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 § 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites “An analytical apparatus for quantitatively calculating line edge roughness of plasmon super diffraction photolithography, wherein the analytical apparatus comprises a processor, and the processor is configured to: … manufacture the bowtie nano-aperture based on the gap.”
It is unclear how the processor of analytical device manufactures the gap that is produced by plasmon super diffraction photolithography. For the purposes of examining, it is understood that the gap has been formed by plasmon super diffraction photolithography and processor is used in measuring the manufactured gap.
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)(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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han et al. [“Quantitative analysis and modeling of line edge roughness in near-field lithography: toward high pattern quality in nanofabrication” and the associated supplementary material].
For claims 1 and 11, Han teaches an analytical method and associated apparatus (software and code inherently embodied on a computer, see Experimental section of supplemental material) for quantitatively calculating line edge roughness of plasmon super diffraction photolithography, comprising:
determining a theoretical point spread function of a light source based on field intensity distribution of the light source at an exit plane of a focusing element of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography (equation 1, see page 880 and Fig. 1);
determining a plurality of transverse widths of spots in a spot-mapping pattern imaged from the light source onto a surface of a photoresist of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography, through performing atomic force microscopy on the spot-mapping pattern (the developed feature sizes of the spot-mapping patterns were measured using atomic force microscopy, see page 883 and dose calibration using spot-mapping patterns to extract the decay characteristics of the evanescent field in Fig. 1);
determining actual point spread functions corresponding to the plurality of transverse widths, based on the theoretical point spread function and the plurality of transverse widths (fitting process using equation 1, see page 883 and Fig. 3A);
determining actual line spread functions of line patterns corresponding to different critical dimensions based on a plurality of attenuation parameters and the actual point spread functions, which correspond to the plurality of transverse widths (equation S5 used to over range of critical dimensions, see Fig. 4A);
determining a transverse attenuation characteristic of a near-field evanescent wave of the light source based on the actual line spread functions and the actual point spread functions (decay constant of the evanescent field, see sections 2.1 and 3.1 and section 2 of the supplemental material);
determining a near-field photoresist contrast and a logarithmic slope of the spot-mapping pattern according to the transverse attenuation characteristic (near field PR contrast and ILS, see Fig. 3A, sections 2.1 and 3.1, and section 2 of the supplemental material);
determining a variation due to line edge roughness at two boundaries of each line pattern corresponding to one of the actual line spread functions, based on position coordinates at the two boundaries of said line pattern (obtain the amount of LER, the local positions of line edges
y
1
and
y
2
are first measured at regular intervals, see section 2.2 and supplementary section S4);
determining the near-field photoresist contrast of each line pattern (γnear for each line pattern, see section 2.1 and 3.1 and supplementary section S5);
establishing an analytical equation of line edge roughness of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography based on the variation due to line edge roughness, an exposure dose of each line pattern, the near-field photoresist contrast, and the logarithmic slope of each line pattern (equation 4, see section 2.2 and supplementary section S4);
calculating the line edge roughness based on the analytical equation (LER calculated, see section 3.2, Fig. 4B and supplementary section S5);
determining a gap of a bowtie nano-aperture based on the analytical equation of line edge roughness of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography (predicted gap size of bowtie, see Fig. 4B and section 3.2); and
manufacturing the bowtie nano-aperture based on the gap (guidance in minimizing the feature errors and effectively enhancing the pattern uniformity in the near-field nanopatterning
process, see sections 1 and 4, measured gap of bowtie aperture, see Fig. 4B and section 3.2 and supplemental section S5).
For claim 2, Han teaches determining the near-field photoresist contrast of each line pattern comprises:
determining a photoresist contrast induced by near-field attenuation (γdecay, see equation 2 on page 881 and equation S7 in section S2 of the supplemental material); and
determining the near-field photoresist contrast of each line pattern based on a far-field photoresist contrast and the photoresist contrast induced by the near-field attenuation (see equation 2 on page 881 and equation S7 in section S2 of the supplemental material).
For claim 3, Han teaches determining the photoresist contrast induced by the near-field attenuation comprises:
acquiring the spot-mapping pattern imaged from the light source onto the surface of the photoresist in an experiment of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography (developed feature sizes of the spot-mapping patterns were measured, see section 3.1 and section S5 of the supplementary material);
determining a plurality of transverse widths of spots in the spot-mapping pattern through atomic force microscopy (developed feature sizes of the spot-mapping patterns were measured, see section 3.1 and section S5 of the supplementary material);
determining a far-field experimental photoresist contrast and a near-field experimental photoresist contrast, based on the plurality of transverse widths of spots in the spot-mapping pattern and exposure doses corresponding to the plurality of transverse widths of spots in the spot-mapping pattern (width vs. dose, see Fig. 3B and section 3.1); and
determining the photoresist contrast induced by the near-field attenuation based on the far-field experimental photoresist contrast and the near-field experimental photoresist contrast (evanescent-field induced PR contrast γdecay , see section 3.1 and supplementary section 3.1).
For claim 4, Han teaches the near-field photoresist contrast is determined based on:
PNG
media_image1.png
38
188
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein γnear represents the near-field photoresist contrast, γfar represents the far-field photoresist contrast, and γdecay represents the photoresist contrast induced by the near-field attenuation (see equation 2 on page 881 and equation S7 in section S2 of the supplemental material).
For claim 5, Han teaches establishing the analytical equation of line edge roughness of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography based on the variation due to line edge roughness, the exposure dose of each line pattern, the near-field photoresist contrast, and the logarithmic slope of each line pattern comprises:
establishing an equation for the variation due to line edge roughness based on the variation due to line edge roughness and the logarithmic slope of each line pattern (variation of line edge Δy, see section 2.2 and section S4 of the supplementary section); and
establishing the analytical equation of line edge roughness of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography based on the equation for the variation due to line edge roughness, the exposure dose of each line pattern, the near-field photoresist contrast (see section 2.2 and section S4 of the supplementary section).
For claim 6, Han teaches the field intensity distribution is determined based on surface plasmon polaritons and an evanescent-wave mode of a quasi-spherical wave (ASPP and AQSW, see equation 1);
when a critical dimension of an exposure pattern is equal to 1/10 of a wavelength of a light radiated by the light source, a field intensity of the surface plasmon polaritons decreases with a factor of 1/ρ2 (see section 2.1 on page 880), and an analytical equation for the theoretical point spread function is:
PNG
media_image2.png
90
564
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
wherein Dpsf (ρ,φ) represents the theoretical point spread function, ρ represents a transverse length of a spot, SPP represents the surface plasmon polaritons, QSW represents the quasi-spherical wave, ASPP represents amplitude of the surface plasmon polaritons, AQSW represents amplitude of the evanescent-wave mode of the quasi-spherical wave, and ϕ−δ represents a phase delay between the surface plasmon polaritons and the quasi-spherical wave (equation 1, see section 2.1).
For claim 7, Han teaches determining the near-field photoresist contrast and the logarithmic slope of the spot-mapping pattern according to the transverse attenuation characteristic comprises:
determining a correspondence between the near-field photoresist contrast and the logarithmic slope according to the transverse attenuation characteristic (ILS relationship with dose variation and near field PR contrast using incident dose, see section 2.1 and sections S2 and S4 of the supplementary section); and
determining the logarithmic slope according to the near-field photoresist contrast and the correspondence (ILS as a function dose variation, see sections 2.1, 2.2, and 3.1 and supplementary section S4).
For claim 8, Han teaches determining the actual line spread functions of the line patterns corresponding to the different critical dimensions based on the plurality of attenuation parameters and the actual point spread functions, which correspond to the plurality of transverse widths, comprises:
determining the plurality of attenuation parameters at edges of the points (edge position decay constant, see section 2.1); and
determining the actual line spread functions through convolution between the actual point spread functions and the line pattern, wherein the convolution is performed by utilizing the plurality of attenuation parameters based on a linear convolution relationship between the points in the spot-mapping pattern and the line patterns (see Fig. 4A and supplementary section S4); and
determining the plurality of attenuation parameters at edges of the points comprises: acquiring an exposure dose at an edge of one of the points; and fitting the exposure dose to determine an attenuation parameter of the plurality of attenuation parameters (can be obtained by fitting the local dose at the edge position, see section 2.1).
For claim 9, Han teaches after establishing the analytical equation of the line edge roughness of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography based on the variation due to line edge roughness, the exposure dose of each line pattern, the near-field photoresist contrast, and the logarithmic slope of each line pattern, the method further comprises:
determining theoretical line edge roughness of the plasmon super diffraction photolithography based on the analytical equation (predicted and measured LERs is plotted with the gap size and shown in Figure 5A, see Fig. 5A and section 3.2);
acquiring the line patterns corresponding to the different critical dimensions on the surface of the photoresist in the plasmon super diffraction photolithography (different gaps sizes, see Fig. 5A);
processing an image of the line patterns to determine actual line edge roughness corresponding to the line patterns (measured LER); and
determining accuracy of the analytical equation based on the theoretical line edge roughness and the actual line edge roughness (comparison of generated LER and measured LER, see section 3.2)
For claim 10, Han teaches the analytical equation of the line edge roughness is:
PNG
media_image3.png
70
226
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
wherein 3σLER represents theoretical line edge roughness, Dnor represents the exposure dose that is normalized, rnear represents the near-field photoresist contrast, and ILS represents the logarithmic slope of the pattern (equation 4, see section 2.2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on June 23, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues on pages 10 and 11, regarding claims 1 and 11, that Han fails to provide for the claimed process steps and continuous computation path of establishing a correspondence between the near-field photoresist contrast and the logarithmic slope based on the transverse attenuation characteristic of the near-field evanescent wave, then determines the logarithmic slope of the line pattern based on said correspondence, and further calculates the line edge roughness.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Han teaches in sections 2.1 and 2.2, that both the near-field contrast, γnear, and logarithmic slope, ILS, are determined based on the dose distribution, D, which attenuates at the boundary region where LER is formed. The LER is then expressed as equation 4 based on that correspondence.
The Applicant argues on pages 10 and 11, regarding claims 1 and 11, that Han also fails to disclose a complete process for predicting and verifying LER.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Han establishes an analytical model and then verifies that model through measurement (see Fig. 4B and sections 3.1 and 3.2).
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 Steven H Whitesell whose telephone number is (571)270-3942. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM (MST).
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/Steven H Whitesell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights