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 .
The amendment filed on December 22, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-21 are pending in this 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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sumi et al. [US 20100014063 A1, hereafter Sumi].
As per Claims 1 and 11, Sumi teaches an exposure apparatus (See fig. 1, Para
18-20) comprising:
a substrate holder 152 configured to hold and move a substrate 150 (Para 138);
a module including:
a spatial light modulator including light modulation elements that are two-
dimensionally arranged (Para 18-20);
an illumination unit 67 configured to irradiate the spatial light modulator 50 with
illumination light (See fig. 4); and
a projection unit 51 configured to guide the illumination light from the light
modulation elements to respective light irradiation areas that are two-dimensionally
arranged in a first direction and a second direction perpendicular to the first direction on
the substrate (Para 147); and
a control unit configured to drive the substrate holder in a scanning direction
(Para 157),
wherein the light modulation elements are two-dimensionally arranged so as to
be inclined at a predetermined angle e (0°< θ <90°) with respect to the scanning direction and a non-scanning direction orthogonal to the scanning direction, and wherein when a predetermined region of the substrate is exposed, the control unit scans the substrate holder at such a speed that spot positions on the predetermined region are arranged in a staggered arrangement, wherein the spot positions each indicate a center of the illumination light emitted from a corresponding one of the light modulation elements and irradiated to the predetermined region (Para 153-156).
As per Claim 2, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the module is provided in plural, and wherein when exposing a first region that
can be exposed using a first module and a second module adjacent to the first module
among the plural modules, the control unit scans the substrate holder at such a speed that arrangement of the spot positions in the first region is the staggered arrangement
(See fig. 2, Para 140).
As per Claim 3, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 2,
wherein the control unit is configured to control the first module and the second module
so that the first region is exposed by both of the first module and the second module
(See fig. 2, Para 140).
As per Claim 4, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 1,
further comprising a receiving unit configured to receive a selection of one of the
following: exposing the predetermined region SO that the spot positions are arranged in
the staggered arrangement, exposing the predetermined region SO that the spot
positions are arranged in a square arrangement in which the spot positions are
arranged on lattice points aligned in the scanning direction and the non-scanning
direction, and exposing the predetermined region SO that the spot positions are
arranged in an inner staggered arrangement in which the spot positions are arranged in
the staggered arrangement inside the predetermined region (See fig. 8, Para 155-156).
As per Claim 5, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein a region shifted from the predetermined region in the non-scanning direction is
exposed by driving the spatial light modulator using drawing data in which one or some
of the spot positions when exposing the predetermined region are changed to be
located at positions that are adjacent to the predetermined region in the non-scanning
direction and are outside the predetermined region (See fig. 8, Para 155-156).
As per Claim 6, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein a region wider than the predetermined region in the non-scanning direction is exposed by driving the spatial light modulator using drawing data changed SO that one
or more new spot positions are added in locations adjacent to both sides of the
predetermined region in the non-scanning direction while reducing or not reducing one
or some of the spot positions when exposing the predetermined region (See fig. 8, Para
155-156).
As per Claim 7, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the predetermined region is exposed by generating drawing data changed SO
that a new spot position is added at a position that is adjacent to the predetermined
region in the non-scanning direction and is outside the predetermined region while one
or some of the spot positions when exposing the predetermined region in a state where
there is no distortion of a projected image by the module are reduced or not reduced,
based on a measurement result of the distortion of the projected image, and driving the
spatial light modulator using the generated drawing data (Para 51).
As per Claim 8, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 7,
wherein the distortion of the projected image is measured at a plurality of locations in a
two-dimensional plane, and drawing data corresponding to each position in the non-
scanning direction is generated based on an average of distortions at locations whose
positions in the non-scanning direction are the same (Para 51 and 154).
As per Claim 9, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the predetermined region is exposed by generating drawing data changed so
that new spot positions are added at positions adjacent to both sides of the
predetermined region in the non-scanning direction while one or some of the spot
positions when exposing the predetermined region in a state where an illumination distribution of the module is ideal are reduced or not reduced, based on a measurement
result of the illumination distribution, and driving the spatial light modulator using the
generated drawing data (Para 179).
As per Claims 10 and 12, Sumi teaches the exposure apparatus according to
claim 1, wherein the predetermined angle θ is an angle where a value of A in tan θ =1/A
is 5, 7, 9, or 11 (Para 155).
As per Claim 13, Sumi teaches a device manufacturing method comprising:
exposing the substrate using the control method according to claim 11; and developing
the exposed substrate (See fig. 1, Para 147).
Claim(s) 14-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukuda et al. [US 20090097002 A1, hereafter Fukuda].
As per Claim 14, Fukuda teaches an exposure apparatus (See fig. 1, Para 15) comprising:
a substrate holder (moving stage 14) movable in two dimensions (X and Y directions) including a first direction and a second direction intersecting with the first direction (Para 57); and
a spatial light modulator (the exposure head unit 18) including light modulation elements (Para 51),
wherein the light modulation elements are two-dimensionally arranged so as to be inclined at a predetermined angle θ (0° < θ < 90°) from the first direction in a plane in the two dimensions (Para 69), and
wherein the predetermined angle θ is an angle at which tan θ = 1/A, where a value of A is an integer (Para 67-70, for example when A=5, the inclination angle θ is 0.157079633).
As per Claims 15 and 16, Fukuda teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the value of A is an odd number (Para 69, wherein 5 is an odd number).
As per Claim 17, Fukuda teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the value of A is 7 (Para 69, when A=7 the inclination angle θ is 0.112199738).
As per Claim 18, Fukuda teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the value of A is 9 (Para 69, when A=9 the inclination angle θ is 0.0872664626).
As per Claim 19, Fukuda teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the value of A is 11 (Para 69, when A=11 the inclination angle θ is 0.071399833).
As per Claim 20, Fukuda teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 14, further comprising: a projection unit, wherein the light modulation elements are mirrors capable of tilting with respect to the plane and capable of being in a plurality of states, and wherein the projection unit is arranged so that light from an ON-state mirror of the mirrors enters the projection unit (Para 73).
As per Claim 21, Fukuda teaches the exposure apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the first direction is a scanning direction (Para 57).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 22, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remark section, with respect to claims 1 and 11, Applicant argued that Sumi et al. does not disclose the claim 1 feature " when a predetermined region of the substrate is exposed, the control unit scans the substrate holder at such a speed that spot positions on the predetermined region are arranged in a staggered arrangement" or the similar amended claim 11 feature "moving a substrate holder while holding a substrate at such a speed that spot positions each indicating a center of illumination light emitted from a corresponding one of light modulation elements with which a predetermined region of the substrate is irradiated are arranged in a staggered manner, ". Specifically, Sumi et al. does not cause "spot positions" to be "arranged in a staggered manner" and does not control the speed of movement/scanning of the substrate holder to result in the spot positions being arranged in a staggered manner.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art to Sumi, for example [0155], disclosed that “FIG. 8B illustrates the scanning trajectories of the exposing beams 53 in the case that the DMD 50 is inclined.” And [0156] further disclosed “As illustrated in FIG. 8B, by inclining the DMD 50, the pitch P.sub.2 of the scanning trajectories (scanning lines) of the exposure beams 53 become narrower than the pitch P.sub.1 of the scanning lines in the case that the DMD 50 is not inclined. Therefore, the resolution of the image can be greatly improved. Meanwhile, because the angle of inclination of the DMD 50 is slight, the scanning width W.sub.2 in the case that the DMD 50 is inclined and the scanning width W.sub.1 in the case that the DMD is not inclined are substantially the same.” So, from the above statements and corresponding figures 8A and 8B, it is clear that the exposure beam spots 53 are arranged differently in the two scanning activities (see the length of scan lines which is varied for different beams 53 of figure 8B in comparison to the one in figure 8A wherein all the scanned lines have the same length as shown in the figure below). Therefore, Applicant’s argument on the above points is not persuasive.
PNG
media_image1.png
702
814
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MESFIN ASFAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 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, 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.
/MESFIN T ASFAW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights