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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/22/24 has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant’s recitation in claims 1 and 22 of an ion optical system and related method employing radiations sources to effect cleaning/charge neutralization employs language such as “wherein the radiation source comprises one or more of an electron source…and an electromagnetic radiation source…” in claim 1 and “wherein (i): the radiation source comprises an electromagnetic radiation source…; and/or (ii) the radiation source comprises an electron source…
This is consistent with the specification which states that the radiation source may be the electromagnetic radiation source, the electron source, or an embodiment where both are combined. Claims 1 and 22 along with their dependent claims are interpreted to cover embodiments covering each type of radiation source individually, and the disclosed embodiment where the radiation source includes both electromagnetic and electron emission sources.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the embodiment where the radiation source includes both electromagnetic and electron sources must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11, and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2003/0066975.
Regarding claims 1 and 22, ‘975 discloses an ion optical system and method for reducing charged contaminants [0003-5] comprising generating charged particles by exciting a radiation source (11) distinct from a contaminated surface where the radiation source is a UV light source, and hence is an electromagnetic radiation generating element which produces photons which interact with a surface being coated with a photoemitting material (16) including a “photocatalytic” layer composed of titanium dioxide for example and where the interaction of the UV light with the contaminant or photoemitting layer produces charged particles, such as radicals [0023] to neutralize charged contaminants.
Regarding claim 21, ‘975 discloses a sample, or substrate, is introduced into the apparatus and affixed on a wafer chuck [0018-0019], manipulated by the ion optical system prior to removal, and acted upon in accord with the method of claim 1 as noted above.
Regarding claims 2 and 23, ‘975 discloses a photoemitting material or photocatalyst for generating charged particles by interaction with the UV light [0020-0021].
Regarding claim 3, ‘975 discloses the photocatalyst includes metal [0020-0021].
Regarding claim 4, ‘975 discloses coating a photoemitting material on any surface in the vacuum chamber [0009], including an electrode of the illumination optical system [0016].
Regrading claims 5 and 11, ‘975 discloses a contaminated surface may include an electrodes [0005, 0016], such as the recited deflectors, coated as noted above in ‘975 and potentially contaminated as taught in ‘975.
Regarding claim 6, ‘975 discloses coating a vacuum chamber interior with the photoemitting/photocatalyst material the coating being distinct from the contaminated surface.
Regarding claim 7, ‘975 discloses that the photocatalyst material generates an electron 24 [0020].
Regarding claim 9, the electromagnetic radiation source of ‘975 comprises a UV generating source [0020].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 10, 12-20, and 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A VANORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2483. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7AM to 6 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, Georgia EPPS can be reached at (571) 272-2328. 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 A. VANORE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/DAVID A VANORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights