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 Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: the terms, “the first and second partial elements” and “the first and the second partial element” should be more consistent. 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 2, 18-20 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.
Regarding claim 2, “the damper is mechanically to the first and second…” seems to be missing a word after “mechanically”. In order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that the missing word is “connected” or “attached”.
Regarding claim 18, “a frame element”, singular, is claimed, but then later, “the frame elements”, plural, is claimed. Since in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, a plurality of frame elements (40.1 and 40.2 in Fig. 3B and two structures 44 in Fig. 4) are disclosed, in order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that “a plurality of frame elements” are claimed instead of “a frame element”.
Also, regarding claim 18, the structural relationship between the frame elements and a stop is unclear. The claim is directed to separate frame elements and a separate stop, wherein “the frame elements are configured so that the actuation of the decoupling element is limited by the stop”. However, it seems a “stop” is not a separate element or a structure, but a part of the frame element. In Fig. 3B and pages 17 and 18, it is disclosed that the shape of the frame elements (40.1, U-shape and 40.2, L-shape) limit the movement of the frame elements. In Fig. 4 and pages 18 and 19, the stop 42 is a portion of the frame elements 44. In order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that the stop is not a separate structure or an element, but a portion of the frame.
The remaining claims, not specifically mentioned, are rejected for incorporating the defects from the base claim by dependency.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hegele (DE 102019200388 in IDS, the page numbers refer to the translation provided in IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Hegele discloses an apparatus (Fig. 1), comprising: a connecting element (Fig. 4c, pg. 4) configured to connect two components of the apparatus (60, 60’, pg. 4), wherein: the connecting element comprises a mechanical decoupling element (40, loop serves to decouple, loop not shown in Fig. 4c for simplicity, see Fig. 2 and 3 for loop) comprising a damper (42) configured to deform when the decoupling element is actuated (pg. 4); and the apparatus is a semiconductor lithography projection exposure apparatus (Fig. 1, pg. 1, 4).
Regarding claim 2, Hegele discloses wherein: the connecting element comprises first and second partial elements (34, 34’); the damper (42) is mechanically connected to the first and second partial elements; and the decoupling element (40) connects the first and second partial elements to each other (Fig. 4c, page 4).
Regarding claim 3, Hegele discloses wherein the damper comprises a cylindrical element that is deformable along its cylinder longitudinal axis when the decoupling element is actuated (Fig. 4c, pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 4, Hegele discloses wherein the damper comprises a hollow-cylindrical element that it is deformable in its axial direction in some regions when the decoupling element is actuated (Fig. 4c, pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 5, Hegele discloses wherein the decoupling element comprises a plurality of dampers (42, left, right and middle between the two components).
Regarding claim 6, Hegele discloses wherein each damper is configured to deform when the decoupling element is actuated (pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 7, Hegele discloses wherein: the connecting element comprises first and second partial elements (34, 34’); the damper (42) is mechanically connected to the first and second partial elements; and the decoupling element (40) connects the first and second partial elements to each other (Fig. 4c, page 4).
Regarding claim 8, Hegele discloses wherein the damper comprises a cylindrical element that is deformable along its cylinder longitudinal axis when the decoupling element is actuated (Fig. 4c, pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 9, Hegele discloses wherein the damper comprises a hollow-cylindrical element that it is deformable in its axial direction in some regions when the decoupling element is actuated (Fig. 4c, pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 10, Hegele discloses wherein the dampers are configured to dissipate kinetic energy of the mechanical excitation (page 4, the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 12, Hegele discloses wherein: the connecting element comprises first and second partial elements (34, 34’); the damper (42) is mechanically connected to the first and second partial elements; and the decoupling element (40) connects the first and second partial elements to each other (Fig. 4c, page 4).
Regarding claim 13, Hegele discloses wherein the damper comprises a cylindrical element that is deformable along its cylinder longitudinal axis when the decoupling element is actuated (Fig. 4c, pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claim 14, Hegele discloses wherein the damper comprises a hollow-cylindrical element that it is deformable in its axial direction in some regions when the decoupling element is actuated (Fig. 4c, pg. 4 the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components and the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Hegele discloses wherein the dampers are configured to dissipate kinetic energy of the mechanical excitation (page 4, the self-damping of the sleeve 42 reduces the energy that is present in the system in the form of mechanical vibration energy).
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.
Claim(s) 11, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hegele.
Regarding claims 11 and 17, Hegele discloses wherein the first component comprises a part of a frame of the apparatus (pg. 4, force frame or sensor frame). Although Hegele does not disclose that the second component comprises an optical element, Hegele discloses a lithography apparatus comprising optical elements (2, 16, 18, 19, 20, 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the connecting element of Hegele to connect two components comprising a frame and an optical element since the scanning movement of the stages of the lithography apparatus would cause vibration to be transmitted to the optical elements via the frame and the connecting element of Hegele as shown in Fig. 4c would isolate or decouple the vibration from reaching the optical element. Also, the components being a part of a frame and an optical element is an intended use of the connecting element of Hegele, and since Hegele discloses that the connecting element is used to mechanically decouple components, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the connecting element between any elements of the lithographic apparatus that required mechanical decoupling including between a frame and an optical element.
Regarding claim 18, Hegele discloses an apparatus (Fig. 1), comprising: a connecting element (Fig. 4c) configured to connect two components of the apparatus (60, 60’, pg. 4), the connecting element comprising first and second partial elements (34, 34’) and a mechanical decoupling element (42) between the first and second partial elements (Fig. 4c, pg. 4, the flexibility or low stiffness of the sleeve 42 leads to a decoupling of the two components); a plurality of frame elements (41, pg. 4), wherein: the frame elements connect the first and the second partial elements (Fig. 4c); and the apparatus is a semiconductor lithography projection exposure apparatus (Fig. 1, pg. 1 and 4). Although Hegele does not explicitly disclose a stop and wherein the frame elements are configured so that actuation of the decoupling element is limited by the stop, Hegele discloses a plurality of frame elements or fasteners (41) that are fastened to the decoupling element (42) and the first and second partial elements (34, 34’). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the fasteners (41) as the claimed stops since while the flexibility or low stiffness of the decoupling element (42) deforms to mechanically decouple the first and second partial elements, the frame elements or fasteners (41) would act as stops to prevent the decoupling element (42) from deforming beyond its flexibility limit causing damage to the decoupling element (42).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 19, none of the prior art of record teaches or discloses the shape of the frame elements as claimed. Hegele discloses the frame elements (41) as discussed above. However, the frame elements of Hegele are cylindrical shaped, and Hegele does not disclose a U-shaped and a L-shaped frame elements.
Regarding claim 20, none of the prior art of record teaches or discloses the frame elements as claimed. Hegele discloses the frame elements (41) comprising a cylindrical body (Fig. 4c). However, Hegele does not disclose a hollow-cylindrical main body comprising axial extensions and radial extensions alternating around a circumferential side of the main body; in each case, a radial extension and an axial extension lie opposite each other; the axial extensions are aligned with the respective radial extension; and the radial extensions comprise a cutout through which a respective screw extends that is screwed at an end face into the opposite axial extension.
Chen et al. (CN 111059208A) discloses a connecting element (Fig. 2 and 3) to connect two components (1, 2), wherein: the connecting element comprising a decoupling element comprising mechanical decoupling element (springs 34, 36) and an electromagnetic decoupling elements (magnet 31 and a coil 32). However, Chen et al. does not disclose a mechanical decoupling element and a damper. Chen et al. also does not disclose the frame elements and a stop.
Naves et al. (WO 2018/097729) discloses a connecting element (Fig. 2) comprising two components (105, 110) and a mechanical decoupling element (flexible bellows 130). Naves et al. discloses frame elements (102, 113) and stops providing enhanced longitudinal an in-plane bending stiffness (132a, 132b, Fig. 3, page 10). However, Naves et al. does not disclose the claimed shapes of the frame elements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER B KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2120. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Toan Ton can be reached at (571) 272-2303. 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.
/PETER B KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 November 23, 2025