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 § 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 3, 8, 9, 11, and 17 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.
With respect to claim 3, the limitation that the axial diffractive optical element is configured to function as a combination diffractive beam splitter and a Fresnel lens with a weak focusing power is unclear on what the structure is actually. The axial diffractive optical element has a certain structure known in the art. However, further limiting that it functions as two other objects, a beam splitter and Fresnel lens, raises issues as to whether there are further structural limitations beyond an axial diffractive optical element or if those functions are inherently satisfied by any generic axial diffractive optical element known in the art. It is unclear what structure is being indicated by “functions as a combination of a diffractive beam splitter and a Fresnel lens”. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 8, the limitation “wherein projection of each of the multiple spots onto a field direction of the time delay integration camera” lacks antecedent basis since the multiple spots are projected on a specimen, not onto the camera. Additionally, “a scan direction” of the camera is not a structural limitation and cannot be used to limit the apparatus claim. The wording of claim 8, that the projection of each of the multiple spots…overlaps with projection of one or more of the multiple spots adjacent to said each of the multiple spots is unclear as to how the projection overlaps with a projection adjacent to itself. Clarification is required. The examiner has interpreted the claim to the best of her abilities with respect to applying prior art below.
With respect to claim 9, the projected distance between spots depends on many variables, including the distance to the specimen, the specimen not being a structural component to the claim and not able to limit the structure of the apparatus. It is unclear what structure is responsible in claim 9 for setting the projected distance between spots. Additionally, the same confusing wording as noted for claim 8 is repeated referring to the multiple spots and multiple spots adjacent to itself having a distance between is unclear. The examiner has interpreted it to the best of her abilities but correction is required.
With respect to claim 11, the limitation “the multiple spots generates a uniform flattop illumination profile” is indefinite since the multiple spots don’t generate any illumination profile but rather the light source does. It is unclear if the illumination profile references a reflection of the spots on the specimen, a detection of intensity from the source, or some other measured profile. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 17, the limitation “the system if further configured for inspection of the specimen” lacks any structural elements to perform the function. It is unclear if the previously described elements (light source, optical element, focusing optics and detector) are configured to perform the function or if there are additional structural components indicated by the claim. Clarification is required.
It should be noted that any claims that are dependent upon the above rejected claims fail to correct the deficiencies in the claims upon which they depend and are likewise rejected.
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, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao U.S. Patent #9,945,792 in view of Nakano U.S. Publication 2011/0255074.
With respect to claim 1, Zhao discloses generating an array of spots on inclined surfaces comprising:
A light source configured to generate a beam of light (Figure 1A, illumination source 103, Col.3, l 60-62)
An axial diffractive optical element positioned in the beam of light, wherein the beam of light is offset to a center of the axial diffractive optical element and wherein the axial diffractive optical element comprises concentric grating rings configured to separate the beam of light into multiple light beams (Col.3, l 60-66, Col.4, l 3-8, Col.6, l 9-11)
Focusing optics configured to focus the multiple light beams to multiple spots respectively on a specimen, wherein a common focal plane of the multiple spots is at a tilted angle with respect to an optical axis of the focusing optics (Col.4, l 34-40, Col.5, l 11-23, Col.6, l 1-5)
A detector configured to detect light from the multiple spots (Col.8, l 21-24)
However, Zhao fails to disclose the detector is an imaging detector configured to generate an image of the specimen.
Nakano discloses an apparatus for inspecting defects comprising:
A light source configured to generate a beam of light (P.0071)
Focusing optics configured to focus the multiple light beams to multiple spots respectively on a specimen, wherein a common focal plane of the multiple spots is at a tilted angle with respect to an optical axis of the focusing optics (P.0075, projection lens 64)
An imaging detector configured to generate an image of the specimen by detecting light from the multiple spots (P.0072)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use an imaging detector as in Nakano for the generic detectors of Zhao since imaging provides spatial information and higher sensitivity for a multi-dimensional specimen.
