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 . This Office Action responds to the Application filed on 8/24/2023, preliminary amendment filed on 11/22/2024, and IDS filed on 2/26/2024, 9/18/2024, 4/10/2025 and 1/2/2026. Claims 1,5-24 are pending, wherein claims 2-4 have been canceled and claims 1,6,9,14-15,20-24 have been amended.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
.Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1,5-11,15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mathematical algorithm/concept without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the generation of image information which involve mathematical calculation of a difference between first information and second information. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the generated information is merely displayed or outputted to a display. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because there is no additional elements per claims 1,5-11,18,20-21 and per claims 16-17,19, the information processing apparatus is communicatively connected to the exposure apparatus, is integrally formed as a constituent element of the exposure apparatus with the exposure apparatus, or the information is based on an inspection result obtained by an inspection apparatus located outside the information processing apparatus and exposure apparatus is a scanning apparatus performing the recited operations, does not result in significantly more than the judicial exception because these additional elements merely directed to input/output to other components without actually affecting how the display information is used to affect the manufacturing/exposure process , or how the processing information is integrally as part of the manufacturing/exposure apparatus/process/method as found in claims 12-14,22-24.
Applicant may want to incorporate any of the elements of claims 12-14,22-24 into the independent claims 1,20-21, to provide for the necessary integrated practical application.
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) 1,5-11,15-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okita et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 20020021433 A1).
As per claims 1,20,21, Fig. 7 illustrates the processing apparatus/method (DeltaCD management apparatus 28) comprising a generator configured to generate image information from the exposure apparatus (21) (graph generating section 102; paragraph [0061]) for causing a display unit (display section 94) to display, as display information, any one of (Fig. 12; paragraphs [0061], [0182]) difference information corresponding to a difference between first information (surface shape information of one shot of the plurality of shots on the wafer W) and second information (surface shape information of the adjacent shot of the plurality of shots on the wafer W), the first information indicating at least one of a height and an attitude of a first shot region (device topography graph of the one shot) among a plurality of shot regions on a substrate (wafer W) for each of which an exposure process is performed by an exposure apparatus (scanning exposure apparatus 21 of Fig. 6), and the second information indicating at least one of a height and an attitude of a second shot region (device topography graph of the adjacent shot) for which the exposure process is performed next to the first shot region among the plurality of shot regions; information indicating at least one of a height and an attitude of the substrate during the exposure process of each of the plurality of shot regions (device topography graphs of the plurality of shots on wafer W); and information indicating a measurement result obtained by measuring a surface position of the substrate for each of the plurality of shot regions (device topography graphs of the plurality of shots on wafer W); wherein the non-transitory computer readable storage medium is part of the computer-implemented method/system as further described in paragraph [0059].
As per claim 5, wherein the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display a distribution representing the display information for respective positions of shot regions on the substrate is illustrated in Fig,.12.
As per claim 6, wherein the generator is configured to generate the image information indicating of the display information indicated by at least one of a numerical value so as to enable a user to visually recognize the display information for respective positions of shot regions on the substrate (see paragraph [0061]).
As per claim 7, wherein in a case where the exposure process has been executed for each of a plurality of substrates, the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display, for respective positions of shot regions, a representative value of the display information on the plurality of substrates (see Figs. 15-16).
As per claim 8, wherein in a case where the exposure process has been executed for each of a plurality of substrates, the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display, for respective positions of shot regions, statistic information indicating dispersion of the display information on the plurality of substrates (see Fig. 11; paragraph [0174]—the movement standard deviation is statistically processed with the slit width; thus the image information displayed resulted from statistical information).
As per claim 9, further comprising an obtainer (management apparatus 28 of Fig. 1—see paragraph [0039]) configured to obtain information from the exposure apparatus, wherein the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display the display information, generated based on the information obtained from the exposure apparatus by the obtainer (see abstract; Fig. 1, scanning exposure apparatus 21 which obtained the information—see paragraph [0038]).
As per claim 10, further comprising an obtainer (management apparatus 28 of Fig. 1—see paragraph [0039]) configured to obtain information from the exposure apparatus (Fig. 1, exposure apparatus 21), wherein the obtainer is configured to obtain the display information from the exposure apparatus, and wherein the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display the display information obtained by the obtainer (see paragraphs [0006]-[0007]).
As per claim 11, wherein the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display the display information upon dividing the display information into a plurality of direction components, is described in paragraph [0150] (i.e., display of information in the x, y, coordinates).
As per claim 15, wherein the exposure apparatus is a scanning exposure apparatus (see paragraphs [0038]-[0046]) configured to perform the exposure process while scanning the substrate, and which allows for exposure in several regions control positions and titling (see paragraph [0045], and make different measurements (see paragraphs [0039], [0056]).
As per claim 16, Fig. 1 illustrates the information processing apparatus (27 or 28) is communicably connected to the exposure apparatus (21).
As per claim 17, Fig. 1 further illustrates the information processing apparatus (27 or 28) is integrally formed as a constituent element of the exposure apparatus (21) with the exposure apparatus as shown in Fig. 1.
As per claim 18, the further simultaneous display of the inspection result is within the scope of Okita et al. since the system/method of Okita et al. also allow for performing inspection (see paragraph 194) which could also be displayed.
As per claim 19, wherein the display information is information based on an inspection result obtained by an inspection apparatus (Fig. 1, 28) which could be considered located outside the information processing apparatus (Fig. 1, 27).
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) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okita et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 20020021433 A1) in view of Shinichi (Japanese Patent Document No. JP-2006165122A, published on 6/22/2006, Machine English translated on 8/24/2026 by WIPO).
Applicant should note that all citations to Shinichi is made to the Machine English translation by WIPO.
As per claims 12-13, Okita et al. teaches the generator is configured to generate the image information for causing the display unit to display the display information for respective positions of shot regions as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, from which the claims depend, including input/output interface for allowing user input and display of various information including trace error, offset amount, moving deviation, graph generation information (see Fig. 7) but failed to further teach the enabling of a user to select whether to apply a correction value for reducing the difference for the respective positions of shot regions, including an input unit configured to accept an instruction input from the user; and a supplier configured to supply, to the exposure apparatus, position information of a shot region selected by the user via the input unit. Such user/operator interactive controls are known in the art as further taught by Shinichi (see paragraphs [0069], [0084]-[0088]) to make the proper correction/adjustment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to further incorporate the teachings of Shinichi into the method/system of Okita et al. because such incorporation would further allow user/operator to take the proper correction action as intended by Okita et al. and further taught by Shinichi.
As per claim 14, wherein the generator is configured to predict a residual the difference remaining at a start time of the exposure process for each shot region on a subsequent substrate in a case where a correction value for reducing the difference is applied to the subsequent substrate, and generate the image information for causing the display unit to display a prediction result thereof the residual difference (i.e., repeated scanning to expose the remaining individual shot areas one after another-- paragraph [0041] and predicting of a state of the image pattern to be formed on the substrate based on the detected pose information and pre-acquired surface shape information in an exposure area--see paragraph [0007]), including input/output interface for allowing user input and display of various information including trace error, offset amount, moving deviation, graph generation information (see Fig. 7) but failed to particularly teach enabling a user to select whether to apply the correction value for respective positions of shot regions. Such user/operator interactive controls are known in the art as further taught by Shinichi (see paragraphs [0069], [0084]-[0088]) to make the proper correction/adjustment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to further incorporate the teachings of Shinichi into the method/system of Okita et al. because such incorporation would further allow user/operator to take the proper correction action as intended by Okita et al. and further taught by Shinichi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHALLAKA KIK whose telephone number is (571)272-1895. The examiner can normally be reached Maxiflex Mon-Fri 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Jack Chiang can be reached at 5712727483. 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.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P. O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
or faxed to:
571-273-8300
/PHALLAKA KIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851 August 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights