (US2020/0335406).
To claims 3 and 16, Hench and Pandev teach claims 1 and 15.
Hench and Pandev teach the computing system further configured to: combine the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure and the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure (as explained in response to claim 1 above).
But, Hench and Pandev do not expressly disclose determine a difference between the combined set of signals and the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure, wherein the estimating of the value of the parameter of interest involves a regression analysis that minimizes the difference between the combined set of signals and the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure.
Liman teach determining a difference between the combined set of signals and the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure, wherein the estimating of the value of the parameter of interest involves a regression analysis that minimizes the difference between the combined set of signals and the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure (Figs. 2-5; paragraphs 0011, 0016-0017, 0092-0094, using regression analysis to find parameter values that minimize the residual between the measured and simulated diffraction patterns), which would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate into the system of Hench and Pandev, in order to improve measurement model.
To claims 4 and 17, Hench, Pandev and Liman teach claims 3 and 16.
Hench, Pandev and Liman teach wherein the combining of the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure and the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure involves a summation of each corresponding element of the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure and the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure (combining measurement data set, as explained in responses to claims 1 and 3 above).
To claims 5 and 18, Hench, Pandev and Liman teach claims 3 and 16.
Hench, Pandev and Liman teach wherein the combining of the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure and the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure involves a convolution of the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure with the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure or a convolution of the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the memory structure with the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure (Hench, paragraph 0078).
To claims 6 and 19, Hench, Pandev and Liman teach claims 3 and 16.
Hench, Pandev and Liman teach the computing system further configured to: generate the set of signals indicative of the scattering response of the logic structure without the memory structure based on a logic signal model, wherein the logic signal model is a model of pixel intensities at the detector characterized by one or more basis functions and corresponding coefficient values (Hench, paragraph 0065; Liman, paragraphs 0060-0061, 0083).
To claim 7, Hench, Pandev and Liman teach claim 6.
Hench, Pandev and Liman teach the computing system further configured to: determine the one or more basis functions and initial values of the corresponding coefficients based on an analysis of a library of measured values indicative of the scattering response of the logic structures without the memory structure, a library of simulated values indicative of the scattering response of the logic structures without the memory structure, or both (Hench, paragraph 0076, 0120, 0136).
To claim 8, Hench, Pandev and Liman teach claim 7.
Hench, Pandev and Liman teach wherein the analysis involves a principal component analysis or a discrete cosine transform analysis (Pandev, paragraphs 0055-0056, 0109).
To claim 9, Hench, Pandev and Liman teach claim 8.
Hench, Pandev and Liman teach the computing system further configured to: estimate a value of each of the corresponding coefficients, wherein the estimating of the value of each of the corresponding coefficients involves the regression analysis that minimizes the difference between the combined set of signals and the detected image of light scattered from the stacked structure (Liman, Figs. 2-5; paragraphs 0011, 0016-0017, 0092-0094, 0108).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHIYU LU whose telephone number is (571)272-2837. The examiner can normally be reached Weekdays: 8:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Stephen R Koziol can be reached at (408) 918-7630. 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.
ZHIYU . LU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2669
/ZHIYU LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2665 May 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights