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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 03 November 2025 have been entered. Claims 1-19 and 21-23 remain pending in the application (claim 20 has been cancelled), however, claims 19 and 21-22 have been withdrawn from consideration. The Applicant’s amendments to the claims and specification overcome each and every objection and rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection dated 06 August 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-9, filed 03 November 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 9, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) in view of Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1) and Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tuitje teaches a method for monitoring a process chamber (112), the method comprising: generating an optical beam (110) at a light source (106) (see figure 1, light source 106 emitting light beam 110 into processing chamber 112); providing the light beam (110) to the process chamber (112) (see figure 1, light beam 110 entering processing chamber 112); receiving the light beam at the process chamber (112) (see figure 1, light beam 110 entering processing chamber 112); and measuring the light beam (118) after being reflected within the process chamber (112) (see figure 1, reflected light beam 118; and ¶30, The incident light beam 110 is being reflected from the substrate 116 to form a reflected light beam 118. The optical sensor 102 also includes a detector such as spectrometers 120 (e.g., measurement spectrometer) for measuring the spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118, for example, an ultra-broad band (UBB) spectrometer (i.e., 180 nm-1080 nm)). However, Tuitje fails to explicitly teach wherein the method is for monitoring a plurality of wafer processing units; dividing the optical beam from the light source into a plurality of light beams having different optical paths; and wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber.
However, Chou teaches wherein the method is for monitoring a plurality of wafer processing units (160/360) (see figure 3, plurality of wafer holders, 160 and 360); and dividing the optical beam (L) from the light source (110) into a plurality of light beams (L’/L’’) having different optical paths (see figure 3, beam splitter 333 splitting beam L into separate beams L’ and L’’; directing light beams L’ and L’’ towards wafer processing units; optical sensors 171, 172, 371, 372, etc.; and ¶34, The optical sensors 171, 172 are configured to receive the light beams reflected by the wafers W1, W2, and generate the inspection results (e.g. images) of the wafers W1, W2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tuitje to incorporate the teachings of Chou to further provide a plurality of wafer processing units because [a]s such, the wafer inspection efficiency is improved, and the yield is thus improved (Chou, ¶95). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber.
However, Matsudo teaches wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber (PC) (see figure 1, processing chambers PC1-PC6; and see ¶¶23-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Tuitje and Chou to incorporate the teachings of Matsudo to include a plurality of process chambers each including a wafer in order to create precise and controlled conditions for wafer manufacturing, as well as reducing the time spent on wafer inspection (Matsudo, ¶37).
Regarding claim 2, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: loading a first substrate (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1 | Matsudo W) into a first chamber (Tuitje 112 | Chou 160 | Matsudo PC1) of the plurality of process chambers (Chou 160/360 | Matsudo PC1-PC6), wherein the measuring comprises measuring a reflected beam (Tuitje 118) of the plurality of light beams (Tuitje 110 | Chou L’/L’’) after being reflected by a major surface of the first substrate (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1) (Tuitje, ¶8, an illumination system configured to illuminate an area on a substrate deposited in the plasma processing chamber; and ¶27, The optical sensor 102 is configured for measuring the reflected light from an illuminated area 114 on a substrate 116); and measuring a property of the first substrate (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1 | Matsudo W) from a measured reflected beam (Tuitje 118) (Tuitje, ¶50, the controller 126 may process the collected intensities (e.g., subtract plasma intensity) in order to determine the feature dimension (e.g., thickness) from the reflected light intensity; and see remainder of ¶50 for further details).
Regarding claim 3, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising loading a plurality of substrates (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W) into the plurality of process chambers (Tuitje 112 | Chou 160/360 | Matsudo PC1-PC6), and simultaneously processing the plurality of substrates (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W), wherein the measuring is performed during the simultaneous processing (Chou, ¶37, the wafers W1, W2 are loaded to the inspection apparatus to be inspected, so as to determine whether the wafers have defect. In some embodiments, the wafer holder includes a plurality of wafer stages, and multiple wafers carried by multiple wafer stages are inspected simultaneously).
Regarding claim 4, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the measuring comprises: collecting the reflected beam (Tuitje 118) from the first substrate (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1 | Matsudo W) (Tuitje, ¶30, The incident light beam 110 is being reflected from the substrate 116 to form a reflected light beam 118. The optical sensor 102 also includes a detector such as spectrometers 120 (e.g., measurement spectrometer) for measuring the spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118); sensing an intensity of the reflected beam (Tuitje 118); and based on the intensity of the reflected beam (Tuitje 118), determining the property (Tuitje, ¶50, the controller 126 may process the collected intensities (e.g., subtract plasma intensity) in order to determine the feature dimension (e.g., thickness) from the reflected light intensity).
Regarding claim 5, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 4, further comprising: comparing the intensity of the reflected beam (Tuitje 118) with a reference light beam, the reference light beam being one of the plurality of light beams obtained after dividing the optical beam (Tuitje, ¶31, A percentage of the incident light beam 110 is directed to a reference channel of spectrometers 120 (i.e., reference spectrometer). Its purpose is to monitor the spectral intensity of the incident light beam 110 so any changes of the intensity of incident light beam 110 can be accounted for in the measurement process; and ¶34, The measured spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118 and the measured spectral intensity of the reference light beam are provided to a controller 126 that process the measured spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118 to suppress the light background and uses special algorithms such as machine learning methods to determine a layer of interest properties (e.g., feature dimension, optical properties) to control the plasma etching process as described further below; and Chou, see figure 3, beam splitter 333).
Regarding claim 6, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the measuring comprises: measuring each reflected beam of the plurality of light beams at a different spectrometer (Tuitje 120 | Chou 171/172/371/372 | Matsudo 190) (Tuitje, ¶30, The optical sensor 102 also includes a detector such as spectrometers 120 (e.g., measurement spectrometer) for measuring the spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118; and Chou, see figure 3, optical sensors 171, 172, 371, 372 for measuring reflected beams from each wafer W1-W4).
Regarding claim 7, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: loading a plurality of substrates (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W) into the plurality of process chambers (Tuitje 112 | Chou 160/360 | Matsudo PC1-PC6), and processing the plurality of substrates (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W) (Chou, ¶37, the wafers may be loaded to the inspection apparatus before or after the processing of wafer(s)); and determining a value of a property of each of the plurality of the substrates (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W) based on the measuring (Tuitje, abstract, The processing circuitry is configured to process the reflected light beam to suppress background light, determine a property value from the processed light, and control an etch process based on the determined property value).
Regarding claim 8, Tuitje as modified by Chou and Matsudo teaches the method of claim 4, further comprising: based on the determined property, identifying one of the plurality of process chambers (Tuitje 112 | Chou 160/360 | Matsudo PC1-PC6) to be operating outside of a target process window (Tuitje, abstract, The processing circuitry is configured to process the reflected light beam to suppress background light, determine a property value from the processed light, and control an etch process based on the determined property value; and Chou, ¶51, the light beams L 1, L2 reflected by the wafers W1, W2 are received by the optical sensors 171, 172, so as to generate the inspection results of the wafers W1, W2; ¶52, The optical sensor 171 receives the first light beam L1 reflected from the wafer W1, and generates an inspection result of the wafer W1. The optical sensor 172 receives the second light beam L2 reflected from the wafer W2, and generates an inspection result of the wafer W2; and see ¶¶51-54 for further details); and altering a process parameter for the one of the plurality of process chambers (Tuitje 112 | Chou 160/360 | Matsudo PC1-PC6) identified as being operating outside of the target process window (Chou, ¶53, if any difference (which may be a defect) is found, the difference is noted and the die having the difference is marked; and ¶54, If the wafer is determined to have a defect, appropriate processes may be performed to eliminate the defect before performing further semiconductor fabrication process).
Claims 9-11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) in view of Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1), Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1), and Gagnon et al. (USPGPub 20080056557 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Tuitje teaches a method comprising: emitting a light beam (110) (see figure 1, light source 106 emitting light beam 110); transmitting the light beam (110) through a plurality of light adjustment systems (220/204/210/128) into a process chamber (112) (see figures 1 and 3, light beam 110 traveling through pinhole 220, reflective objective 204, polarizer 210, and shutter 128 before entering process chamber 112); reflecting the light beam (110) off of a plurality of calibration wafers to measure a property of each of the plurality of calibration wafers (¶35, The optical sensor 102 and associated methodologies can also use periodic measurements on a reference wafer (calibration), such as a bare silicon wafer, to compensate for optical sensor or etch chamber components drifts as described later herein; ¶61, The algorithms can also use periodic measurements on one or more reference substrates (calibration), such as a bare silicon wafer and/or thin-film wafers, to compensate for optical sensor or etch chamber components drifts; and see remainder of ¶61 for further details), each of the plurality of calibration wafers having a known surface reflectance (¶61, The algorithms can also use periodic measurements on one or more reference substrates (calibration), such as a bare silicon wafer and/or thin-film wafers, to compensate for optical sensor or etch chamber components drifts. During calibration of the system, a beam may be reflected from a bare (i.e., unpatterned) silicon wafer or other wafer of known properties). However, Tuitje fails to explicitly teach dividing an optical beam into a plurality of light beams having different optical paths; transmitting the plurality of light beams into a plurality of processing chambers; reflecting one of the plurality of light beams off one of a plurality of wafers for each of the plurality of wafers; determining, in a controller, whether the property of each of the plurality of calibration wafers is within a process window; and adjusting one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems based on the determining to adjust the associated light beam transmitting through the corresponding plurality of light adjustment systems.
However, Chou teaches dividing an optical beam (L) into a plurality of light beams (L’/L’’) having different optical paths (see figure 3, beam splitter 333 splitting beam L into separate beams L’ and L’’); transmitting the plurality of light beams (L’/L’’) into a plurality of wafer processing units (160/360) (see figure 3, plurality of wafer holders, 160 and 360); reflecting one of the plurality of light beams (L’/L’’) off one of a plurality of wafers (W1-W4) for each of the plurality of wafers (W1-W4) (see figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tuitje to incorporate the teachings of Chou to further provide a plurality of wafer processing units because [a]s such, the wafer inspection efficiency is improved, and the yield is thus improved (Chou, ¶95). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber; and determining, in a controller, whether the property of each of the plurality of calibration wafers is within a process window; and adjusting one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems based on the determining to adjust the associated light beam transmitting through the corresponding plurality of light adjustment systems.
However, Matsudo teaches wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber (PC) (see figure 1, processing chambers PC1-PC6; and see ¶¶23-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Tuitje and Chou to incorporate the teachings of Matsudo to include a plurality of process chambers each including a wafer in order to create precise and controlled conditions for wafer manufacturing, as well as reducing the time spent on wafer inspection (Matsudo, ¶37). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach a controller, whether the property of each of the plurality of calibration wafers is within a process window; and adjusting one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems based on the determining to adjust the associated light beam transmitting through the corresponding plurality of light adjustment systems.
However, Gagnon teaches determining, in a controller, whether the property of each of the plurality of calibration wafers (52) is within a process window; and adjusting one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems based on the determining to adjust the associated light beam transmitting through the corresponding plurality of light adjustment systems (¶36, Testing wafer 52 may be used to isolate the source of a problem with wafer inspection tool 10. As an example, testing wafer 52 may be used to establish whether the source of the problem is occurring during generation of a light beam or during detection of the reflected light beam. If testing wafer identifies a problem with the light beam, light source 20 may be adjusted to correct the problem; and see ¶30 for additional details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Tuitje, Chou, and Matsudo to incorporate the teachings of Gagnon to use a calibration wafer to determine if the optical components of the device are functioning properly in order to allow for adjustment of said optical systems automatically.
Regarding claim 10, Tuitje as modified by Chou, Matsudo, and Gagnon teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the determining comprises comparing a reflected light beam (Tuitje 118) of the plurality of light beams (Tuitje 110 | Chou L’/L’’) with a reference light beam, the reference light beam being formed by dividing the optical beam (Tuitje, ¶31, A percentage of the incident light beam 110 is directed to a reference channel of spectrometers 120 (i.e., reference spectrometer). Its purpose is to monitor the spectral intensity of the incident light beam 110 so any changes of the intensity of incident light beam 110 can be accounted for in the measurement process; and ¶34, The measured spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118 and the measured spectral intensity of the reference light beam are provided to a controller 126 that process the measured spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118 to suppress the light background and uses special algorithms such as machine learning methods to determine a layer of interest properties (e.g., feature dimension, optical properties) to control the plasma etching process as described further below; and Chou, see figure 3, beam splitter 333).
Regarding claim 11, Tuitje as modified by Chou, Matsudo, and Gagnon teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising: after the adjusting, processing a plurality of wafers (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W | Gagnon 80) within the plurality of process chambers (Tuitje 112 | Chou 160/360 | Matsudo PC1-PC6) (Chou, ¶37, the wafers W1, W2 are loaded to the inspection apparatus to be inspected, so as to determine whether the wafers have defect. In some embodiments, the wafer holder includes a plurality of wafer stages, and multiple wafers carried by multiple wafer stages are inspected simultaneously); and measuring a property of each of the plurality of wafers (Tuitje 116 | Chou W1-W4 | Matsudo W | Gagnon 80) using an optical metrology system (Tuitje, ¶50, the controller 126 may process the collected intensities (e.g., subtract plasma intensity) in order to determine the feature dimension (e.g., thickness) from the reflected light intensity; and ¶56, The properties associated with each sample may be obtained from CD metrology tools).
Regarding claim 14, Tuitje as modified by Chou, Matsudo, and Gagnon teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the property measured of each of the plurality of calibration wafers (Gagnon 52) comprises an intensity of each of the plurality of light beams (Tuitje, ¶50, the controller 126 may process the collected intensities (e.g., subtract plasma intensity) in order to determine the feature dimension (e.g., thickness) from the reflected light intensity; and see ¶61 for further details).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) in view of Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1), Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1), and Gagnon et al. (USPGPub 20080056557 A1) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Hill et al. (USPGPub 20180052099 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Tuitje as modified by Chou, Matsudo, and Gagnon teaches the method of claim 9, wherein each of the plurality of light adjustment systems (Tuitje 220/204/210/128 | Chou 140/340/151/152/351/352 | Matsudo 120/130/140) comprise: a shutter (Tuitje 128) for modulating each of the plurality of light beams (Tuitje 110 | Chou L’/L’’) (Tuitje, see figure 1, shutter 128; and ¶28, The light source 108 may be fiber coupled to the illumination system 104 after being modulated by a shutter 128). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach a filter wheel for changing an intensity of each of the plurality of light beams.
However, Hill teaches a filter wheel for changing an intensity of each of the plurality of light beams (¶54, the intensity filter may include one or more filter changers (e.g. filter wheels, or the like) having a set of neutral density filters).
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Tuitje, Chou, Matsudo, and Gagnon to incorporate the teachings of Hill to further include a filter wheel in order to adjust the intensity of the device, allowing for a plurality of different intensities of light to be used during the wafer inspection process, allowing the device to detect different kinds of defects as well as adjust due to the types of wafer surfaces being inspected.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) in view of Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1), Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1), Gagnon et al. (USPGPub 20080056557 A1), and Hill et al. (USPGPub 20180052099 A1) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Kreh et al. (USPGPub 20050002021 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Tuitje as modified by Chou, Matsudo, Gagnon, and Hill teaches the one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems (Tuitje 220/204/210/128 | Chou 140/340/151/152/351/352) (Tuitje, see figures 1 and 3; and Chou, see figure 3); and rotating the filter wheel (Hill, ¶54, the intensity filter may include one or more filter changers (e.g. filter wheels, or the like) having a set of neutral density filters…the intensity filter may be a circular gradient filter mounted to a rotational stage (e.g. rotational stage 210 or rotational stage 212) in which the transmissivity (or reflectivity) of the intensity filter may be controllable by actuating the rotational position of the intensity filter with respect to the channel beam 108). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the adjusting one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems comprises changing the intensity of each of the plurality of light beams based on the determining.
However, Kreh teaches wherein the adjusting one or more of the plurality of light adjustment systems comprises rotating the filter wheel of each of the plurality of light adjustment systems to change the intensity of each of the plurality of light beams based on the determining (¶76, The individual adaptation of the intensities of the illuminating light beams radiated by LEDs 23 through 25 can also be accomplished in advance on the basis of a reference wafer having a defined reflectivity).
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Tuitje, Chou, Matsudo, Gagnon, and Hill to incorporate the teachings of Kreh to adjust the intensity based on a reference wafer in order to provide the best illumination to a specific surface.
Claims 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1) in view of Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) and Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Chou teaches a system for optical metrology, the system comprising: a light divider (333) optically coupled to a light source (110), the light divider (333) having a single optical input (L) and a plurality of optical outputs (L’/L’’) (see figure 3, beam splitter 333 coupled to light source 110, the beam splitter 333 having an input of light L and an output of lights L’ and L’’); illumination systems (140/340/151/152/351/352) optically coupled to the light divider (333), each of the illumination systems (140/340/151/152/351/352) optically coupled to one of the plurality of optical outputs (L’/L’’) and each of the illumination systems (140/340/151/152/351/352) being associated with one of a plurality of wafer processing units (160/360) (see figure 3, illumination systems comprising beam splitters 140 and 340, as well as one-way mirrors 151, 152, 351, and 352 associated with each split light beam L’ and L’’); and collection systems (151/152/351/352), each of the collection systems (151/152/351/352) being associated with one of the plurality of wafer processing units (160/360), each of the collection systems (151/152/351/352) being optically coupled to one of the illumination systems (140/340/151/152/351/352) through an associated wafer processing unit (160/360) (see figure 3, one-way mirrors 151, 152, 351, and 352 also acting as collection systems as they receive light reflected from the wafers W1-W4). However, Chou fails to explicitly teach wherein the wafer processing units are processing chambers; and wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber.
However, Tuitje teaches wherein the wafer processing units are processing chambers (112) (see figure 1, process chamber 112).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chou to incorporate the teachings of Tuitje to instead include process chambers for the wafers in order to isolate the wafers from the outside environments, preventing the breakdown of the wafer formation processes as well as to prevent further defects. However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber.
However, Matsudo teaches wherein each of the plurality of light beams enter a respective process chamber (PC) (see figure 1, processing chambers PC1-PC6; and see ¶¶23-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Chou and Tuitje to incorporate the teachings of Matsudo to include a plurality of process chambers each including a wafer in order to create precise and controlled conditions for wafer manufacturing, as well as reducing the time spent on wafer inspection (Matsudo, ¶37).
Regarding claim 18, Chou as modified by Matsudo teaches the system of claim 15, further comprising: a plurality of optical detectors (Chou 171/172/371/372 | Matsudo 190), each of the plurality of optical detectors (Chou 171/172/371/372) being optically coupled to an output of one of the collection systems (Chou 151/152/351/352) (Chou, see figure 3, optical sensors 171, 172, 371, 372 for measuring reflected beams from each wafer W1-W4). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the optical detectors are spectrometers.
However, Tuitje teaches wherein the optical detectors (102) are spectrometers (¶30, The optical sensor 102 also includes a detector such as spectrometers 120 (e.g., measurement spectrometer) for measuring the spectral intensity of the reflected light beam 118).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Chou and Matsudo to incorporate the teachings of Tuitje to have the detectors be spectrometers as they have a high sensitivity for detecting minute changes in light absorbance and transmission, allowing the device to detect minute defects on the wafer surface.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1) in view of Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) and Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Hill et al. (USPGPub 20180052099 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Chou as modified by Tuitje and Matsudo teaches the system of claim 15, further comprising: optical filters coupled between the illumination systems (Chou 140/340/151/152/351/352 | Tuitje 220/204/210/128) and the light divider (Chou 333 | Matsudo 130/140) (Chou, ¶92, the integrated optical element 520 includes a plurality of optical components which are combined to fulfill some complex functions. Such optical components, for example, may be optical filters, modulators, amplifiers, splitters or the like; ¶90, the optical splitting element 140 is replaced by an integrated optical element 520. The integrated optical element 520 is configured to split the light from the light source 110 into a plurality of light beams for inspecting multiple wafers; and see figure 3). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach mechanical drive systems to position the optical filters.
However, Hill teaches mechanical drive systems to position the optical filters (¶54, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the intensity filter may be a circular gradient filter mounted to a rotational stage (e.g. rotational stage 210 or rotational stage 212) in which the transmissivity (or reflectivity) of the intensity filter may be controllable by actuating the rotational position of the intensity filter with respect to the channel beam 108).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Chou, Tuitje, and Matsudo to incorporate the teachings of Hill to further include a movable filter in order to adjust the intensity of the device, allowing for a plurality of different intensities of light to be used during the wafer inspection process, allowing the device to detect different kinds of defects as well as adjust due to the types of wafer surfaces being inspected.
Regarding claim 17, Chou as modified by Matsudo and Hill teaches the system of claim 16, wherein each of the optical filters comprise: a filter wheel for changing an intensity of the light beams before they reach the illumination systems (Chou 140/340/151/152/351/352) (Hill, ¶54, the intensity filter may include one or more filter changers (e.g. filter wheels, or the like) having a set of neutral density filters). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach a shutter for modulating the light beams produced by the light source.
However, Tuitje teaches a shutter (128) for modulating the light beams produced by the light source (108) (see figure 1, shutter 128; and ¶28, The light source 108 may be fiber coupled to the illumination system 104 after being modulated by a shutter 128).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Chou, Matsudo, and Hill to incorporate the teachings of Tuitje to further include a shutter because [t]he incident light beam 110 is modulated by a chopper wheel or shutter 128 in order to account for the light background (i.e., light which is not indicative of the reflected light of the incident light beam 110 such as plasma light emission or background light) measured by a measurement channel of spectrometers 120 when the incident light beam 110 is blocked (Tuitje, ¶33).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (USPGPub 20210033541 A1) in view of Tuitje et al. (USPGPub 20180286643 A1) and Matsudo et al. (USPGPub 20120243572 A1) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Samsoondar et al. (USPGPub 20240060957 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Chou as modified by Tuitje and Matsudo teaches the light divider (Chou 333 | Matsudo 130/140) (Chou, see figure 3). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach a bifurcated optical cable, the illumination systems being optically coupled to the light divider through the bifurcated optical cable.
However, Samsoondar teaches a bifurcated optical cable (16), the illumination systems being optically coupled to the light divider through the bifurcated optical cable (16) (see figure 15, bifurcated optical fiber 16 splitting light beam towards different optical elements; and ¶275, the beam splitter of system 70 (a bifurcated fiber optic cable 16 shown as an example)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Chou, Tuitje, and Matsudo to incorporate the teachings of Samsoondar to have the beam splitter be a bifurcated optical fiber as they are merely equivalents known for the same purpose (MPEP 2144.06 II).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN R GARBER whose telephone number is (571)272-4663. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0730-1730.
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, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at (571)272-2328. 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.
/ERIN R GARBER/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
/JENNIFER D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2878