With respect to claim 2, 4, 5, 7, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, Zhao in view of Nakano discloses all of the limitations as applied to claim 1 above. In addition, Zhao discloses:
2- A pitch of the grating rings varies with a radius of the axial diffractive optical element (Col.4, l 9-11)
4- at least two of the multiple light beams have different powers (inherent that different diffraction orders have different power, Col.6, l 31-39)
5- the multiple spots have an elliptical shape with a long axis at an angle with respect to the scan direction of the detector (Col.6,l 65- Col.7, l 3)
7- the multiple spots are separated from each other on the specimen (Col.6, l 52-61)
13- beam splitting optics configured for splitting each of the multiple light beams into first and second portions of said each of the multiple light beams thereby generating first and second sets of multiple light beams (Figure 1A and Figure 1B, beam splitting optics = diffractive optical element 102, first portion = top set of positive orders and second portion = bottom set of negative orders)
13- wherein the focusing optics are further configured to focus the first and second set of multiple light beams to the multiple spots respectively on the specimen at different azimuthal angles and the same polar angle (Figure 1B, focusing optic 114, azimuthal angle for z axis and polar angle for x axis)
14- the different azimuthal angles are different by 90 degrees (Figure 13 of U.S. Patent 8,194,301 incorporated by reference)
16- the multiple spots are each in focus on a surface of the specimen (Col.6, l 1-5, l 46-53)
17- the system is further configured for inspection of the specimen (Col.8, l 7-16)
18- the specimen is a wafer (MPEP 2114, object worked upon cannot limit the apparatus, Col.8, l 7-16)
With respect to claim 12, Zhao in view of Nakano discloses all of the limitations as applied to claim 1 above. In addition, Zhao discloses:
12- the focusing optics are further configured to direct the multiple light beams to the multiple spots, respectively at a polar angle of 45 to 85 degrees, especially 70 degrees (Col.7, l 14-19)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to illuminate at a polar angle of 75 degrees rather than 70 since 75 is still within the taught range of Zhao and is very close to the specific example of 70 degrees. Selecting a specific angle would be within ordinary skill in the art since determining the optimum value of a result effective variable is within that skill. (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215)
With respect to claim 15, Zhao in view of Nakano discloses all of the limitations as applied to claim 1 and 13 above.
However, Zhao fails to disclose a set of cylindrical lenses positioned in the beam of light between the source and axial diffractive optical element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include cylindrical lenses to asymmetrically expand the beam of light since this would enable a larger inspection area on the surface with a smaller, less expensive light source, saving time and money by covering more surface area at once. Cylindrical lenses are well known in the art for beam expansion and a predictable tool for one of ordinary skill.
With respect to claim 8, 9, 10, Zhao in view of Nakano disclose all of the limitations as applied to claim 1 above. In addition, Zhao discloses:
Wherein projection of each of the multiple spots onto a field direction overlaps with projection of one or more of the multiple spots adjacent to said each of the multiple spots in the field direction (Figure 4, Figure 6 of U.S. 8,194,301 incorporated by reference)
Wherein a projected distance between each of the multiple spots and each of the one or more multiple spots adjacent to each of the multiple spots is approximately half a size of the multiple spots (Figure 9A of U.S. 8,194,301 incorporated by reference)
However, Zhao fails to disclose details of the imaging detecting.
Nakano discloses:
The imaging detector is further configured as a time delay integration camera and wherein projection of each of the multiple spots onto a field direction of the tdi camera (P.0072)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the TDI of Nakano for the detector of Zhao since a time delay camera further offers the advantage over the already discussed camera that it provides high speed with high sensitivity.
With respect to claim 19, Zhao discloses generating an array of spots on an inclined surface comprising:
Separating a beam of light into multiple light beams with an axial diffractive optical element positioned in the beam of light, wherein the beam of light is offset to a center of the axial diffractive optical element and wherein the axial diffractive optical element comprises concentric grating rings configured to separate the beam of light into the multiple light beams (Col.3, l 60-66, Col.4, l 3-8, Col.6, l 9-11)
Focusing the multiple light beams to multiple spots, respectively on a specimen, wherein a common focal plane of the multiple spots is at a tilted angle with respect to an optical axis of the multiple light beams (Col.4, l 34-40, Col.5, l 11-23, Col.6, l 1-5)
Generating detection of the specimen by detecting light from the multiple spots (Col.8, l 21-24)
However, Zhao fails to disclose generating an image of the specimen.
Nakano discloses a method for inspecting defects comprising:
Focusing multiple light beams to multiple spots respectively on a specimen, wherein a common focal plane of the multiple spots is at a tilted angle with respect to an optical axis of the focusing optics (P.0075, projection lens 64)
Generating an image of the specimen by detecting light from the multiple spots (P.0072)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use an imaging detector as in Nakano for the generic detectors of Zhao since imaging provides spatial information and higher sensitivity for a multi-dimensional specimen.
With respect to claim 20, Zhao in view of Nakano discloses all of the limitations as applied to claim 1 above. In addition, Nakano discloses:
A computer subsystem configure to detect defects on the specimen based on the image (P.0073)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REBECCA CAROLE BRYANT whose telephone number is (571)272-9787. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 12-4 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, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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.
/REBECCA C BRYANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights