DETAILED ACTION
This is the Office action based on the 18686440 application filed February 26, 2024. Claims 1-28 and 30-42 are currently pending and have been considered below. Applicant’s cancellation of claims 29 and 43-63 acknowledged.
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 .
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 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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show Figure 15C as described in the specification. Examiner is unable to find Figure 15C in the drawings. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 Interpretations
Claim 1 recites in the preamble “A method for forming a mold for casting”; however, the claim does not recite any actual usage of the structure being made as a mold for casting. Therefore, for the purpose of examining any structure that is capable of being used as a mold for casting will be considered to meet this limitation. It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (See MPEP 2106; Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409).
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.
Claim 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 16 recites “(t)he method of Claim 15, wherein further etching the substrate through the third etch mask layer automatically stops at a stable crystalline plane”; however, further etching is not recited in claim 15. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be clear about which step automatically stops at a stable crystalline plane. For the purpose of examining it will be assumed that the above sentence is “(t)he method of Claim 15, wherein the etching the substrate through the third etch mask layer automatically stops at a stable crystalline plane”.
Claim 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The term “the 3-dimensional shape of the opening” in claim 7 lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of examining it will be assumed that this term is “a 3-dimensional shape of the opening”.
Claim 42 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 42 recites “(t)he method of Claim 30, wherein the fourth etch mask layer comprises metal”, but claim 30 does not recite a fourth etch mask layer. For the purpose of examining it will be assumed that this claim is “(t)he method of Claim 31, wherein the fourth etch mask layer comprises metal”.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Peroz et al. (U.S. PGPub. No. 20180059297), hereinafter “Peroz”:--Claims 1, 2, 13: Peroz teaches a method of making an imprint template ([0817], Fig. 118), comprisingslicing a silicon wafer having a desired crystal orientation from a block ([0813], Fig. 117A);
forming a mask on the silicon wafer, the mask has a plurality of openings that align with a desired silicon crystal lattice axis ([0819-0820]; Fig. 118, Step 11806A or B);etching the silicon substrate through the openings to form a plurality of recesses on the silicon wafer ([0821], Fig. 118, Step 11807);stripping the mask to form the imprint template comprising gratings corresponded to the recesses (last step in Fig. 118). Although Peroz failed to teach that the silicon wafer is a single crystalline material, since the wafer is sliced from a silicon block such as it has the desired crystal orientation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to form the silicon wafer from a single crystalline material.--Claim 3: Peroz further teaches that a multi-level grating may be formed by adding a stop etch layer as follows:(i) providing a silicon substrate (Step 12301 in Fig. 123, [0837-0838]);(ii) forming a stop etch layer on the silicon substrate, wherein the stop etch layer may be SiO2 (Step 12302 in Fig. 123, [0839-0840]);(iii) forming a silicon layer on the stop etch layer (Step 12303 in Fig. 123, [0839]);(iv) forming a mask layer on the silicon layer (Step 12305 in Fig. 123);(v) etching the silicon layer through the mask layer, wherein the etching stops at the stop etch layer (Step 12310 in Fig. 123). It is noted that the substrate at step (iii) is a silicon-on-insulator (SOI) wafer. Since SOI wafer is widely available in commerce, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use a commercially available SOI wafer and skip step (i)-(iii) because this would simplify manufacturing and shorten cycle time.--Claim 4: Peroz further teaches that the silicon wafer may have a <100> crystal orientation (Item 11701C in Fig. 117C).--Claim 5: Peroz further teaches that the plurality of recesses form gratings for the template ([0812]). Peroz further teaches that the gratings may have a rectangular top-view shape ([0496], Fig. 54A and B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to form the recesses having rectangular top-view shape in the invention of Peroz.--Claim 6: Peroz further teaches that the plurality of recesses may have a triangular cross section (Item 11702C in Fig. 117C). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to form the recesses having a pyramidal shape in the invention of Peroz.--Claim 7: It is noted that Item 11702C in Fig. 117C shows the silicon wafer is thicker than the depth of the recess.--Claim 8: It is noted that Item 11701C in Fig. 117C shows the edge of the recess is parallel with the <100> axis.--Claim 9: It is noted that in Item 11701C in Fig. 117C, the other sides of the rectangular that are not shown in the figure are aligned with the <110> axis.--Claim 10: Peroz further teaches that the plurality of openings in the mask may have different depths ([0533], Fig. 60A-60G). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to use a mask having openings of different depths in the invention of Peroz.--Claim 11:Peroz further teaches that the mask may comprise a polymer layer (Fig. 118, Step 11803 or 11806), and further teaches that the grating may be formed by etching through a photoresist mask ([0498-0499]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to use a mask comprising a layer of photoresist in the invention of Peroz.--Claim 12: Peroz further teaches that the etching may comprise KOH wet etching ([0813, 0821]).--Claim 14: Peroz further teaches that the imprint template may be used to imprint a grate pattern about 280 nm tall ([0826-0827, 0832-0833], Fig. 120 and 121A). . Peroz further teaches that the method above enables the patterning of different components (i.e., fields) of a waveguide device with a predetermined (e.g., the most optimum) nano- or micro-structure for each individual field ([0817]), and that the waveguide can utilize different nano- and micro-patterns for various functions. The ability to vary pattern within and among various fields is this provided by some embodiments of the present invention as a feature of the device fabrication process ([0818]). Therefore, the depth of the recesses that would result in a height of the grating structure is a result-effective variable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the depth of the recesses, such as a depth of more than 1000 nm for the recesses because it’s been well established that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)”. MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Claims 15-28 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Peroz:--Claims 15, 20, 21, 22, 23: Peroz teaches a method of making an imprint template ([0817], Fig. 118), comprisingslicing a silicon wafer having a desired crystal orientation from a block ([0813], Fig. 117A);
forming a first mask on the silicon wafer, wherein the first mask has a plurality of first holes and a plurality of second holes, wherein the plurality of first holes align with a desired silicon crystal lattice axis ([0819]; Fig. 118, Step 11801);forming a second mask on the first mask, wherein the second mask extends over the plurality of first holes and exposes the plurality of second holes ([0819]; Fig. 118, Step 11803);etching the substrate through the plurality of second holes to form a plurality of second recesses by using a dry etch ([0819]; Fig. 118, Step 11804); stripping the second mask, then forming a third mask on the second mask, wherein the third mask extends over the plurality of second recesses and exposes the plurality of first holes ([0820]; Fig. 118, Step 11806A-B); thenetching the substrate through the plurality of first holes to form a plurality of first recesses by using a wet etch ([0821]; Fig. 118, Step 11807); stripping the mask to form the imprint template comprising gratings corresponded to the recesses (Last step in Fig. 118). Although Peroz failed to teach that the silicon wafer is a single crystalline material, since the wafer is sliced from a silicon block such as it has the desired crystal orientation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to form the silicon wafer from a single crystalline material.--Claim 16: Peroz further teaches that the silicon wafer may be a <100> silicon substrate, and the etching stops at a <111> crystal lattice plane ([0821], Item 11702C in Fig. 117C).--Claim 17: Peroz further teaches that the imprint template may be used to imprint a grating structure for a waveguide ([0817-0818, 0827], Fig 120-121A) for visible wavelength region ([0652, 0659]).--Claims 18, 19: Peroz further teaches that the imprint template may be used to imprint a grate pattern about 280 nm tall ([0826-0827, 0832-0833], Fig. 120 and 121A). . Peroz further teaches that the method above enables the patterning of different components (i.e., fields) of a waveguide device with a predetermined (e.g., the most optimum) nano- or micro-structure for each individual field ([0817]), and that the waveguide can utilize different nano- and micro-patterns for various functions. The ability to vary pattern within and among various fields is this provided by some embodiments of the present invention as a feature of the device fabrication process ([0818]). Therefore, the depth of the recesses that would result in a height of the grating structure is a result-effective variable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the depth of the recesses, such as a depth of less than 500nm for the first recesses and more than 1000 nm for the second recesses because it’s been well established that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)”. MPEP 2144.05(II)(A). --Claim 24: Peroz further teaches that the silicon wafer may have a <100> crystal orientation (Item 11701C in Fig. 117C).--Claim 25: Peroz further teaches that forming the first mask may comprise forming a polymer mask layer on a hardmask layer (Fig. 118, Step 11806A), wherein the polymer layer is formed by photolithography process ([0819]), then etching the hardmask layer, then performing an oxygen clean to form a mask (Step 11802 in Fig. 118) . Peroz further teaches that the grating may be formed by etching through a photoresist mask ([0498-0499]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to use a layer of photoresist as the polymer mask layer in the invention of Peroz.--Claim 26: Peroz further teaches that the second mask may comprise a polymer layer ([0819]; Fig. 118, Step 11803), and further teaches that the grating may be formed by etching through a photoresist mask ([0498-0499]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to use a second mask comprising a layer of photoresist in the invention of Peroz.--Claims 27, 28: Peroz teaches stripping the second mask and the third mask as above. Although Peroz is silent about removing the first mask, since Peroz teaches performing an oxygen clean at step 11802 in Fig. 118, and the polymer mask disappears in the next step it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to remove the polymer mask prior to forming the second mask.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 30-41 are allowable. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claim 30, none of the cited prior arts teaches the feature “etching the substrate through the first etch mask layer to a depth to form a plurality of first openings corresponding to the plurality of first holes and a plurality of second openings corresponding to the plurality of second holes, wherein the depth is less than thickness of the first etch mask layer; forming a third etch mask layer on the substrate, the third etch mask layer exposing the plurality of first openings while extending over the plurality of second openings; etching the second etch mask layer through the third etch mask layer until the plurality of first openings extend to the layer of crystalline material” in the context of claim 30.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submission should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS PHAM whose telephone number is (571) 270-7670 and fax number is (571) 270-8670. The examiner can normally be reached on MTWThF9to6 PST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Allen can be reached on (571) 270-3176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOMAS T PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights