DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment and Status of Application
This notice is in response to the amendments filed 12 December 2025. Claims 1-13 are pending in the instant application where claims 1 and 5-13 have been amended. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 02 October 2025, and are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Lega does not teach or suggest the claimed illumination configuration since Lega does not disclose spatially modulating incident light to form a ring-shaped image at the back focal plane of an objective lens, examiner disagrees. The spatially modulated incident light forming a ring-shaped image at the back focal plane of an objective lens is taught by Pahk, which discloses the light source projection being in the shape of a circle, and irradiating that projection to the back focal plane of an objective lens [i.e. a ring-shaped image is formed at the back focal plane of an objective lens]. This fact in combination with the projection capability of Lega to project sinusoidal distributions on a back focal plane of an objective lens (see Lega [0055]) renders obvious a light projection with a sinusoidal distribution (Lega) along the circumference of a ring (Pahk, given any desired shape can be projected (text, picture, moving picture, etc.)).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., Lega does not disclose light having a sinusoidal intensity distribution along the azimuthal circumference of a ring at the back focal plane) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In this case, Pahk’s light projection capabilities coupled with the sinusoidal patterns within Lega (figs. 11-12) ensure a sinusoidal distribution at least along the circumference of a ring-shaped image.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 102235642 B1 by Heui Jae Pahk et al. (“Pahk”) in view of US 2023/0324283 A1 by Emad Zawaideh et al. (“Zawaideh”) and further in view of US 2012/0140243 A1 by Xavier M. Colonna de Lega (“Lega”). Examiner notes the reference Pahk was cited in the IDS filed 23 April 2024 as KR 10-2020-0132572 A.
Regarding claim 1, Pahk discloses an angle-resolved ellipsometer (Pahk [0021] discloses an elliptical system [ellipsometer] where figs. 2-4 show ellipsometer systems; [0102] “angle-resolved” is demonstrated by the ability to determine the angle at which a light beam is incident to a sample); using a spatial light modulator (Pahk [0044] discloses spatial light modulators 120 within figs. 2-4), the angle-resolved ellipsometer comprising:
the spatial light modulator spatially modulating light originating from a light source to be irradiated to a back focal plane of an objective lens (Pahk [0044] and figs. 2-4 disclose light sources 110 and spatial light modulators 120; [0046] the modulators modulate light from the light source; [0052] light modulated eventually is directed to a back focal plane 200 of an objective lens 150);
an incident light controller controlling light emitted from the spatial light modulator (Pahk [0049] disclose a control module to control the output from the spatial light modulator to form a desired image) to form a ring-shaped image and controlling an amount of light (Pahk [0067] figs. 5-8 disclose examples of spatial light modulators, including a projector controlled by an external computer projecting a circle from the light source [i.e. ring shaped image via controlling the amount of light]);
a polarizer polarizing the light emitted from the spatial light modulator (Pahk [0051 and figs. 2-4 disclose the use of a polarizer 130c downstream from the spatial light modulator 120);
a first beam splitter changing a direction of the light passing through the polarizer and through which the light reflected from a sample (Pahk [0052] and figs 2-4 disclose a beam splitter 140 [first beam splitter] which changes the direction of light emerging from the polarizer 130; light is directed towards a sample 300 and the beam splitter receives that light from the sample as well);
the objective lens allowing light incident from the first beam splitter to be incident on the sample (Pahk [0052] and figs. 2-4 disclose objective lens 150 [objective lens] which directs light from the beam splitter to the sample);
an analyzer analyzing the polarization of the light reflected from the sample (Pahk [0054] discloses a polarization state analyzer, where a second polarizer 160 is depicted in figs 2-4 as said polarization state analyzer; PSA analyzes the reflected light from the sample; [0062] the PSA is composed only of polarizers).
Pahk is silent to a spectroscopic ellipsometer, the spectroscopic ellipsometer comprising:
a camera capturing an image of the back focal plane of the objective lens or of a surface of the sample;
a spectrometer receiving a signal of light reflected from a specific region of the surface of the sample;
a second beam splitter reflecting a part of the light reflected from the sample to the spectrometer, and allowing a remainder of the light to be incident on the camera; and a signal processing computer calculating a physical property value of a thin film by post-processing the signal of light received by the spectrometer.
However, Zawaideh does address this limitation. Pahk and Zawaideh are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are both related to ellipsometry for thin film imaging and/or probing.
Zawaideh discloses “a spectroscopic ellipsometer” (Zawaideh abstract discloses imaging spectroscopic ellipsometry apparatus), “the spectroscopic ellipsometer comprising:
a camera capturing an image of the back focal plane of the objective lens or of a surface of the sample” (Zawaideh fig. 1 shows a CCD camera 14 which captures an image of a sample stage; while Pahk does not explicitly disclose a camera, Pahk uses a CCD array as photodetector stage capturing data from the back focal plane of the objective lens; using camera 14 of Zawaideh, said camera would capture an image of the back focal plane of the objective lens);
“a spectrometer receiving a signal of light reflected from a specific region of the surface of the sample” (Zawaideh fig. 1 shows a spectrometer 11, capturing light reflected from the sample stage);
“a second beam splitter reflecting a part of the light reflected from the sample to the spectrometer, and allowing a remainder of the light to be incident on the camera” (Zawaideh fig. 1 shows beamsplitter 8 splitting and sending light reflected by the sample to spectrometer 11, and allowing a remainder of light to be incident on the camera 14); and a signal processing computer calculating a physical property value of a thin film by post-processing the signal of light received by the spectrometer (Zawaideh [0047] discloses obtaining intensity spectra from spectrometer 11 and intensity images from CCD camera 14; a computer 15 [signal processing computer] performs Fourier analysis from spectroscopic data to determine ellipsometric parameters [post-processing the signal from spectrometer]; [0048] ellipsometric parameters permit accurate determination of film thickness and refractive index [physical property values]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk to incorporate a spectroscopic ellipsometer comprising a camera capturing an image of the back focal plane of the objective lens or of a surface of the sample; a spectrometer receiving a signal of light reflected from a specific region of the surface of the sample; a second beam splitter reflecting a part of the light reflected from the sample to the spectrometer, and allowing a remainder of the light to be incident on the camera; and a signal processing computer calculating a physical property value of a thin film by post-processing the signal of light received by the spectrometer as suggested by Zawaideh for the advantage of increasing the accuracy with which the values of film thickness and refractive index are obtained (Zawaideh [0048]).
Pahk when modified by Zawaideh is silent to an incident light controller controlling the amount of light to have a sinusoidal distribution along a circumference of a ring.
However, Lega does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, and Lega are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they use modulated illumination to characterize thin films.
Lega discloses an incident light controller controlling the amount of light to have a sinusoidal distribution along a circumference of a ring (Lega [0066] discloses that the projected pattern can have a sinusoidal shape [sinusoidal distribution]; [0095] and figs 11 and 12 show examples where the sinusoidal distribution is placed along the circumference of a ring shape, the distribution being arranged horizontally and vertically respectively with figs. 11-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh to incorporate an incident light controller controlling the amount of light to have a sinusoidal distribution along a circumference of a ring as suggested by Lega for the advantage of reducing the amount of illumination source brightness required to characterize samples to the same degree (Lega [0028]).
Regarding claim 2, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1, and Pahk further teaches the ellipsometer further comprising a first relay lens arranged between the spatial light modulator and the polarizer and adjusting a path of light of the spatial light modulator to form an image at a specific position on the back focal plane of the objective lens (Pahk [0050] and figs 2-4 discloses a first relay lens 130a [first relay lens] appearing between the spatial light modulator 120 and the polarizer 130c; the figures show the adjustment of the light path by the first relay lens for ultimate focus on the back focal plane of the objective lens 150; the first relay lens prevents the beam diameter from becoming excessively wide [helps form an image on the back focal plane of the objective lens by limiting the beam diameter]).
Regarding claim 5, Pahk discloses a method of measuring a thin film (Pahk [0009], [0012] discloses a method for measuring physical properties of a sample, i.e. a thin film [Pahk [0003]]), using an angle-resolved ellipsometer (Pahk [0021] discloses an elliptical system [ellipsometer] where figs. 2-4 show ellipsometer systems; [0102] “angle-resolved” is demonstrated by the ability to determine the angle at which a light beam is incident to a sample); using a spatial light modulator (Pahk [0044] discloses spatial light modulators 120 within figs. 2-4), the method comprising: a beam incident operation in which the spatial light modulator, by an incident light controller, irradiates light received from a light source into light forming a ring-shaped image (Pahk [0044] and figs 2-4 disclose light source 110 and spatial light modulators 120; [0049] a control module controls output from the spatial light modulator 120 to form a desired image [incident light controller irradiates light forming an image]; [0067] and figs. 5-8 disclose examples of spatial light modulators, including a projector controlled by an external computer projecting a circle from the light source [i.e. ring shaped image via controlling the amount of light);
a beam projection operation in which the light irradiated in the beam incident operation is polarized through the polarizer and then projected onto a back focal plane of an objective lens (Pahk [0051] and figs 2-4 disclose the use of a polarizer 130c downstream from the spatial light modulator 120 [light irradiated by the beam incident operation is polarized]; [0052] and figs. 2-4 disclose the modulated light [from beam incident operation] being directed/projected to a back focal plane 200 of an objective lens 150);
a reflected light signal acquisition operation in which the light projected in the beam projection operation is reflected from a specific region of a sample by the objective lens, passes through an analyzer, and is detected as an electrical signal (Pahk [0052] and figs. 2-4 disclose objective lens 150 directs light to a sample where that incident light is reflected; [0054] discloses a polarization state analyzer (PSA) [analyzer] where a second polarizer 160 depicted in figs 2-4 serves as the PSA; [0055] the PSA transmits light through and is directed to a light detector where the photodetector converts the light to an electrical signal).
Pahk is silent to a method of measuring the thickness of a thin film;
a reflected light signal acquisition operation in which the light reflected from a specific region of a sample by the objective lens, passes through an analyzer and is detected as an electrical signal by a spectrometer; and
a signal processing operation of calculating physical properties of a thin film by analyzing the electrical signal acquired in the reflected light signal acquisition operation.
However, Zawaideh does address this limitation. Pahk and Zawaideh are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are both related to ellipsometry for thin film imaging and/or probing.
Zawaideh discloses “a method of measuring the thickness of a thin film” (Zawaideh [0048] discloses the determination of film thickness by collecting optical data);
“a reflected light signal acquisition operation in which the light reflected from a specific region of a sample by the objective lens, passes through an analyzer and is detected as an electrical signal by a spectrometer” (Zawaideh fig. 1 shows a spectrometer 11, capturing light reflected from the sample stage); and
a signal processing operation of calculating physical properties of a thin film by analyzing the electrical signal acquired in the reflected light signal acquisition operation (Zawaideh [0047] discloses obtaining intensity spectra from spectrometer 11 where a computer 15 performs Fourier analysis [signal processing] from spectroscopic data to determine ellipsometric parameters; [0048] ellipsometric parameters permit accurate determination of film thickness).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk to incorporate measuring the thickness of a thin film, a reflected light signal acquisition operation in which the light reflected from a specific region of a sample by the objective lens, passes through an analyzer and is detected as an electrical signal by a spectrometer, and a signal processing operation of calculating physical properties of a thin film by analyzing the electrical signal acquired in the reflected light signal acquisition operation as suggested by Zawaideh for the advantage of increasing the accuracy with which the values of film thickness and refractive index are obtained (Zawaideh [0048]).
Pahk when modified by Zawaideh is silent to a sinusoidal beam incident operation in which the spatial light modulator irradiates light from a light source into light forming a ring-shaped image and having a sinusoidal distribution of an amount of light along a circumference of the ring-shaped image, and
a beam projection operation in which the light irradiated in the sinusoidal beam incident operation is polarized.
However, Lega does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, and Lega are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they use modulated illumination to characterize thin films.
Lega discloses “a sinusoidal beam incident operation in which the spatial light modulator irradiates light from a light source into light forming a ring-shaped image and having a sinusoidal distribution of an amount of light along a circumference of the ring-shaped image” (Lega [0066] discloses that the projected pattern can have a sinusoidal shape [sinusoidal distribution]; [0095] and figs 11 and 12 show examples where the sinusoidal distribution is placed along the circumference of a ring shape, the distribution being arranged horizontally and vertically respectively with figs. 11-12), and
“a beam projection operation in which the light irradiated in the sinusoidal beam incident operation is polarized” (the beam projection operation disclosed by Pahk in view of Zawaideh above would comprise irradiating the ring-shaped sinusoidal distribution to be polarized).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh to incorporate a sinusoidal beam incident operation in which the spatial light modulator irradiates light from a light source into light forming a ring-shaped image and having a sinusoidal distribution of an amount of light along a circumference of the ring-shaped image, and a beam projection operation in which the light irradiated in the sinusoidal beam incident operation is polarized as suggested by Lega for the advantage of reducing the amount of illumination source brightness required to characterize samples to the same degree (Lega [0028]).
Regarding claim 6, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of measuring the thickness of a thin film of claim 5 and Pahk further teaches the method wherein the intensity of light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function of ½ + ½ sin(0) (Pahk [0075] discloses the light emitted by the light source having desired shapes as needed by the user; examiner notes that sin(0) = 0 such that ½ + ½ sin(0) is a constant – the uniform distribution illuded to within Pahk fulfills such a constant intensity distribution).
Regarding claim 11, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 5. Pahk is silent to the method of claim 5, wherein, in the signal processing operation, a polarization factor of the sample is obtained by calculating an intensity of the reflected light measured by the spectrometer under different incident light conditions.
However, Zawaideh does address this limitation.
Zawaideh discloses the method of claim 5, “wherein, in the signal processing operation, a polarization factor of the sample is obtained by calculating an intensity of the reflected light measured by the spectrometer under different incident light conditions” (Zawaideh [0047]-[0048] discloses the determination of ellipsometric parameters [signal processing operation] via detecting intensity of spectra captured by the spectrometer 11 and intensity images captured by the CCD camera, both of which are after light is reflected from the sample; the intensity measurements are captured at different angular orientations of the compensator 5 [i.e. different incident light conditions]; the polarization factor is considered present within the ellipsometric parameters determined based on the intensity measurements captured at different incident light conditions within Zawaideh given the description of “polarization factor” within the claim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk to incorporate wherein, in the signal processing operation, a polarization factor of the sample is obtained by calculating an intensity of the reflected light measured by the spectrometer under different incident light conditions as suggested by Zawaideh for the advantage of increasing the accuracy with which the values of film thickness and refractive index are obtained (Zawaideh [0048]).
Regarding claim 12, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 5, and Pahk further teaches wherein the incident light controller changes an incident angle of light incident onto the sample by changing a radius of the ring-shaped image (Pahk [0117] discloses that adjusting a radius (radii seen in figs. 13 and 14), the angle at which incident light is incident on the sample can be controlled).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahk in view of Zawaideh, in view of Lega, and further in view of US 2010/0328780 A1 by Michael D. Tocci (“Tocci”).
Regarding claim 3, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1. Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1, further comprising a second relay lens arranged between the analyzer and the second beam splitter and assisting the camera to observe the image of the sample.
However, Tocci does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Tocci are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are in the same field of optical imaging systems using polarizing components.
Tocci discloses the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1, “further comprising a second relay lens arranged between the analyzer and the second beam splitter and assisting the camera to observe the image of the sample” (Tocci fig. 1A and [0076] discloses an optical system comprising a beam splitting element 118; a polarization component 136 is disclosed, where the polarizing component may be optionally added to any embodiment within Tocci; [0085]-[0087] and fig. 2 shows an optical system where light is split by beam splitter 218 and first and second corrective lens elements 240 and 248 respectively appear after the splitter and before the camera [both first and second corrective lens elements 240 and 248 are considered a second relay lens]; given the optical system of Pahk comprising the splitter and polarizer 160 [analyzer] and given the disclosure of Tocci’s polarization component within any embodiment, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a corrective lens element between the splitter and analyzer of Pahk).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate a second relay lens arranged between the analyzer and the second beam splitter and assisting the camera to observe the image of the sample as suggested by Tocci for the advantage of ensuring a good quality image is formed on the image sensor (Tocci [0087]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahk in view of Zawaideh, in view of Lega, and further in view of US 2015/0168291 A1 by Kazuhiro Sugita et al. (“Sugita”).
Regarding claim 4, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1. Pahk is silent to the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1, wherein the spectrometer includes an optical fiber light receiving unit.
However, Zawaideh does address this limitation.
Zawaideh discloses the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1 “wherein the spectrometer includes an optical fiber light receiving unit” (Zawaideh [0033] discloses an optical fiber 10 which collects light split from the beam splitter 8 after being collected by collection lens 9; optical fiber 10 receives light and directs it to the spectrometer system 11; [optical fiber 10 is considered the optical fiber light receiving unit]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk to incorporate wherein the spectrometer includes an optical fiber light receiving unit as suggested by Zawaideh for the advantage of increasing the accuracy with which the values of film thickness and refractive index are obtained (Zawaideh [0048]); collecting via an optical fiber may prevent loss of signal.
Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1, wherein the spectrometer is able to be two-dimensionally moved by a transfer device.
However, Sugita does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Sugita are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they use polarization analysis techniques to optically characterize a sample under investigation.
Sugita discloses the angle-resolved spectroscopic ellipsometer of claim 1, “wherein the spectrometer is able to be two-dimensionally moved by a transfer device” (Sugita [0024] and fig. 1 disclose an optical system comprising a light receiving unit 4 which in turn comprises an imaging spectrometer 6; the light receiving unit 4 (and therefore spectrometer 6) is supported movably in a circumferential direction about a sample S – because the spectrometer is movable in a circumferential direction, a translation occurs in both a horizontal and vertical direction [i.e. movable in two-dimensions]; the inherent mechanism allowing the circumferential movement to occur is considered the transfer device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate wherein the spectrometer is able to be two-dimensionally moved by a transfer device as suggested by Sugita for the advantage of enabling the angle at which light is detected to be changed (Sugita [0024]), enabling light to be obtained by the imaging spectrometer selectively based on phase (Sugita [0048]-[0049]).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahk in view of Zawaideh, in view of Lega, and further in view of “Creation and detection of optical modes with spatial light modulators” by Andrew Forbes et al. (herein after “Forbes”) (doi: 10.1364/AOP.8.000200).
Regarding claim 7, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 5. Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the method of claim 5, wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ cos(2φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring.
However, Forbes does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Forbes are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they utilize spatial light modulators to project light for optical characterization.
Forbes discloses the method of claim 5, “wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ cos(2φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring” (Forbes is directed to the creation of a variety of projected light patterns using SLM, similar to the present invention, for use in holography (see figs. 6, 14 and 15 for experimental device setup); while a distribution taking the form of ½ + ½ cos(2φ) does not appear explicitly within Forbes, figures 2 and 4 provide a plurality of projection shapes which can be formed, including ones that take a form of sinusoidal distrubtion along the circumference of a circle [i.e. the ring of Pahk]; this includes fig. 2 with b, d, and f being experimental patterns, and at lest fig. 4 c, d, and g [p shows the ability for precise distribution control]; the intensity of the light emitted along the circumference of the ring is a result effective variable, since patterned light enables smooth and/or high sloping features on objects to be analyzed (see Lega [0093]), where it requires only routine skill in the art to optimize a result effective variable – a distribution, such as ½ + ½ cos(2φ), may be found via an optimization process for analyzing a sample with such smooth or high sloping features – see MPEP 2144.05 II. (A) and (B)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ cos(2φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring as suggested by Forbes for the advantage of easily generating patterned optical fields, enabling the patterns to be rewritable in real-time and inexpensive to generate and master (Forbes page 2 – page 3 paragraph 2) – easily changing the light pattern distribution on a sample by sample basis ensures a streamlined characterization process.
Regarding claim 8, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 5. Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the method of claim 5, wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ cos(4φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring.
However, Forbes does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Forbes are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they utilize spatial light modulators to project light for optical characterization.
Forbes discloses the method of claim 5, “wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ cos(4φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring” (Forbes is directed to the creation of a variety of projected light patterns using SLM, similar to the present invention, for use in holography (see figs. 6, 14 and 15 for experimental device setup); while a distribution taking the form of ½ + ½ cos(4φ), does not appear explicitly within Forbes, figures 2 and 4 provide a plurality of projection shapes which can be formed, including ones that take a form of sinusoidal distrubtion along the circumference of a circle [i.e. the ring of Pahk]; this includes fig. 2 with b, d, and f being experimental patterns, and at lest fig. 4 c, d, and g [p shows the ability for precise distribution control]; the intensity of the light emitted along the circumference of the ring is a result effective variable, since patterned light enables smooth and/or high sloping features on objects to be analyzed (see Lega [0093]), where it requires only routine skill in the art to optimize a result effective variable – a distribution, such as ½ + ½ cos(4φ), may be found via an optimization process for analyzing a sample with such smooth or high sloping features – see MPEP 2144.05 II. (A) and (B)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ cos(4φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring as suggested by Forbes for the advantage of easily generating patterned optical fields, enabling the patterns to be rewritable in real-time and inexpensive to generate and master (Forbes page 2 – page 3 paragraph 2) – easily changing the light pattern distribution on a sample by sample basis ensures a streamlined characterization process.
Regarding claim 9, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 5. Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the method of claim 5, wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ sin(2φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring.
However, Forbes does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Forbes are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they utilize spatial light modulators to project light for optical characterization.
Forbes discloses the method of claim 5, “wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ sin(2φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring” (Forbes is directed to the creation of a variety of projected light patterns using SLM, similar to the present invention, for use in holography (see figs. 6, 14 and 15 for experimental device setup); while a distribution taking the form of ½ + ½ sin(2φ) does not appear explicitly within Forbes, figures 2 and 4 provide a plurality of projection shapes which can be formed, including ones that take a form of sinusoidal distrubtion along the circumference of a circle [i.e. the ring of Pahk]; this includes fig. 2 with b, d, and f being experimental patterns, and at lest fig. 4 c, d, and g [p shows the ability for precise distribution control]; the intensity of the light emitted along the circumference of the ring is a result effective variable, since patterned light enables smooth and/or high sloping features on objects to be analyzed (see Lega [0093]), where it requires only routine skill in the art to optimize a result effective variable – a distribution, such as ½ + ½ sin(2φ), may be found via an optimization process for analyzing a sample with such smooth or high sloping features – see MPEP 2144.05 II. (A) and (B)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ sin(2φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring as suggested by Forbes for the advantage of easily generating patterned optical fields, enabling the patterns to be rewritable in real-time and inexpensive to generate and master (Forbes page 2 – page 3 paragraph 2) – easily changing the light pattern distribution on a sample by sample basis ensures a streamlined characterization process.
Regarding claim 10, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 5. Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the method of claim 5, wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ sin(4φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring.
However, Forbes does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Forbes are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they utilize spatial light modulators to project light for optical characterization.
Forbes discloses the method of claim 5, “wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ sin(4φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring” (Forbes is directed to the creation of a variety of projected light patterns using SLM, similar to the present invention, for use in holography (see figs. 6, 14 and 15 for experimental device setup); while a distribution taking the form of ½ + ½ sin(4φ) does not appear explicitly within Forbes, figures 2 and 4 provide a plurality of projection shapes which can be formed, including ones that take a form of sinusoidal distrubtion along the circumference of a circle [i.e. the ring of Pahk]; this includes fig. 2 with b, d, and f being experimental patterns, and at lest fig. 4 c, d, and g [p shows the ability for precise distribution control]; the intensity of the light emitted along the circumference of the ring is a result effective variable, since patterned light enables smooth and/or high sloping features on objects to be analyzed (see Lega [0093]), where it requires only routine skill in the art to optimize a result effective variable – a distribution, such as ½ + ½ sin(4φ), may be found via an optimization process for analyzing a sample with such smooth or high sloping features – see MPEP 2144.05 II. (A) and (B)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate wherein the intensity of the light emitted in the sinusoidal beam incident operation has a function ½ + ½ sin(4φ), wherein φ is an azimuthal angle along the circumference of the ring as suggested by Forbes for the advantage of easily generating patterned optical fields, enabling the patterns to be rewritable in real-time and inexpensive to generate and master (Forbes page 2 – page 3 paragraph 2) – easily changing the light pattern distribution on a sample by sample basis ensures a streamlined characterization process.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahk in view of Zawaideh, in view of Lega, and further in view of “Angle-insensitive phase shift in one-dimensional photonic crystal containing hyperbolic metamaterials in the visible range” by Feng Wu et al. (herein after “Feng”) (doi: 10.1016/j.physb.2022.413967).
Regarding claim 13, Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega discloses the method of claim 12. Pahk is silent to the method of claim 12, wherein the thickness of the thin film is obtained by obtaining a measurement and comparing the measurement to a theoretical value obtained by calculation.
However, Zawaideh does address this limitation.
Zawaideh discloses the method of claim 12, “wherein the thickness of the thin film is obtained” (Zawaideh [0048] discloses the determination of film thickness via determining ellipsometric parameters) “by obtaining a measurement and comparing the measurement to a theoretical value obtained by calculation” (Zawaideh [0059] and fig. 14 disclose a process whereby ellipsometry parameters are obtained by a regression of images captured during measurement of a thin film to obtain the thickness of the sample; fig. 13 discloses a means for simulating the thickness [theoretical value] obtained by calculation; fig. 15 shows a comparison between the simulated thickness and measured thickness [compare measurement to a theoretical value]; this is a general statement of what Zawaideh discloses, and not a verbatim recitation of the claim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk to incorporate wherein the thickness of the thin film is obtained by obtaining a measurement and comparing the measurement to a theoretical value obtained by calculation as suggested by Zawaideh for the advantage of increasing the accuracy with which the values of film thickness and refractive index are obtained (Zawaideh [0048]).
Pahk when modified by Zawaideh and Lega is silent to the method of claim 12 wherein the thickness of the thin film is obtained by changing the incident angle in the incident light controller, forming a three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface with a polarization factor, a wavelength value, and an incident angle which are obtained in the signal processing operation, as orthogonal coordinates, and comparing the three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface with a three-dimensional theoretical polarized curved surface obtained by calculation.
However, Feng does address this limitation. Pahk, Zawaideh, Lega, and Feng are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are in the same field of surface characterization via optical physics and devices.
Feng discloses the method of claim 12 “wherein the thickness of the thin film is obtained by changing the incident angle in the incident light controller, forming a three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface with a polarization factor, a wavelength value, and an incident angle which are obtained in the signal processing operation, as orthogonal coordinates” (Feng fig. 3 (a) and (b) disclose transmittance values as a function of both wavelength and an incident angle; fig. 3(b) specifically is a three dimensional plot [three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface] with color as the third orthogonal axis representing the transmittance of a thin film – an extrapolation of the transmittance value into a dimension instead of a color would generate a curved surface and is an equivalent representation; here, wavelength, incident angle, and transmittance are all shown as orthogonal; the plot is generated as a function of incident angle [i.e. the incident angle is changed to make the measurement – changed by the incident light controller of Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega above]; the plot is generated for TM polarization [polarized curved surface]; while a “polarization factor” is not explicitly named one of the orthogonal axes of the three-dimensional measurement polarization curved surface in Feng, the polarization factor is described in applicant’s specification as being closely related to the physical properties [of the sample] but is not explicitly defined via equation or written definition – the transmittance is an analogous metric closely related to the physical properties of the sample and thus is treated as reading on the claim; the incident angle, wavelength, and transmittance are all values able to be obtained during the signal processing operation of claim 5), “and comparing the three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface with a three-dimensional theoretical polarized curved surface obtained by calculation” (The comparison of measurement with theoretical calculation has been disclosed above within Zawaideh, and follows the same principle when comparing the three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface with a three-dimensional theoretical polarized curved surface obtained by calculation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pahk in view of Zawaideh and Lega to incorporate wherein a characteristic of the thin film is obtained by changing the incident angle in the incident light controller, forming a three-dimensional measurement polarized curved surface with a polarization factor, a wavelength value, and an incident angle which are obtained in the signal processing operation, as orthogonal coordinates as suggested by Feng for the advantage of enabling a metric to gauge the error in a thin film thickness measurement, by characterizing the angle-insensitivity property of Feng – the angle-insensitivity is robust when thickness measurement error is low (Feng page 5 col 2 paragraph 4, 10 lines up from bottom).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA M CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0065. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Tarifur R Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/JOSHUA M CARLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877