DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 17, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 4-7, 10-12, 14-17, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. (2017/0082932)-previously cited in view of Zhan et al. (6,798,511) and Kuznetsov et al. (9,243,886)-previously cited and Horie et al. (2009/0059228).
As for claims 1 and 15 (treating claim 1 as the apparatus for the practice of claim 15), Fu in a spectroscopic beam profile overlay metrology discloses/suggests the following: a system (claims 1 and 15)(abstract with FIG. 1: 100, FIG. 3: 300, FIG. 5: 500, and FIG. 6: 600) comprising: a light source configured to emit light along an illumination path at one or more wavelengths, one or more angles of incidence (AOI), and one or more azimuths (claims 1 and 15)(FIGS. 1 and 5: 101 to 102 to 103 to 104 to 105 to 106 to 107 to 109 to 111 to 112; FIGS. 3 and 6: 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, to 109 to 111 to 112; abstract; paragraphs 0063 and 0068, FIGS. 10A-12B); a polarization assembly disposed in the illumination path, wherein the polarization assembly is configured to produce one or more polarization states of the light (claims 1 and 15) (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 105 with paragraphs 0144-0146); a main objective disposed in the illumination path and configured to focus the light in the one or more polarization states onto a target, wherein the target is configured to reflect the light along a collection path and the main objective is further configured to collect the light reflected from the target (claims 1 and 15)( (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 111 with paragraph 0072); an analyzer assembly disposed in the collection path, wherein the analyzer assembly is configured to analyze one or more polarization states of the light reflected from the target (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 114); a collection pupil disposed in the collection path and configured to collect the light reflected from the target (claims 1 and 15) (FIG. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 115 noting paragraph 0130 referring to illumination aperture having illumination pupil stops with paragraphs 0148, 0167 and 0188), wherein an x-y position of the light collected on the collection pupil corresponds to a subset of the one or more AOIs and the one or more azimuths thereby producing a two-dimensional image (claims 1 and 15)(FIGS. 1, 3, 5: noting 115 with 118 having wavelength by AOI which suggests a single azimuth; FIG. 6: 115 with 144 appears to demonstrates subsets of azimuths and AOIs when performing hyperspectral detection); a detector disposed in the collection path, wherein the detector is configured to detect the light reflected from the target and generate an output signal based on the detected light (claims 1 and 15)(FIGS. 1, 3, 5: 118 and 135; FIG. 6: 144 and 123), wherein the detector resolves the light reflected from the target in one or more segments of the light, where each of the segments corresponds to a subset of the one or more AOIs and the one or more azimuths (claims 1 and 15)(FIG. 6: 144 with azimuth by AOI by wavelength; refer to FIGS. 12A-12B: 188D and 189D (which would have a single azimuth) as well as FIGS. 9A-11B, 13, 15-16 and 18-20); and a processor in electronic communication with the detector and the analyzer assembly, wherein the processor is configured to generate a measurement of the target based on the output signal produced at the one or more polarization states, the one or more wavelengths, the one or more AOIs, and the one or more azimuths (claims 1 and 15)(FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 130 and 140; paragraph 0144: processor being computing system 130 necessarily in electronic communication by virtue of controlling the rotary stage of the analyzer 114).
As for the analyzer assembly configured to ‘generate polarization data about the polarization states (claim 1)’ thereby, ‘generating polarization data about the polarization states using the analyzer assembly (claim 15)’ and ‘the processor is configured to generate a measurement of the target based on the polarization and the output signal (claims 1 and 15),’ Fu does not explicitly state this. Nevertheless, Fu teaches that polarization data is a parameter when dealing with parametrization for overlay metrology (paragraphs 0112-0113) and CD metrology (paragraphs 0195-0196). And Fu teaches that multiple types of measurement signals from multiple measurement modules may be included in a combined measurement analysis to estimate values of parameters of interest that includes ellipsometry and reflectometry which at least suggests that multiple output signals and multiple data signals can be created as well as that multiple detectors may be used such as a detector for reflectometry and a detector for ellipsometry. As well Zhan in imaging ellipsometry teaches that analyzer portion is operable to generate polarization information based on the reflected light in an ellipsometry apparatus (abstract; col. 3, lines 43-55; col. 7, lines 5-15). And Kuznetsov in an optical metrology of periodic targets in presence of multiple diffraction orders teaches in an ellipsometric device to have the analyzer in communication with the processor and showing that the polarization data generated by the analyzer, ellipsometric data, is communicated to the processor (FIG. 7: 68, 60, 56, 54 with col. 14, lines 23-38) And lastly, Horie in a spectroscopic ellipsometer, film thickness measuring apparatus, and method of focusing in spectroscopic ellipsometer teaches that polarization information is generated by an analyzer with a detector along with reflected intensity information is generated by a separate detector (FIG. 7: 41 with 422 and 43 and separate detector: 424).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the analyzer assembly be configured to ‘generate polarization data about the polarization states (claim 1)’ thereby, ‘generating polarization data about the polarization states using the analyzer assembly (claim 15)’ and ‘the processor’ be ‘configured to generate a measurement of the target based on the polarization and the output signal (claims 1 and 15),’ in order to provide ellipsometric data such as polarization data from the analyzer in order to provide a combined measurement analysis such as from ellipsometry and reflectometry such as by having two distinct detectors one for reflectometric data and another ellipsometric data to provide multiple parameters for a more robust metrology model for overlay metrology and cd metrology.
As for claims 4 and 16, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claims 1 and 15). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests wherein the one or more wavelengths of light emitted by the light source are a continuous spectrum or discrete wavelengths over a wavelength range from 150 to 2500 nm (claims 4 and 16)(paragraph 0064).
As for claim 5, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests an illumination optical assembly disposed in the illumination path, wherein the illumination optical assembly is configured to collimate the light emitted by the light source (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 102; paragraph 0065).
As for claim 6, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests wherein the polarization assembly comprises a polarizer and a compensator, wherein the polarizer and the compensator are arranged as rotating polarizer (RP), rotating compensator (RC), RPRC, or RCRC (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 106; paragraph 0146).
As ‘for generating Mueller matrix elements corresponding to the one or more polarization states of the light emitted by the light source,’ it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).
As for claims 7 and 17, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claims 1 and 15). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests wherein the main objective has a numerical aperture of 0.6 to 0.99 at the target (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, 6: 111 with paragraphs 0063 and 0088).
As for claim 10, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests a second objective collocated with the main objective, wherein the second objective is configured to transmit a portion of the light in ultraviolet wavelengths or deep ultraviolet wavelengths (paragraphs 0075 with 0064 and 0120).
As for claim 11, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests wherein the analyzer assembly comprises an analyzer and a compensator (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, and 6: 113; paragraph 0146).
As ‘for generating Mueller matrix elements corresponding to the one or more polarization states of the light reflected by the target,’ it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).
As for claim 12, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests wherein the detector comprises a 2D CCD, a 2D photo diode array, or a combination of 1D sensors (paragraph 0081).
As for claim 12, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests wherein the processor is configured to generate a measurement of the target based on a combination of beam profile reflectometry (BPR) data and spectroscopic ellipsometry (SE) or spectroscopic reflectometry (SR) data of a plurality of AOIs, a plurality of wavelengths, and a plurality of polarization states (paragraph 0176).
As for claim 22, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, Fu discloses/suggests a beam splitter disposed in the collection path between the main objective and the collection pupil (FIGS. 1, 3, 5, 6: 109).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 3 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. (2017/0082932)-previously cited in view of Zhan et al. (6,798,511) and Kuznetsov et al. (9,243,886)-previously cited and Horie et al. (2009/0059228) and further in view of Chuang et al. (2019/0285407)-previously cited.
As for claims 3 and 20, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claims 1 and 15). As for wherein the detector is conjugate with the collection pupil, such that the detector is configured to image each x-y position of the light collected on the collection pupil (claims 3 and 20), Fu is silent. Nevertheless, Chuang in an overlay metrology system and method suggests a detector assembly is conjugate with a collection pupil aperture that has adjustable diameter or shape in order for different ranges of angles of illumination reflected may be directed to detector assembly (paragraph 0047; FIG. 1: 130 with 118 and 119) which appears to be able to image (paragraph 0051) for the detector assembly may include any detector assembly known in the art (paragraph 0052 with FIG. 1: 118) and noting another embodiment with an image sensor (FIG. 2: 218; paragraph 0072: CCD or other image sensor). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the detector be conjugate with the collection pupil, such that the detector is configured to image each x-y position of the light collected on the collection pupil in order to image data for overlay determination with angle resolution by being able image different ranges of angles of illumination reflected by the sample under investigation.
7. Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Fu et al. (2017/0082932)-previously cited in view of Zhan et al. (6,798,511) and Kuznetsov et al. (9,243,886)-previously cited and Horie et al. (2009/0059228) and further in view of Kononchuk et al. (2015/0300809)-previously cited.
As for claims 8 and 18, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov, and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claims 1 and 15). As for the main objective having a magnification of 40x to 100x (claims 8 and 18), Fu is silent. Fu does teach that film thickness may be determined (paragraphs 0194-0196 with 0004) and demonstrates that ellipsometry and reflectometry may be performed in one metrology system (paragraph 0176). Nevertheless, Kononchuk in a method for measuring thickness variations in a layer of a multilayer semiconductor structure teaches using optical measurements such as ellipsometry or spectral reflectometry (paragraph 0016) and demonstrates using an objective having a magnification of 100 times (paragraph 0135). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the main objective have a magnification of 40x to 100x (claims 8 and 18) such as 100 times to measure film thickness optically using reflectometry or ellipsometry.
8. Claims 9, 13, 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Fu et al. (2017/0082932)-previously cited in view of Zhan et al. (6,798,511) and Kuznetsov et al. (9,243,886)-previously cited and Horie et al. (2009/0059228) and further in view of Wang et al. (2020/0240907)-cited by applicant.
As for claims 9 and 19, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claims 1 and 15). As for wherein the main objective has a field of view of 15 microns to 350 microns, Fu does not explicitly state this. Fu does suggest that the field of view must be large enough to be able to capture first order diffraction from an overlay target with a pitch of at least 430 nm (paragraph 0088) and Fu does not appear to limit the type of structures that may be measured (paragraph 0234) or what type of measurement may be performed (paragraph 0175). Nevertheless, Wang in a mid-infrared spectroscopy for measurement of high aspect ratio structures appears to disclose/suggests that a main objective may have a field of view of 15 microns to 350 microns by demonstrating an illumination spot size of 25 microns, 50 microns or less, 200 microns, and less than 200 microns (paragraphs 0073, 0074, 0088, and 0107: illumination spot size demonstrating that the field of view is at least as large as the illuminated spot size). And Wang demonstrates that high aspect ratio structures are measured (paragraphs 0010, 0037, 0046, 0120). Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the main objective has a field of view of 15 microns to 350 microns in order to optically measure high aspect ratio structures using an illumination spot size of 25 microns, 50 microns or less, less than 200 microns, or 200 microns.
As for claims 13 and 21, Fu in view of Zhan, Kuznetsov and Horie discloses/suggests everything as above (see claims 1 and 15). As for the target being a high aspect ratio structure, Fu does not explicitly state this. However, Fu does not appear to limit the type of structure that may be measured (paragraph 0234) and does not appear to limit the type of optical metrology that may be performed (paragraph 0175). Nevertheless, Wang in a mid-infrared spectroscopy for measurement of high aspect ratio structures demonstrates that high aspect ratio structures are measured (paragraphs 0010, 0037, 0046, 0120) wherein these high aspect ratio structures pose challenges for measurements due to having very deep film stacks and etched structures, and so it is critical to be able to adequately measure the critical dimensions to achieve desired performance levels and device yield when manufacturing flash memory architectures (paragraph 0005). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the target be a high aspect ratio structure in order to optically measure the critical dimensions to determine if flash memory architectures that are being manufactured achieve desired performance levels and yields.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant’s arguments filed on June 17, 2026 (see pages 7-8 of Remarks regarding claim rejections under 35 USC 102) with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Sun et al. (CN 111474182 B)-machine translation (page 5 paragraphs beginning with ‘1) firstly, one side…’ and ‘2), then adjusting…’: demonstrating that an analyzer is connected to a computer and that the azimuthal angle of the analyzer is recorded so as to obtain a polarization characteristic).
Fax/Telephone Numbers
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gordon J. Stock, Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 272-2431.
The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 10:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
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.
/GORDON J STOCK JR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights