DETAILED ACTION
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to the applicant’s arguments that the reference to Rella is non-analogous art, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art of record is directed to the field of optical measuring and testing, and specifically both references are directed to optical systems including an optical interferometer for measuring a wavelength of light.
In regards to the applicant’s arguments that the Office does not provide some articulated reasoning with rational underpinning to combine the prior art, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The secondary reference to Rella is directed to an optical measurement device, which utilizes a “wavemeter” or a “wavelength locker’ to remove a potential source of measurement error, i.e. wavelength or power fluctuations. Rella, and the rejection below, explicitly state that the reference power signal provided by the detector (15) is utilized to “render the measurement of wavelength immune to power fluctuations”.
In regards to the applicant’s arguments that Rella does not teach or suggest the claimed “interferogram-frame” normalization, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Attention is brought to Figures 1a and 2, wherein the interferograms (16) that are detected by sensors (28, 30) are explicitly disclosed. The detected interference signals are then normalized by a reference power measurement obtained by power detector (15), for the advantage of removing wavelength or power fluctuations and providing a wavelength measurement that is “immune to power fluctuations”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2018/0226304 to Chen et al., in further view of US Publication 2004/0105098 to Rella et al.
In regards to claims 1-23, Chen discloses and shows in Figures 1-2a, a system and method comprising:
a laser source (201);
a dual interferometer sub-system comprising a first channel (250) and a second channel (251) (par. 28), wherein the first channel of the dual interferometer sub-system comprises:
a first splitter (212) element optically coupled to a first output beam from a laser source and configured to split the first output beam into a first transmitted beam and a first reflected beam (par. 30); and
a first detector (222) configured to receive a first interference signal from the dual interferometer sub-system and record a first interferogram frame (par. 32); and
a controller (226) communicatively coupled the first detector of the first channel of the dual interferometer sub-system, the controller including one or more processors (108), wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute a set of program instructions stored in memory (110), the set of program instructions configured to cause the one or more processors to: receive the first interferogram frame from the first detector (par. 20-32);
[claims 2-3, 11, 19, 21] wherein an average thickness based on the plurality of measurements is obtained (par. 37);
[claims 4, 12, 20] wherein the second channel of the dual interferometer sub-system comprises: a second splitter element (213) coupled to a second output beam of a second laser source configured to split the second output beam into a second transmitted beam and a second reflected beam (par. 20-32); and a second detector (223) configured to receive a second interference signal from the dual interferometer sub-system and record a second interferogram frame (par. 20-32);
[claims 5, 13, 22-23] wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: determine a geometry of a substrate based on the first normalized interferogram frame and at least one of a second interferogram frame or a second normalized interferogram frame (par. 33-36);
[claims 6, 17] wherein the substrate comprises: a semiconductor wafer (par. 36);
[claims 7, 14] wherein the dual interferometer sub-system comprises: a dual wavelength dual Fizeau interferometer (DWDFI) sub-system (par. 25, 36);
[claims 9, 16] wherein the first detector comprises a camera (par. 32).
Chen differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the system and method further comprising:
[claims 1, 10, 18] a first power sensor configured to measure a power of the first transmitted beam; wherein a controller is communicatively coupled to the first power sensor to receive a first laser power measurement from the first power sensor; and normalize an intensity of the first interferogram frame based on the first laser power measurement to produce a first normalized interferogram frame;
[claims 2, 19] wherein the first laser power measurement comprises a mean of a plurality of power measurements;
[claims 3, 11, 21] wherein normalizing an intensity of the first interferogram frame comprises calculating a product of a mean power of all interferogram frames and an intensity of the first interferogram frame;
[claims 4, 12, 20] wherein a second power sensor configured to measure a power of the second transmitted beam;
[claims 8, 15] wherein the first power sensor comprises a photodetector.
However, Rella teaches and shows in Figures 1a, an interferometric system (14) for measuring a wavelength of light, wherein a beam splitter (13) provides a portion of an optical signal to a power detector (15) to determine an input power reference value for the optical signal (par. 34-35); and wherein the wavelength measurements are normalized by the reference power value obtained by the power detector, in order to provide measurements which are “immune to power fluctuations” (par. 53). Further, obtaining an average or mean of a dataset is a well-known mathematical or statistical operation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Chen to include the power detector and signal normalization discussed above for the advantage of providing measurements which are “immune to power fluctuations”, with a reasonable expectation of success.
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 JONATHAN M HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 4pm.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-270-5789. 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.
JONATHAN M. HANSEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2877
/JONATHAN M HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights