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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's preliminary amendment filed on 11/29/2023 has been entered.
Claims 1-26 have been cancelled.
Claims 27-46 have been added.
Claims 27-46 are still pending in this application, with claims 27, 38, and 42 being independent.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 4-13 inappropriately utilize black shading and/or utilize white reference numerals within black boarders. For example, Figures 4A-7B have black on black writing within the graphs which makes the writing legible. Further, in Figures 8-12 white numerals are utilized when all numerals must be in durable black ink. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The amendment filed 11/29/2023 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but are not persuasive [Remarks: “The amendments to the specification include the addition of a reference to an earlier filed pending application from which the present application is filed as a national stage application under 35 U.S.C § 371. No new matter has been added.”]. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: The incorporation by reference of International Patent Application No. PCT/GB2022/052060, and United Kingdom Application No. GB 202112125 A is ineffective as it was added on the date of entry into the national phase, which is after the filing date of the instant application. The filing date of this national stage application is the filing date of associated PCT, in this case 8/5/2022, see MPEP 1893.03(b). Therefore the specification amendment of 11/29/2023 to include the incorporation by reference is new matter, per MPEP 608.01(p). For the purposes of this office action, Examiner will interpret the disclosure as reciting “…
Claim Interpretation
Claim 30:
The claim describes a conventional 4F arrangement of a first and second lens relative to two one-axis AOM beam scanner elements [i.e., a standard optical setup that uses two lenses separated by the sum of their focal lengths (2F), spanning a total distance of 4F to perform optical signal processing and image relaying]
Claim 31:
The claim uses “a first lens and a second lens” to describe an optical relay system [fig. 1: optical relay system 126, third lens 136, fourth lens 137; p. 18: “The optical relay system 126 comprises a third lens 136 and a fourth lens 137. The second beam scanner element 134, the third lens 136, the fourth lens 137, and the further beam scanner 122 are arranged in a 4f configuration. Specifically, the third and fourth lenses 136, 137 are separated by a distance of 2f, the second beam scanner element 136 of the beam scanner 120 is located in a back focal plane of the third lens 136, and the galvanometer beam scanner 122 is located in a front focal plane of the fourth lens 137.”].
Claim 32:
The claim describes a conventional 4F arrangement of a first and second lens relative two two-axis beam scanner elements [i.e., a standard optical setup that uses two lenses separated by the sum of their focal lengths (2F), spanning a total distance of 4F to perform optical signal processing and image relaying]
Claim 35:
The claim describes a conventional 4F arrangement of a first and second lens as an optical relay system relative to a microscope objective and a two-axis beam scanner element [i.e., a standard optical setup that uses two lenses separated by the sum of their focal lengths (2F), spanning a total distance of 4F to perform optical signal processing and image relaying]
Claim Objections
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the pulsed laser is to generate a train of periodic laser pulses with a repetition rate of at least 100 KHz” should be “wherein the pulsed laser [[is to generate]]emits a train of periodic laser pulses with a repetition rate of at least 100 KHz” [p. 17: “The pulsed laser 102 is a pulsed femtosecond laser for emitting a pulsed laser beam 150 in the form of a train of laser pulses with a wavelength in the region of 1035nm, a repetition rate in the range 100 KHz-10 MHz, and a pulse energy in the range of 100 to 2000 nJ.”]. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 35, 38-41, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 35:
The limitation “the second lens” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. The claim will be interpreted as reciting “…wherein the optical relay system comprises a first lens that is one focal length distance from the second two-axis beam scanner element, [[the second lens]]and a second lens that is two focal lengths distance from the first lens…”
Claim 38:
The additional recitation of “a substrate” in “the stage positioned such that a substrate coupled to the stage receives pulsed laser beam from the arrangement of optical elements” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this is intended to be distinct from “a substrate” earlier recited in “a stage to house a substrate”. The claim will be interpreted as reciting “the stage positioned such that [[a]]the substrate coupled to the stage receives pulsed laser beam from the arrangement of optical elements”.
Claim 41:
The recitation of “a direction of the pulsed laser beam” in lines 6 and 11, and “a position of the substrate” in lines 6 and 11, render the claim indefinite because it is unclear if they are intended to be distinct from “a direction” and “a position” recited in line 2. The claim will be interpreted as reciting “[[a]]the direction of the pulsed laser beam” in lines 6 and 11, and “[[a]]the position of the substrate”
Claim 46:
The recitation of “for example” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). In this case, it is at least unclear if the claim requires the method include a step of controlling a beam steering configuration, or a step of controlling a rate of change of the beam steering configuration, both, or an equivalent method element not listed. For the purposes of this office action, the claim will be interpreted as reciting “using a faster beam scanner to compensate for any difference between the predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse, [[for example]] by controlling a beam steering configuration of the faster beam scanner and/or a rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the faster beam scanner to compensate for any difference between the predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse.”
The recitation of “a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse” in the last line renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this is intended to be distinct from “a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse” recited in lines 12-13. The last line will be interpreted as reciting “[[a]]the corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse”
Claims 39-41 are also rejected due to dependence on a rejected claim.
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.
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.
Claims 27 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Sugawara (JP 2007237242 A).
Regarding claim 27,
Mukai discloses:
An apparatus [i.e., a device configured to laser process material; col. 1, lines 10-37] comprising:
a pulsed laser to generate a pulsed laser beam [col. 3, lines 26-46: “In the present invention, a pulse laser irradiates a conductor layer a plurality of times in an overlapping manner to temporarily melt the conductor layer and the solidify the conductor layer.”];
[see fig. 15, wherein at least three square areas FR (FR1 to FR24), each correspond to a selected direction of the pulsed laser beam on a substrate, the pulsed laser beam being applied to each of the areas in a particular predetermined sequence, determined according to the relative spatial positions of nearby applications of the laser beam which also defines the order of irradiation, so as to prevent undesirable levels of heat accumulation; col. 8, lines 32-66: “…By successively irradiating the non-adjacent square areas FR of the conductor layer, it is possible to prevent heat accumulation in the conductor layer and the underlayer and accordingly prevent the generation of the post heating effect.”].
However, although Mukai describes the relative two dimensional movement between substrate and laser in a laser process [i.e., conventional beam positioning, see fig. 15, showing XY coordinates indicating two dimensional movement of the laser beam relative to a target area/surface], Mukai does not explicitly disclose:
an arrangement of optical elements to receive at least a portion of the pulsed laser beam, the optical elements comprising:
a first two-axis beam scanner element; and
a second two-axis beam scanner element after the first two-axis beam scanner element; and
control circuitry to actuate the first two-axis beam scanner element and the second two-axis beam scanner element to control the direction of the pulsed laser beam.
Sugawara, in the same field of endeavor [high precision positioning in laser processing; p. 2: “An object of the present invention is to provide a laser processing apparatus and method for solving the above-described problems and achieving both high precision positioning and high followability in both punching and trepanning.”], teaches control circuitry [i.e., a host control device (not shown); p. 3] actuating conventional optical elements [i.e., known optical elements in the laser processing art] comprising a first two-axis beam scanner element [fig. 1: first biaxial scanner 14] and a second two-axis beam scanner element [fig. 1: second biaxial scanner 19/third biaxial scanner 20], for receiving portions of a pulse laser beam [fig. 1: laser beam 2, first processing beam 6, second processing beam 7].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai by including an arrangement of optical elements to receive at least a portion of the pulsed laser beam, the optical elements comprising: a first two-axis beam scanner element; and a second two-axis beam scanner element after the first two-axis beam scanner element; and control circuitry to actuate the first two-axis beam scanner element and the second two-axis beam scanner element to control the direction of the pulsed laser beam, as taught by Sugawara, since Sugawara teaches this allows for high precision positioning, thereby improving throughput [e.g., by allowing trepanning; p. 5: “As described above, according to the laser processing apparatus of the present invention, by separately arranging a scanner that draws a trace of trepanning, it is possible to improve processing throughput and hole shape in both punching and trepanning. This makes it possible to drill various holes from small to large diameters.”].
Regarding claim 33, Mukai in view of Sugawara discloses the apparatus of claim 27.
Mukai as modified by Sugawara further discloses:
wherein the second two-axis beam scanner element is a two-axis galvanometer beam scanner [Sugawara; p. 4: “The second biaxial scanner 19 includes a galvano scanner 19b to which a mirror 19a for oscillating the first machining beam 6 in the X axis direction with respect to the work area on the surface of the substrate 24 on the XY stage 23; The galvano scanner 19d is provided with a mirror 19c for swinging in the Y-axis direction. Similarly, the third biaxial scanner 20 is a galvano scanner to which a mirror 20a for oscillating the second machining beam 7 in the X-axis direction with respect to the work area on the surface of the substrate 25 on the XY stage 23 is attached. 20b and a galvano scanner 20d to which a mirror 20c for swinging in the Y-axis direction is attached.”].
Claims 28-29 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Sugawara (JP 2007237242 A) as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Johnson (US 20050270631 A1).
Regarding claim 28, Mukai in view of Sugawara discloses the apparatus of claim 27.
However, Mukai as modified by Sugawara does not disclose:
wherein the first two-axis beam scanner element is a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam in a first direction and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam in a second direction.
Johnson, in the same field of endeavor [beam steering in a laser process; para. 0182: “Skilled persons will appreciate that current beam-positioning or scanning systems in laser processing equipment are generally mechanical in nature, being either a galvanometer-based system or a fast-steering-mirror--(FSM) or other type of movable-mirror-based system. Both the galvanometer and FSM techniques have mechanical masses that limit the overall scanning speed of the system. In general, the trade-off between scan angle and scanning speed can be seen in both of these systems: where galvanometer systems have a larger scanning angle and slower speed, whereas FSMs have a smaller scanning angle but higher speed.”], teaches a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM60] as a conventional two axis beam scanner comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM X 601 diffracting the laser beam in the X axis and AOM Y 602 diffracting the laser beam in the Y axis; para. 0081].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai and Sugawara wherein the first two-axis beam scanner element is a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam in a first direction and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam in a second direction, since Johnson teaches this allows the amplitude and frequency of the RF power delivered to transducers controlling the beam scanner elements at very high speeds [para. 0093: “AOMs 60.sub.1 and 60.sub.2 are preferably driven by separate respective RF drivers 66.sub.1 and 66.sub.2 that have the ability to variably control the amplitude and/or the frequency of the RF power delivered to the transducers 70 as in any of the previously described embodiments, so the amplitude and position of the output beam at the workpiece 80 can be accurately controlled. Because the RF driver frequency can be adjusted at very high speeds, the AOMs 60 can be used to steer the beam in real time in an open-loop scanning system with lookup tables of characterized linear effects to calibrate out unwanted position error effects.”].
Regarding claim 29, Mukai in view of Sugawara and Johnson discloses the apparatus of claim 28.
Mukai as modified by Sugawara and Johnson further discloses:
wherein the first direction and the second direction are orthogonal [i.e., X axis perpendicular to the Y axis, Johnson further teaching the arrangement is not limited thereto; para. 0081: “Skilled persons will appreciate that even though AOMs 60.sub.1 and 60.sub.2 are shown and described to alter the beam path along perpendicular axes, AOMs 60.sub.1 and 60.sub.2 may be adapted and positioned along the same axis or along transverse axes that are not perpendicular.”].
Regarding claim 36, Mukai in view of Sugawara discloses the apparatus of claim 27.
However, Mukai as modified by Sugawara does not disclose:
wherein the pulsed laser is to generate a train of periodic laser pulses with a repetition rate of at least 100 KHz.
Johnson, in the same field of endeavor [beam steering in a laser process; para. 0182: “Skilled persons will appreciate that current beam-positioning or scanning systems in laser processing equipment are generally mechanical in nature, being either a galvanometer-based system or a fast-steering-mirror--(FSM) or other type of movable-mirror-based system. Both the galvanometer and FSM techniques have mechanical masses that limit the overall scanning speed of the system. In general, the trade-off between scan angle and scanning speed can be seen in both of these systems: where galvanometer systems have a larger scanning angle and slower speed, whereas FSMs have a smaller scanning angle but higher speed.”], teaches a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM60] as a conventional two axis beam scanner comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM X 601 diffracting the laser beam in the X axis and AOM Y 602 diffracting the laser beam in the Y axis; para. 0081], wherein the pulsed laser is to generate a train of periodic laser pulses with a repetition rate of at least 100 KHz [para. 0116: “With reference to FIGS. 18-20C, employing serial AOMs 60 for modulating the same axis can extend the scan angle of the downstream AOM 60x2 as determined by the extent of scan angle of the upstream AOM 60x1 or other device. An AOM 60x1 as the upstream Bragg adjustment device can provide a larger scan angle than using a single AOM 60 alone and can be accomplished, at a bandwidth higher than most laser repetition rates, i.e., greater than 100 kHz. Skilled persons will appreciate that even small AOM scanning range improvements will be particularly beneficial at UV wavelengths where the Bragg efficiency factors can be somewhat limiting.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai and Sugawara wherein the first two-axis beam scanner element is a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam in a first direction and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam in a second direction, such that the pulsed laser is capable of generating a train of periodic laser pulses with a repetition rate of at least 100 KHz [e.g., a given application requires an energy density corresponding to a repetition rate of 100 KHz], since Johnson teaches this allows the amplitude and frequency of the RF power delivered to transducers controlling the beam scanner elements at very high speeds [para. 0093: “AOMs 60.sub.1 and 60.sub.2 are preferably driven by separate respective RF drivers 66.sub.1 and 66.sub.2 that have the ability to variably control the amplitude and/or the frequency of the RF power delivered to the transducers 70 as in any of the previously described embodiments, so the amplitude and position of the output beam at the workpiece 80 can be accurately controlled. Because the RF driver frequency can be adjusted at very high speeds, the AOMs 60 can be used to steer the beam in real time in an open-loop scanning system with lookup tables of characterized linear effects to calibrate out unwanted position error effects.”].
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Sugawara (JP 2007237242 A) and Johnson (US 20050270631 A1) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Okuma (US 20200139484 A1).
Regarding claim 30, Mukai in view of Sugawara and Johnson discloses the apparatus of claim 28.
However, Mukai as modified by Sugawara and Johnson does not disclose:
further comprising a first lens and a second lens between the first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and the second one-axis AOM beam scanner element, wherein the first lens is one focal length distance from the first one-axis AOM beam scanner element, the second lens is two focal lengths distance from the first lens, and the second one-axis AOM beam scanner element is one focal length distance from the second lens.
Okuma, in the same field of endeavor [optical elements and arrangements in a laser processing device; para. 0002: “Patent Literature 1 discloses a laser processing device including a holding mechanism that holds a workpiece and a laser irradiation mechanism that irradiates the workpiece held by the holding mechanism with laser light. In this laser processing device, components arranged on an optical path of the laser light extending from a laser oscillator to a condenser lens are accommodated in one housing. The housing is fixed to a wall portion standing erect on a base of the laser processing device.”], teaches the conventional arrangement of a 4f lens unit, wherein a first lens [e.g., lens 422 in fig. 16] and second lens [e.g., lens 423 in fig. 16] are arranged between two optical elements [e.g., SLM 410 and condenser lens unit 430; paras. 0090-93].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai, Sugawara, and Johnson, by further comprising a first lens and a second lens between the first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and the second one-axis AOM beam scanner element, wherein the first lens is one focal length distance from the first one-axis AOM beam scanner element, the second lens is two focal lengths distance from the first lens, and the second one-axis AOM beam scanner element is one focal length distance from the second lens, since Okuma teaches the 4f lens unit as allowing for adjusting a beam passing therethrough [para. 0093: “In the 4f lens unit 420, the magnification M of the both-side telecentric optical system is not equal to 1, and thus, as shown in FIG. 17, when the pair of lenses 422, 423 move along the optical axis, a conjugate point adjacent to the condenser lens unit 430 moves accordingly… Thus, for example, when the attachment position of the condenser lens unit 430 is misaligned, the conjugate point adjacent to the condenser lens unit 430 is aligned with the entrance pupil surface 430a of the condenser lens unit 430. In the 4f lens unit 420, as shown in FIG. 11, a plurality of long holes 421a extending in the Y-axis direction are formed through the bottom wall of the holder 421, and the holder 421 is bolted to the bottom surface 401b of the housing 401 through each of the long holes 421a. Accordingly, the pair of lenses 422, 423 are adjusted in position in the direction along the optical axis by adjusting a position where the holder 421 is fixed to the bottom surface 401b of the housing 401 in the Y-axis direction.”].
Claims 31-32 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Sugawara (JP 2007237242 A) as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Okuma (US 20200139484 A1).
Regarding claim 31, Mukai in view of Sugawara discloses the apparatus of claim 27.
However, Mukai as modified by Sugawara does not disclose:
wherein the arrangement of optical elements further comprises a first lens and a second lens between the first two-axis beam scanner element and the second two-axis beam scanner element.
Okuma, in the same field of endeavor [optical elements and arrangements in a laser processing device; para. 0002: “Patent Literature 1 discloses a laser processing device including a holding mechanism that holds a workpiece and a laser irradiation mechanism that irradiates the workpiece held by the holding mechanism with laser light. In this laser processing device, components arranged on an optical path of the laser light extending from a laser oscillator to a condenser lens are accommodated in one housing. The housing is fixed to a wall portion standing erect on a base of the laser processing device.”], teaches the conventional arrangement of a 4f lens unit, wherein a first lens [e.g., lens 422 in fig. 16] and second lens [e.g., lens 423 in fig. 16] are arranged between two optical elements [e.g., SLM 410 and condenser lens unit 430; paras. 0090-93].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai and Sugawara, wherein the arrangement of optical elements further comprises a first lens and a second lens between the first two-axis beam scanner element and the second two-axis beam scanner element, since Okuma teaches the 4f lens unit as allowing for adjusting a beam passing therethrough [para. 0093: “In the 4f lens unit 420, the magnification M of the both-side telecentric optical system is not equal to 1, and thus, as shown in FIG. 17, when the pair of lenses 422, 423 move along the optical axis, a conjugate point adjacent to the condenser lens unit 430 moves accordingly… Thus, for example, when the attachment position of the condenser lens unit 430 is misaligned, the conjugate point adjacent to the condenser lens unit 430 is aligned with the entrance pupil surface 430a of the condenser lens unit 430. In the 4f lens unit 420, as shown in FIG. 11, a plurality of long holes 421a extending in the Y-axis direction are formed through the bottom wall of the holder 421, and the holder 421 is bolted to the bottom surface 401b of the housing 401 through each of the long holes 421a. Accordingly, the pair of lenses 422, 423 are adjusted in position in the direction along the optical axis by adjusting a position where the holder 421 is fixed to the bottom surface 401b of the housing 401 in the Y-axis direction.”].
Regarding claim 32, Mukai in view of Sugawara and Okuma discloses the apparatus of claim 31.
Mukai as modified by Sugawara and Okuma further discloses:
wherein the first lens is one focal length distance from the first two-axis beam scanner element, the second lens is two focal lengths distance from the first lens, and the second two-axis beam scanner element is one focal length distance from the second lens [Okuma; see fig. 16 and paras. 0090-93].
Regarding claim 37, Mukai in view of Sugawara discloses the apparatus of claim 27.
However, although Sugawara describes laser processing apparatuses wherein laser light is switched or split [p. 2: “In order to meet the demands for improving the processing throughput as described above, a plurality of laser processing apparatuses having multiple processing beams have been proposed. As a method of multisizing, a laser processing apparatus (for example, Patent Document 1) that switches laser light temporally and a laser processing apparatus (for example, Patent Document 2) that splits laser light spatially are typical. is there.”], Mukai as modified by Sugawara does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the pulsed laser comprises a Q-switched laser or a mode-locked laser.
Okuma, in the same field of endeavor [optical elements and arrangements in a laser processing device; para. 0002: “Patent Literature 1 discloses a laser processing device including a holding mechanism that holds a workpiece and a laser irradiation mechanism that irradiates the workpiece held by the holding mechanism with laser light. In this laser processing device, components arranged on an optical path of the laser light extending from a laser oscillator to a condenser lens are accommodated in one housing. The housing is fixed to a wall portion standing erect on a base of the laser processing device.”], teaches a laser process wherein a Q-switched laser is selected as the pulsed laser [para. 0057: “In the laser oscillator 310, the output of the laser light L is switched between ON and OFF as described below. In a configuration where the laser oscillator 310 is constituted of a solid-state laser, switching of a Q-switch (an acousto-optic modulator (AOM),”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai and Sugawara, wherein the pulsed laser comprises a Q-switched laser or a mode-locked laser, since Okuma teaches the Q-switched laser as capable of performing a desirable laser process.
Claims 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Sugawara (JP 2007237242 A) as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Courvoisier (US 20150158120 A1) and Okuma (US 20200139484 A1).
Regarding claim 34, Mukai in view of Sugawara discloses the apparatus of claim 27.
However, although Sugawara discloses fθ lenses 21/22 downstream of the second two-axis beam scanner element, upstream of the substrate, similar to the recited placement of the instant microscope objective, Mukai as modified by Sugawara does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the arrangement of optical elements further comprises a microscope objective and an optical relay system between the second two-axis beam scanner element and the microscope objective.
Courvoisier, in the same field of endeavor [optical elements and arrangements in a laser processing device; para. 0002: “The present invention relates to a laser nanomachining method and device, especially suitable for high-aspect-ratio nano-drilling or wafer bonding.”], teaches a microscope objective as a conventional optical element [fig. 2: 209] downstream to a 4f type imaging system [para. 0058]
Okuma, in the same field of endeavor [optical elements and arrangements in a laser processing device; para. 0002: “Patent Literature 1 discloses a laser processing device including a holding mechanism that holds a workpiece and a laser irradiation mechanism that irradiates the workpiece held by the holding mechanism with laser light. In this laser processing device, components arranged on an optical path of the laser light extending from a laser oscillator to a condenser lens are accommodated in one housing. The housing is fixed to a wall portion standing erect on a base of the laser processing device.”], teaches the conventional arrangement of a 4f lens unit, wherein a first lens [e.g., lens 422 in fig. 16] and second lens [e.g., lens 423 in fig. 16] are arranged between two optical elements [i.e., the lenses forming an optical relay between SLM 410 and condenser lens unit 430; paras. 0090-93].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai, and Sugawara, wherein the arrangement of optical elements further comprises
a microscope objective, since Courvoisier teaches this allows for advantageous positioning of the substrate [para. 0058: “Advantageously, the microscope objective also allows an image of the sample to be machined to be formed on a video camera 206 in front of which a focusing objective 207 is arranged, in order to allow the zone of the sample that it is desired to machine to be pinpointed and to ensure the beam is correctly positioned”] and
an optical relay system between the second two-axis beam scanner element and the microscope objective, since Okuma teaches the 4f lens unit as allowing for adjusting a beam passing therethrough [para. 0093: “In the 4f lens unit 420, the magnification M of the both-side telecentric optical system is not equal to 1, and thus, as shown in FIG. 17, when the pair of lenses 422, 423 move along the optical axis, a conjugate point adjacent to the condenser lens unit 430 moves accordingly… Thus, for example, when the attachment position of the condenser lens unit 430 is misaligned, the conjugate point adjacent to the condenser lens unit 430 is aligned with the entrance pupil surface 430a of the condenser lens unit 430. In the 4f lens unit 420, as shown in FIG. 11, a plurality of long holes 421a extending in the Y-axis direction are formed through the bottom wall of the holder 421, and the holder 421 is bolted to the bottom surface 401b of the housing 401 through each of the long holes 421a. Accordingly, the pair of lenses 422, 423 are adjusted in position in the direction along the optical axis by adjusting a position where the holder 421 is fixed to the bottom surface 401b of the housing 401 in the Y-axis direction.”].
Regarding claim 35, Mukai in view of Sugawara, Courvoisier, and Okuma discloses the apparatus of claim 34.
Mukai as modified by Sugawara, Courvoisier, and Okuma further discloses:
wherein the optical relay system comprises a first lens that is one focal length distance from the second two-axis beam scanner element, the second lens is two focal lengths distance from the first lens, and the microscope objective is one focal length distance from the second lens [Okuma; see fig. 16 and paras. 0090-93].
Claims 38-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Sugawara (JP 2007237242 A), Johnson (US 20050270631 A1), and Courvoisier (US 20150158120 A1).
Regarding claim 38,
Mukai discloses:
A system [i.e., a device configured to laser process material; col. 1, lines 10-37] comprising:
a pulsed laser to generate a pulsed laser beam [col. 3, lines 26-46: “In the present invention, a pulse laser irradiates a conductor layer a plurality of times in an overlapping manner to temporarily melt the conductor layer and the solidify the conductor layer.”];
[e.g., a semiconductor device; col. 1, lines 10-17]
However, although Mukai describes the relative two dimensional movement between substrate and laser in a laser process [i.e., conventional beam positioning, see fig. 15, showing XY coordinates indicating two dimensional movement of the laser beam relative to a target area/surface], Mukai does not explicitly disclose:
a beamsplitter to receive the pulsed laser beam;
an arrangement of optical elements to receive a first portion of the pulsed laser beam from the beamsplitter, the optical elements comprising:
a first two-axis beam scanner element;
a second two-axis beam scanner element after the first two-axis beam scanner element; and
a microscope objective after the second two-axis beam scanner element;
a stage to house the substrate, the stage positioned such that the substrate coupled to the stage receives pulsed laser beam from the arrangement of optical elements;
a photodetector to receive a second portion of the pulsed laser beam; and
control circuitry to actuate the first two-axis beam scanner element and the second two-axis beam scanner element based on signals from the photodetector.
Sugawara, in the same field of endeavor [high precision positioning in laser processing; p. 2: “An object of the present invention is to provide a laser processing apparatus and method for solving the above-described problems and achieving both high precision positioning and high followability in both punching and trepanning.”], teaches control circuitry [i.e., a host control device (not shown); p. 3] actuating conventional optical elements [i.e., known optical elements in the laser processing art] in an arrangement including a first two-axis beam scanner element [fig. 1: first biaxial scanner 14] and a second two-axis beam scanner element [fig. 1: second biaxial scanner 19/third biaxial scanner 20], for receiving portions of a pulse laser beam [fig. 1: laser beam 2, first processing beam 6, second processing beam 7], the arrangement including additional optical elements such as a beamsplitter to receive the pulsed laser beam [e.g., beam splitter 13, beam splitter 15, p. 4: “Next, functions of the first polarizing beam splitter 13 and the second polarizing beam splitter 15 will be described...”] and fθ lenses 21/22 downstream of the second two-axis beam scanner element, upstream of the substrate, similar to the recited placement of the instant microscope objective; and a stage to house the substrate, the stage positioned such that the substrate coupled to the stage receives pulsed laser beam from the arrangement of optical elements [fig. 1: XY stage 23].
Johnson, in the same field of endeavor [beam steering in a laser process; para. 0182: “Skilled persons will appreciate that current beam-positioning or scanning systems in laser processing equipment are generally mechanical in nature, being either a galvanometer-based system or a fast-steering-mirror--(FSM) or other type of movable-mirror-based system. Both the galvanometer and FSM techniques have mechanical masses that limit the overall scanning speed of the system. In general, the trade-off between scan angle and scanning speed can be seen in both of these systems: where galvanometer systems have a larger scanning angle and slower speed, whereas FSMs have a smaller scanning angle but higher speed.”], teaches a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM60] as a conventional two axis beam scanner comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM X 601 diffracting the laser beam in the X axis and AOM Y 602 diffracting the laser beam in the Y axis; para. 0081], wherein a beamsplitter is configured to receive the pulsed laser beam [fig. 16: beam-splitting optical element 120], and a photodetector is arranged to receive a second portion of the pulsed laser beam [i.e., a laser light detector 122; para. 0085: “FIG. 16 shows an exemplary laser system 50e employing a beam-splitting optical element 120 to direct a portion of the laser output propagating along the beam path 72a to a laser output detector 122 that can be used to determine the incident amplitude and energy of the laser pulse going to the workpiece 80.”]
Courvoisier, in the same field of endeavor [optical elements and arrangements in a laser processing device; para. 0002: “The present invention relates to a laser nanomachining method and device, especially suitable for high-aspect-ratio nano-drilling or wafer bonding.”], teaches a microscope objective as a conventional optical element [fig. 2: 209] downstream to a 4f type imaging system [para. 0058]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Mukai by including a stage to house the substrate, the stage positioned such that the substrate coupled to the stage receives pulsed laser beam from the arrangement of optical elements; and an arrangement of optical elements to receive at least a portion of the pulsed laser beam, the optical elements comprising: a first two-axis beam scanner element; and a second two-axis beam scanner element after the first two-axis beam scanner element; and control circuitry to actuate the first two-axis beam scanner element and the second two-axis beam scanner element to control the direction of the pulsed laser beam, as taught by Sugawara, since Sugawara teaches this allows for high precision positioning, thereby improving throughput [e.g., by allowing trepanning; p. 5: “As described above, according to the laser processing apparatus of the present invention, by separately arranging a scanner that draws a trace of trepanning, it is possible to improve processing throughput and hole shape in both punching and trepanning. This makes it possible to drill various holes from small to large diameters.”]; and wherein a beamsplitter is configured to receive the pulsed laser beam to direct a second portion thereof to a photodetector since Johnson teaches this allows for compensating for deviations [para. 0088: “In some embodiments, the beam-splitting optical element 120 and the laser output detector 122 can be placed at other downstream positions along the beam path so that the amplitude corrections may compensate for amplitude deviation caused by other components in the beam path 72a. Laser output detectors 122 are known to skilled practitioners and employed in many laser applications. The laser output detector 122 can, however, be adapted to send a signal 124 directly or indirectly to the system controller 62, which can send corrective signals 126 to the RF driver 66 or adjust existing amplitude or frequency control signals delivered to the RF driver 66.”]; and a microscope objective after the second two-axis beam scanner element since Courvoisier teaches this allows for advantageous positioning of the substrate [para. 0058: “Advantageously, the microscope objective also allows an image of the sample to be machined to be formed on a video camera 206 in front of which a focusing objective 207 is arranged, in order to allow the zone of the sample that it is desired to machine to be pinpointed and to ensure the beam is correctly positioned”]
Regarding claim 39, Mukai in view of Sugawara, Johnson, and Courvoisier discloses the system of claim 38.
Mukai as modified by Sugawara, Johnson, and Courvoisier further discloses:
wherein the control circuitry is to actuate the first and second two-axis beam scanner elements to control a direction of the pulsed laser beam from laser pulse to laser pulse so that at least three consecutive laser pulses sequentially irradiate at least three regions of the substrate according to a predetermined spatial sequence which defines relative spatial positions, and an order of irradiation, of the at least three regions of the substrate [i.e., the control circuitry/beam steering of Sugawara configured to control the optical elements of Sugawara, Johnson, Courvoisier, so as to irradiate areas in a particular predetermined sequence, as per Mukai; see fig. 15, wherein at least three square areas FR (FR1 to FR24), each correspond to a selected direction of the pulsed laser beam on a substrate, the pulsed laser beam being applied to each of the areas in a particular predetermined sequence, determined according to the relative spatial positions of nearby applications of the laser beam which also defines the order of irradiation, so as to prevent undesirable levels of heat accumulation; col. 8, lines 32-66: “…By successively irradiating the non-adjacent square areas FR of the conductor layer, it is possible to prevent heat accumulation in the conductor layer and the underlayer and accordingly prevent the generation of the post heating effect.”].
Regarding claim 40, Mukai in view of Sugawara, Johnson, and Courvoisier discloses the system of claim 38.
Mukai as modified by Sugawara, Johnson, and Courvoisier further discloses:
wherein the control circuitry is further to control a position of the stage from laser pulse to laser pulse so that at least three consecutive laser pulses sequentially irradiate at least three regions of the substrate according to a predetermined spatial sequence which defines relative spatial positions, and an order of irradiation, of the at least three regions of the substrate [i.e., the movable stage of Sugawara controlled so as to facilitate the irradiation of the areas of Mukai].
Regarding claim 41, Mukai in view of Sugawara, Johnson, and Courvoisier discloses the system of claim 38.
In this case, in view of the movable stage of Sugawara, the beam steering elements of Sugawara and Johnson, and Johnson disclosing the beam-splitting optical element 120 and laser output detector 122 compensating for any deviations [e.g., caused by inertia/mass of galvanometer scanners; Johnson para. 0107: “The primary limitations of a galvanometer scanner is the inertia created by moving a mass and the resonance of the movement.”] by taking advantage of the high speed adjustability of beam steering elements [para. 0089: “One or more AO Ms 60 can therefore be used, with or without the frequency control techniques, in a closed-loop system for increasing the pulse amplitude stability at high update rates. Such amplitude or frequency adjustments can be used to control the laser pulse energy for laser drift and/or thermal instabilities in the laser output and/or inconsistent RF-induced heating of the AOM 60.”], it would have been obvious to modify the system of Mukai, Sugawara, Johnson, and Courvoisier to compensate for any undesirable movements of the laser beam to the different areas of Mukai so as to improve reliability/throughput, such that the control circuitry is further configured to:
control a direction of the pulsed laser beam or a position of the substrate so as to move a nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam to a first position in the substrate so that a first one of at least three consecutive laser pulses irradiates a first region of the substrate centered on the first position;
control a direction of the pulsed laser beam or a position of the substrate so as to move the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate along a first direction from the first position in the substrate to a second position in the substrate so that a second one of the at least three consecutive laser pulses irradiates a second region of the substrate centered on the second position; and
control a direction of the pulsed laser beam or a position of the substrate so as to move the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate along a second direction from the second position in the substrate to a third position in the substrate so that a third one of the at least three consecutive laser pulses irradiates a third region of the substrate centered on the third position, wherein the first and second directions are different.
Claims 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai (US 5232674 A) in view of Johnson (US 20050270631 A1).
Regarding claim 45, Mukai teaches the method of claim 42 (see below).
However, Mukai does not disclose:
comprising:
determining or measuring emission timing data for one or more of the laser pulses;
determining or measuring a nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and/or
determining or measuring a velocity of the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate;
calculating a predicted nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate at a time of emission of a future laser pulse on the substrate using the determined or measured emission timing data and at least one of the determined or measured nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and the determined or measured velocity of the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate; and
compensating for any difference between the predicted nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and a corresponding desired future nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate by controlling a beam steering configuration of a beam scanner and/or a rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the beam scanner, to compensate for any difference between the predicted nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and the desired future nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate.
Johnson, in the same field of endeavor [beam steering in a laser process; para. 0182: “Skilled persons will appreciate that current beam-positioning or scanning systems in laser processing equipment are generally mechanical in nature, being either a galvanometer-based system or a fast-steering-mirror--(FSM) or other type of movable-mirror-based system. Both the galvanometer and FSM techniques have mechanical masses that limit the overall scanning speed of the system. In general, the trade-off between scan angle and scanning speed can be seen in both of these systems: where galvanometer systems have a larger scanning angle and slower speed, whereas FSMs have a smaller scanning angle but higher speed.”], teaches a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM60] as a conventional two axis beam scanner comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM X 601 diffracting the laser beam in the X axis and AOM Y 602 diffracting the laser beam in the Y axis; para. 0081], wherein a beamsplitter is configured to receive the pulsed laser beam [fig. 16: beam-splitting optical element 120], and a photodetector is arranged to receive a second portion of the pulsed laser beam [i.e., a laser light detector 122; para. 0085: “FIG. 16 shows an exemplary laser system 50e employing a beam-splitting optical element 120 to direct a portion of the laser output propagating along the beam path 72a to a laser output detector 122 that can be used to determine the incident amplitude and energy of the laser pulse going to the workpiece 80.”], further disclosing determining or measuring emission timing data for the pulsed laser beam [para. 0024: “FIG. 7 is a timing diagram showing exemplary high-bandwidth frequency-shifting waveforms expressed by an AOM transducer to achieve full extinction from an AOM.”] and determining or measuring a nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate [i.e., the AOM beam steerer controls a position of the pulsed laser beam in a predictable manner; para. 0092] and/or determining or measuring a velocity of the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate [i.e., the AOM beam steerer controls a position of the pulsed laser beam with a predictable velocity; para. 0096].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the method of Mukai by including determining or measuring emission timing data for one or more of the laser pulses; determining or measuring a nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and/or determining or measuring a velocity of the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate; calculating a predicted nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate at a time of emission of a future laser pulse on the substrate using the determined or measured emission timing data and at least one of the determined or measured nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and the determined or measured velocity of the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate; and compensating for any difference between the predicted nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and a corresponding desired future nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate by controlling a beam steering configuration of a beam scanner and/or a rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the beam scanner, to compensate for any difference between the predicted nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate and the desired future nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam in the substrate, since Johnson also teaches compensating for deviations [para. 0088: “In some embodiments, the beam-splitting optical element 120 and the laser output detector 122 can be placed at other downstream positions along the beam path so that the amplitude corrections may compensate for amplitude deviation caused by other components in the beam path 72a. Laser output detectors 122 are known to skilled practitioners and employed in many laser applications. The laser output detector 122 can, however, be adapted to send a signal 124 directly or indirectly to the system controller 62, which can send corrective signals 126 to the RF driver 66 or adjust existing amplitude or frequency control signals delivered to the RF driver 66.”]
Regarding claim 46, Mukai teaches the method of claim 42 (see below).
However, Mukai does not disclose:
comprising:
determining or measuring emission timing data for one or more of the laser pulses;
determining or measuring a beam steering configuration such as one or more tilt angles of a slower beam scanner and/or determining or measuring a rate of change of a beam steering configuration such as a rate of change of the one or more tilt angles of the slower beam scanner;
calculating a predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at a time of emission of a future laser pulse using the determined or measured emission timing data and at least one of the determined or measured beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and the determined or measured rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner; and
using a faster beam scanner to compensate for any difference between the predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse, for example by controlling a beam steering configuration of the faster beam scanner and/or a rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the faster beam scanner to compensate for any difference between the predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse.
Johnson, in the same field of endeavor [beam steering in a laser process; para. 0182: “Skilled persons will appreciate that current beam-positioning or scanning systems in laser processing equipment are generally mechanical in nature, being either a galvanometer-based system or a fast-steering-mirror--(FSM) or other type of movable-mirror-based system. Both the galvanometer and FSM techniques have mechanical masses that limit the overall scanning speed of the system. In general, the trade-off between scan angle and scanning speed can be seen in both of these systems: where galvanometer systems have a larger scanning angle and slower speed, whereas FSMs have a smaller scanning angle but higher speed.”], teaches a two-axis acousto-optic modulator (AOM) beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM60] as a conventional two axis beam scanner comprising a first one-axis AOM beam scanner element and a second one-axis AOM beam scanner element [fig. 14: AOM X 601 diffracting the laser beam in the X axis and AOM Y 602 diffracting the laser beam in the Y axis; para. 0081], wherein a beamsplitter is configured to receive the pulsed laser beam [fig. 16: beam-splitting optical element 120], and a photodetector is arranged to receive a second portion of the pulsed laser beam [i.e., a laser light detector 122; para. 0085: “FIG. 16 shows an exemplary laser system 50e employing a beam-splitting optical element 120 to direct a portion of the laser output propagating along the beam path 72a to a laser output detector 122 that can be used to determine the incident amplitude and energy of the laser pulse going to the workpiece 80.”], further disclosing determining or measuring emission timing data for the pulsed laser beam [para. 0024: “FIG. 7 is a timing diagram showing exemplary high-bandwidth frequency-shifting waveforms expressed by an AOM transducer to achieve full extinction from an AOM.”], determining or measuring a beam steering configuration such as one or more tilt angles of a beam scanner and/or determining or measuring a rate of change of a beam steering configuration such as a rate of change of the one or more tilt angles of the beam scanner [Johnson teaches that slow and fast beam scanners have predictable angles and speeds; para. 0182: “Both the galvanometer and FSM techniques have mechanical masses that limit the overall scanning speed of the system. In general, the trade-off between scan angle and scanning speed can be seen in both of these systems: where galvanometer systems have a larger scanning angle and slower speed, whereas FSMs have a smaller scanning angle but higher speed.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the method of Mukai by including determining or measuring emission timing data for one or more of the laser pulses; determining or measuring a beam steering configuration such as one or more tilt angles of a slower beam scanner and/or determining or measuring a rate of change of a beam steering configuration such as a rate of change of the one or more tilt angles of the slower beam scanner; calculating a predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at a time of emission of a future laser pulse using the determined or measured emission timing data and at least one of the determined or measured beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and the determined or measured rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner; and using a faster beam scanner to compensate for any difference between the predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse, for example by controlling a beam steering configuration of the faster beam scanner and/or a rate of change of the beam steering configuration of the faster beam scanner to compensate for any difference between the predicted beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner and a corresponding desired beam steering configuration of the slower beam scanner at the time of emission of the future laser pulse, since Johnson discloses the benefits of either fast or slow beam steering configurations [para. 0182], and further teaches compensating for deviations [para. 0088: “In some embodiments, the beam-splitting optical element 120 and the laser output detector 122 can be placed at other downstream positions along the beam path so that the amplitude corrections may compensate for amplitude deviation caused by other components in the beam path 72a. Laser output detectors 122 are known to skilled practitioners and employed in many laser applications. The laser output detector 122 can, however, be adapted to send a signal 124 directly or indirectly to the system controller 62, which can send corrective signals 126 to the RF driver 66 or adjust existing amplitude or frequency control signals delivered to the RF driver 66.”].
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 42-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mukai (US 5232674 A).
Regarding claim 42,
Mukai teaches:
A method [col. 1: “The present invention generally relates to methods of improving surface morphology, and more particularly to a method of improving the surface morphology of a laser irradiated surface when carrying out a process such as planarization of a layer or changing a crystal state of a layer by irradiating a pulse laser on an inter-connection material or the like of a semiconductor device.”] comprising:
generating a pulsed laser beam comprising a train of laser pulses, the train of laser pulses including at least three consecutive laser pulses [col. 3, lines 26-46: “In the present invention, a pulse laser irradiates a conductor layer a plurality of times in an overlapping manner to temporarily melt the conductor layer and the solidify the conductor layer.”]; and
sequentially irradiating at least three regions of a substrate with the at least three consecutive laser pulses so as to modify the substrate according to a desired spatial profile [see fig. 15, wherein at least three square areas FR (FR1 to FR24), each correspond to a selected direction of the pulsed laser beam on a substrate, the pulsed laser beam being applied to each of the areas in a particular predetermined sequence, determined according to the relative spatial positions of nearby applications of the laser beam which also defines the order of irradiation, so as to prevent undesirable levels of heat accumulation; col. 8, lines 32-66: “…By successively irradiating the non-adjacent square areas FR of the conductor layer, it is possible to prevent heat accumulation in the conductor layer and the underlayer and accordingly prevent the generation of the post heating effect.”], wherein modifying the substrate comprises at least one of:
modifying a refractive index of a material of the substrate, modifying a chemical etchability of the material of the substrate, or ablating the material of the substrate [e.g., laser processing so as to melt then smooth a surface; col. 4: “It may be seen from FIG. 2B that the melted Al at the surface portion of the Al layer 2 flows into the depressions 5 and a smooth surface can be obtained.”]; and
controlling a direction of the pulsed laser beam or a position of the substrate from laser pulse to laser pulse so that the at least three consecutive laser pulses sequentially irradiate the at least three regions of the substrate according to a predetermined spatial sequence which defines relative spatial positions of at least three regions of the substrate and defines an order of irradiation of the at least three regions of the substrate [i.e., laser pulse direction controlled so as to irradiate the sequence of areas FR].
Regarding claim 43, Mukai teaches the method of claim 42.
Mukai further teaches:
wherein controlling the direction of the pulsed laser beam and/or the position of the substrate comprises synchronizing a movement of the pulsed laser beam and/or of the substrate with the timing of the at least three consecutive laser pulses so that the at least three regions of the substrate are sequentially irradiated with the at least three consecutive laser pulses according to the predetermined spatial sequence [i.e., the synchronizing of the application of the laser beam such that only non-adjacent square areas are irradiated in sequence; col. 8: “By successively irradiating the non-adjacent square areas FR of the conductor layer, it is possible to prevent heat accumulation in the conductor layer and the under layer and accordingly prevent the generation of the post heating effect.”].
Regarding claim 44, Mukai teaches the method of claim 42.
Mukai further teaches:
wherein controlling the direction of the pulsed laser beam or the position of the substrate comprises:
controlling movement of the pulsed laser beam or of the substrate so as to move a nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam to a first position in the substrate so that a first one of the at least three consecutive laser pulses irradiates a first region of the substrate centered on the first position [i.e., the irradiation of, e.g., square area FR1];
controlling movement of the pulsed laser beam or of the substrate so as to move the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate along a first direction from the first position in the substrate to a second position in the substrate so that a second one of the at least three consecutive laser pulses irradiates a second region of the substrate centered on the second position [i.e., the irradiation of, e.g., square area FR2 after FR1]; and
controlling movement of the pulsed laser beam or of the substrate so as to move the nominal writing position of the pulsed laser beam across the substrate along a second direction from the second position in the substrate to a third position in the substrate so that a third one of the at least three consecutive laser pulses irradiates a third region of the substrate centered on the third position, wherein the first and second directions are different [i.e., the irradiation of, e.g., square area FR3 after FR2].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J EVANGELISTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm EST.
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, Edward F Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/THEODORE J EVANGELISTA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights