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 19 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 19 recites “an alignment inspection location.” It is unclear from the claim what this inspection location is. Further, the specification does not provide a definition of “an alignment inspection location.” For purposes of examination, this is interpreted to be merely any location at which the alignment can be determined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-11, and 17-20 and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quintanilha (US 20150331336 A1).
Claim 1: Quintanilha teaches a system for generating a metrology signal, the system comprising:
Sensor (Fig. 3, 104b) configured to detect reflected radiation from a feature in a patterned substrate irradiated with radiation (Fig. 3, target T1 on substrate W),
the feature being different than a dedicated alignment structure ([0059] - patterning device MA);
and one or more processors configured to generate the metrology signal based on the detected reflected radiation from the feature, the metrology signal comprising measurement information pertaining to the feature ([0047]).
Claim 2: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the feature comprises one or more structures in the patterned substrate capable of providing a diffraction signal ([0065] - diffraction).
Claim 3: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the feature is different than the dedicated alignment structure and other structures that lie near the feature and within an illumination spot ([0059] - mask and substrate alignment marks).
Claim 4: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the irradiation and detection comprises a continuous scanning of the feature ([0060] - scan mode).
Claim 6: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the feature comprises a line, an edge, or a fine-pitched series of lines and/or edges, and wherein the feature has a length spanning a region of measurement interest (Fig. 4 and [0083]).
Claim 7: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 6, wherein the feature comprises the fine-pitched series of lines and/or edges and the fine-pitch has a pitch dimension of less than 1 micrometer ([0084]).
Claim 9: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the irradiation and detection comprises a scanning, and wherein the scanning is performed faster and is configured to generate more information than in typical systems for generating metrology signals because the scanning is performed on the feature in the patterned substrate instead of on the dedicated alignment structure ([0060] - scanning substrate).
Claim 10: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the irradiation and detection comprises a scanning, and wherein the metrology signal is calibrated based on a scan of the feature isolated from other surrounding structures ([0085]).
Claim 11: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the irradiation and detection comprises a scanning, and wherein the metrology signal is calibrated based on a perpendicular or parallel line scan ([0085] and [0074] - linear array).
Claim 17: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the feature comprises a line and/or an edge, the dedicated alignment structure comprises a diffraction grating, and the line and/or edge feature forms a portion of a design layout, separate from the diffraction grating (Fig. 4, [0083]).
Claim 18: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the metrology signal is an alignment signal or an overlay signal ([0064] - overlay measurements).
Claim 19: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to determine, based on the metrology signal, an alignment inspection location of the feature. ([0037]).
Claim 20: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the feature is included in a layer of the substrate in a semiconductor device structure, and wherein the one or more processors are further configured to adjust a semiconductor device manufacturing process based on the metrology signal ([0106]).
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 5, 8, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quintanilha in view of Hofmans (US 20090305151 A1).
Claim 5: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the feature is a structure capable of generating wide angle diffraction ([0083]).
Quintanilha does not teach, but Hofmans does teach wherein the scanning is: perpendicular to the feature; along one side of the feature, wherein a spot size of the radiation is configured to cover the one side of the feature; or along both sides of the feature, wherein the spot size of the radiation is configured to cover both sides of the feature at the same time. (Fig. 6, scanning direction 102 and [0167]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the scanning, as taught by Hofmans, in the system as taught by Quintanilha because this would allow for fast scanning as the entire pattern can be scanned in one pass.
Claim 8: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1. Quintanilha does not teach, but Hofmans does teach wherein the irradiation and detection comprises a scanning, and wherein the scanning is performed faster and is configured to generate more information than in typical systems for generating metrology signals because the scanning is performed on the feature and continuously samples deformation across a large region of a field or wafer rather than a series of discrete alignment marks, and because the feature is configured to span an interior of device dies without causing processing and packaging issues ([270]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the scanning speed, as taught by Hofmans, in the system as taught by Quintanilha, because, as Hofmans teaches, this allows for quick measurements ([0270]).
Claim 12: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1. Quintanilha does not teach, but Hofmans does teach wherein the metrology signal comprises a signal from a parallel flank scan, a signal from a flank scan comprising diffraction oriented perpendicular from a scan direction, the signal from the parallel flank scan comprising a difference between a signal from a first scan of the feature and a second parallel scan of the feature ([0206]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the flank scan, as taught by Hofmans, in the system as taught by Quintanilha because flank scans are a method well known in the art, and, as Hofmans states, “the diffractive property is most sensitive on the flanks of the intensity profile” ([0187]).
Claim 13: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1. Quintanilha does not teach, but Hofmans does teach wherein the metrology signal comprises a signal from two parallel flank scans on two corresponding features from two different regions, the signal from the two parallel flank scans comprising a difference between a first signal from a first parallel flank scan from a first region and a second signal from a second parallel flank scan from a second region, and wherein a given signal from a given parallel flank scan comprises a difference between a signal from a first scan of the feature and a second parallel scan of the feature, where different regions comprise different dies on one substrate or the same dies between different substrates ([0206]. [0211]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the flank scan, as taught by Hofmans, in the system as taught by Quintanilha because flank scans are a method well known in the art, and, as Hofmans states, “the diffractive property is most sensitive on the flanks of the intensity profile” ([0187]).
Claim 14: Quintanilha teaches the system of claim 1. Quintanilha does not teach, but Hofmans does teach wherein the irradiation and detection comprises a scanning, and wherein the scanning is performed at a predefined scan speed for a given sampling rate, the predefined scan speed and/or given sampling rate determined based on a size of the feature 151 [0068] - longer pattern yields higher speed and [0200]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the scanning speed, as taught by Hofmans, in the system as taught by Quintanilha, because, as Hofmans teaches, this saves time ([0200]).
Claim 15: Quintanilha, as modified, teaches the system of claim 14, wherein the predefined scan speed and/or given sampling rate are adjustable based on the size of the feature (Hofmans [0068] - longer pattern yields higher speed and [0200]).
Claim 16: Quintanilha, as modified, teaches the system of claim 14, wherein the size of feature that can be scanned is determined based on a ratio of the predefined scan speed to the given sampling rate (Hofmans [0200]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights