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 .
The amendment filed on May 27, 2026 has been entered. Claims ## are pending in this application.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakagawa et al. [US 20080241709 A1, hereafter Nakagawa].
As per Claim 1, Nakagawa teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium
having instructions thereon or therein, the instructions, when executed by a computer system (Para 14), configured to cause the computer system to at least:
receive a representation of a first contour of a substrate pattern (Para 13, An original geometry to be formed in an absorber layer of a photomask blank is received);
determine a curvature of the first contour (See fig. 7 and 8);
determine an etch bias direction based on the curvature; wherein the etch bias direction is different for different curvatures (Para 46, original geometry may be modified to generate a modified geometry that is offset from the original geometry in at least one direction); and
use a simulation model to determine an etch effect based on the etch bias direction for an etching process on the substrate pattern (See fig. 5 and 6, Para 13 and 43, wherein a simulation may be performed based on the modified geometry to determine a simulated geometry).
As per Claim 2, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
curvature 108 corresponds to a curvature at a given location of the first contour (See
fig. 5), wherein the etch bias direction is for the given location and is determined based
on the curvature at the given location and further based on a curvature at one or more
adjacent locations 100 along the first contour in proximity to the given location (See fig.
5 and 6, Para 43).
As per Claim 3, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 2, wherein the etch
bias direction for the given location on the first contour is determined based on a combination of curvatures at the one or more adjacent locations along the first contour
with the curvature at the given location (See fig. 5 and 6, Para 43).
As per Claim 4, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 3, wherein the
combination is weighted based on the curvatures (See fig. 5 and 6, Para 43).
As per Claim 5, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the etch
bias direction for a given location on the first contour is determined based on a
combination of normal directions (100, 102) at one or more adjacent locations along the
first contour with the normal direction of the first contour at the given location (See fig. 5
and 6, Para 43).
As per Claim 6, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 5, wherein the
combination is weighted with respect to the normal directions (See fig. 5 and 6, Para
43).
As per Claim 7, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
instructions are further configured to cause the computer system to determine an etch
bias value based on the representation of the first contour of the substrate pattern, and
use the simulation model to determine the etch effect based on the etch bias direction
and the etch bias value (Para 41-43).
As per Claim 8, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the etch
effect is a change in the first contour (100, 102) of the substrate pattern caused by
etching, which produces an after etch substrate pattern (See fig. 5), and wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to use the simulation model to
determine the etch effect are further configured to cause the computer system to
determine one or more locations on the after etch substrate pattern based on the etch bias direction, wherein the representation of the first contour is received electronically (a
particular geometry defined by a mask pattern file), and the representation of the
first contour is a representation of a resist contour (See fig. 5 and 6, Para 39-41).
As per Claim 9, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to determine the etch bias
direction are further configured to cause the computer system to determine the etch
bias using an algorithm comprising a combination term, a filtering term, and a curvature
term (See fig. 5-8, Para 42 and 46).
As per Claim 10, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
simulation model is an etch bias model (Para 41).
As per Claim 11, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to use the simulation model to
determine the etch effect are further configured to cause the computer system to, in a
calibration flow, determine the etch bias direction at each location on a gage contour of
the substrate pattern (Para 41).
As per Claim 12, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to use the simulation model to
determine the etch effect are further configured to cause the computer system to, in a
model application flow, bias each vertex of a resist contour with a bias vector based on
the etch bias direction to determine an after etch contour (See fig. 5 and 6, wherein
each point of the geometry 100).
As per Claim 13, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to use the simulation model to determine the etch effect are further configured to cause the computer system to, for
optical proximity correction, use a resist contour and an etch bias direction at each
location on the resist contour, and determine an after etch contour, which can be used
to estimate an etch signal for the optical proximity correction (Para 29).
As per Claim 14, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the etch
effect is determined based on an etch bias value and the etch bias direction, and
wherein the etch bias value and/or the etch bias direction are configured to be provided
to a cost function to facilitate determination of costs associated with individual patterning
process variables (Para 40, wherein a particular offset extending around the
perimeter of desired geometry 100 to generate a modified geometry 102).
As per Claim 15, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 1, wherein the
curvature of the first contour is determined based on one or more derivatives of an
equation that represents the first contour (Para 41-42).
As per Claim 16, Nakagawa teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions thereon or therein, the instructions, when executed by a computer system (Para 14), configured to cause the computer system to at least:
receive a representation of a substrate pattern, wherein the representation comprises a contour in the substrate pattern (Para 13, An original geometry to be formed in an absorber layer of a photomask blank is received);
determine an etch bias value for a location on the contour of the substrate pattern (Para 14, wherein geometry offset from the original geometry in at least one direction);
determine a curvature of the contour of the substrate pattern at the location (See
fig. 7 and 8);
determine an etch bias direction based on the curvature; wherein the etch bias direction is different for different curvatures (Para 46, original geometry may be modified to generate a modified geometry that is offset from the original geometry in at least one direction);
input the etch bias value and the etch bias direction to a simulation model (Para
14, wherein perform a simulation based on the modified geometry to determine a simulated geometry); and
use the simulation model to determine an after etch contour for the substrate pattern, the after etch contour comprising change in the contour of the substrate pattern caused by etching, wherein the after etch contour from the simulation model is configured to be used in a cost function to facilitate determination of costs associated with individual patterning process variables, and wherein the costs associated with individual patterning variables are configured to be used to facilitate an optimization of the patterning process (See fig. 5 and 6, Para 13 and 43, wherein a simulation may be performed based on the modified geometry to determine a simulated geometry).
As per Claim 17, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 16, wherein the
representation of the substrate pattern comprises a resist image and the contour is a
resist contour (See fig. 5C).
As per Claim 18, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 16, wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to use the simulation model to
determine the after etch contour are further configured to cause the computer system to determine a location on the after etch contour based on the etch bias direction (Para
41-42).
As per Claim 19, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 16, wherein the
instructions configured to cause the computer system to determine the etch bias
direction are further configured to cause the computer system to determine the etch
bias direction using an algorithm comprising a combination term, a filtering term, a
curvature term, and a calibration term (Para 41-42).
As per Claim 20, Nakagawa teaches the medium of claim 16, wherein the
simulation model is a vector based effective etch bias model (Para 41).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the remark section, filed May 27, 2026, with respect to the rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the rejected under 35 U.S.C. $102 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remark section, with regard to claims 1 and 16, Applicant argued that the prior art to Nakagawa do not disclose claimed limitation of “determine an etch bias direction based on the curvature, wherein the etch bias direction is different for different curvatures.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Nakagawa, for example in [0046], disclosed that “the curvature of an inside corner 124 of predicted resulting geometry 108 is less sharp (or less acute), while the curvature of an outside corner 124 of predicted resulting geometry 108 is sharper (or more acute) as compared with the symmetrical curve of conventional predicted geometry 120.” Therefore, Applicant’s argument on the above point is not persuasive.
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 MESFIN ASFAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 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, Toan Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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.
/MESFIN T ASFAW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights