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 .
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (WO 2021204740 A1) in view of Schamber (US 20180033589 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches a charged particle beam system comprising:
A first electron detector (613);
A second electron detector (612); and
A first scanning deflector (611; equivalent to scanning deflectors 308-311 described as such in [0053]) positioned between the first electron detector and the second electron detector (fig. 6).
Liu does not teach that the first scanning deflector includes a deflector interior surface including a frustoconical shape.
Schamber teaches that it is advantageous to have a conically shaped electrode between a sample and a detector in order to minimize the solid angle of the electrodes as viewed from the sample and maximize detector collection efficiency ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Liu to give the deflector an interior frustoconical shape (i.e. by tilting the flat deflectors) as this is an equivalent deflector structure that maximizes the deflector viewing angle as described by Schamber with no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 2, Liu teaches a second scanning deflector (610), wherein the second electron detector (612) is positioned between the second scanning deflector and the first scanning deflector (fig. 6).
Regarding claim 3, Liu teaches that the first scanning deflector includes a first end oriented towards the first electron detector and a second end oriented towards the second electron detector. Tilting the deflector as taught by Schamber would result in the first end and the second end having different diameters.
Regarding claim 4, tilting the deflector would result in the second diameter (near detector 612) being greater than the first diameter.
Regarding claim 5, Liu teaches a drift section extending from the second end to the second electron detector (space between deflector 611 and detector 612), wherein (in the combination with Schamber, above) the deflector interior surface defines a first slope from the first end to the second end, and the drift section includes a drift interior surface (interior surface of objective lens surface 607M, fig. 6) from the second end to the second electron detector. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the angle of the tilted deflector to be substantially the same as the slope of the objective lens, as a matter of arranging the parts of the invention with no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 6, Liu teaches a beam column (apparatus 600, fig. 6), wherein the first electron detector, the second electron detector and the first scanning deflector are in the beam column.
Regarding claim 8, Liu teaches a sample holder (236, fig. 2) having a sample bias ([00100]).
Liu does not teach a sample chamber.
Schamber teaches an electron beam system having a sample chamber for storing the sample (310, fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the system of Liu to have a sample chamber in order to allow control of the gas pressure around the sample in a known manner and allow the addition of x-ray sensors as described by Schamber with no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 9, Liu teaches that the first electron detector is a backscatter electron detector configured to measure a first current of backscatter electrons ([0084]) and the second electron detector is a secondary electron detector configured to measure a second current of secondary electrons ([0057]).
Regarding claim 10, Liu teaches a charged particle beam system comprising:
A first electron detector (613);
A second electron detector (612); and
A first scanning deflector (611; equivalent to scanning deflectors 308-311 described as such in [0053]) positioned between the first electron detector and the second electron detector (fig. 6), wherein:
The first scanning deflector has includes a first end (closer to the sample) having a first diameter and a second end having a second diameter; and
The first end is oriented toward the first electron detector and the second end is oriented toward the second electron detector.
Liu does not teach that the second diameter is greater than the first diameter.
Schamber teaches that it is advantageous to have a conically shaped electrode between a sample and a detector in order to minimize the solid angle of the electrodes as viewed from the sample and maximize detector collection efficiency ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Liu to give the deflector an interior frustoconical shape (i.e. by tilting the flat deflectors so that the second diameter is greater than the first diameter) as this is an equivalent deflector structure that maximizes the deflector viewing angle as described by Schamber with no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 11, tilting the detectors as described above would result in the first scanning deflector having a frustoconical shape.
Regarding claim 12, Liu teaches a second scanning deflector (611), where the second electron detector is positioned between the second scanning deflector and the first scanning deflector.
Regarding claim 14, Liu teaches a beam column (apparatus 600, fig. 6), wherein the first electron detector, the second electron detector and the first scanning deflector are in the beam column.
Regarding claim 16, Liu teaches a sample holder (236, fig. 2) having a sample bias ([00100]).
Liu does not teach a sample chamber.
Schamber teaches an electron beam system having a sample chamber for storing the sample (310, fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the system of Liu to have a sample chamber in order to allow control of the gas pressure around the sample in a known manner and allow the addition of x-ray sensors as described by Schamber with no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 17, Liu teaches that the first electron detector is a backscatter electron detector configured to measure a first current of backscatter electrons ([0084] and the second electron detector is a secondary electron detector configured to measure a second current of secondary electrons ([0057]).
Regarding claim 18, Liu teaches a method of using a charged particle beam system comprising:
Emitting an electron beam from an electron source (601), through a beam column, to a sample holder (236, fig. 2), wherein the beam column includes:
A first electron detector (613);
A second electron detector (612); and
A first scanning deflector (611; equivalent to scanning deflectors 308-311 described as such in [0053]) positioned between the first electron detector and the second electron detector (fig. 6);
Detecting, with the first electron detector, a first portion of signal electrons emitted from the sample chamber (backscattered electrons, [0084]);
Detecting, with the second electron detector, a second portion of the signal electrons emitted from the sample chamber (secondary electrons, [0057]); and
Generating an image based on the first and second portions of the detector (imaging secondary and backscattered electrons, [0068]).
Liu does not teach a sample chamber.
Schamber teaches an electron beam system having a sample chamber for storing the sample (310, fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to structure the system of Liu to have a sample chamber in order to allow control of the gas pressure around the sample in a known manner and allow the addition of x-ray sensors as described by Schamber with no unexpected result.
Liu does not teach that the first scanning deflector includes a deflector interior surface including a frustoconical shape.
Schamber teaches that it is advantageous to have a conically shaped electrode between a sample and a detector in order to minimize the solid angle of the electrodes as viewed from the sample and maximize detector collection efficiency ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Liu to give the deflector an interior frustoconical shape (i.e. by tilting the flat deflectors) as this is an equivalent deflector structure that maximizes the deflector viewing angle as described by Schamber with no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 19, Liu teaches that the first electron detector is a backscatter electron detector configured to measure a first current of backscatter electrons ([0084] and the second electron detector is a secondary electron detector configured to measure a second current of secondary electrons ([0057]).
Regarding claim 20, Liu teaches a second scanning deflector (611), where the second electron detector is positioned between the second scanning deflector and the first scanning deflector.
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Schamber and in further view of Ohashi (US 20210043420 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Liu and Schamber teach all the limitations of claims 6 and 14 as described above. Liu and Schamber do not teach that the beam column comprises a booster tube, wherein the first scanning deflector, the first electron detector and the second electron detector are positioned in, or around a length of, the booster tube.
However Liu teaches that the first and second detector and the deflector are within the objective lens. Ohashi teaches using an objective lens electrode (110a) as a booster tube (booster voltage 141).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to use the objective lens electrode of Liu as a booster tube as taught by Ohashi in order to control the acceleration of electrons striking the sample in a known manner with no unexpected result.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Kim can be reached at 22293. 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.
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights