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 April 01, 2026 has been entered. Claims 22-46 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) 22-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Solak et al. [US 20110310374 A1, hereafter Solak].
As per Claims 22, 33, 41 and 42, Solak teaches a method for improving the
uniformity of exposure of a first periodic pattern (See fig. 22, for
printing periodic patterns) in a photomask (a mask 96) by a collimated beam in a photolithographic system using the Talbot effect to print a second periodic pattern into a
photosensitive layer on a substrate in proximity to the photomask (See fig. 22, Para 21
and 71), the method comprising:
a) providing a plate (the wedge plate 88) composed of a material transparent to
the beam, the plate having opposing surfaces (top and bottom surfaces) being mutually
parallel and separated by a thickness (Para 111);
b) placing the plate in the photolithographic system such that the beam
illuminates the plate at an initial angle of incidence and a beam transmitted by the plate
illuminates the photomask (the mask 96); and
c) rotating the plate through at least one angle about at least one axis of rotation
during the exposure such that the transmitted beam displaces translationally across the
photomask (Para 111-112, The wedge plate 88 is mounted to a mechanical system (not
indicated in FIG. 22) that approximately centres the plate 88 on the system z-axis and
enables it to be rotated about that axis).
As per Claims 23 and 34, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22,
which further comprises rotating the plate about an axis of rotation perpendicular to a
direction of the beam (Para 111).
As per Claims 24 and 35, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22,
which further comprises placing the plate such that the beam illuminates the plate at an
oblique initial angle of incidence and rotating the plate about an axis of rotation parallel
to a direction of the beam (See fig. 22).
As per Claims 25 and 36, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22,
which further comprises placing the plate such that the beam illuminates the plate at an oblique initial angle of incidence, and rotating the plate firstly through a first angle about
a first axis of rotation parallel to a direction of the beam, secondly through a second
angle about a second axis of rotation perpendicular to the beam, and thirdly through a
third angle about the first axis of rotation (See fig. 29, Para 112).
As per Claims 26 and 37, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22,
which further comprises placing the plate such that the beam illuminates the plate at an
oblique initial angle of incidence and rotating the plate simultaneously through a first
angle about a first axis of rotation parallel to a direction of the beam and through a
second angle about a second axis of rotation perpendicular to the beam (See fig. 29,
Para 112, wherein the wedge plate 88 is rotated by 120.degree.)
As per Claims 27 and 38, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22,
which further comprises rotating the plate about first and second axes of rotation being
mutually orthogonal and substantially perpendicular to a direction of the beam (See fig.
29, Para 112, wherein the wedge plate 88 is rotated by a further 0.degree.).
As per Claims 28 and 39, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22,
which further comprises: rotating the plate about first and second axes of rotation being
mutually orthogonal and substantially perpendicular to a direction of the beam; and
describing time-dependencies of the rotations about the first and second axes by
respective sine and cosine functions (See fig. 29, Para
119).
As per Claims 29, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22, which
further comprises selecting the initial angle of incidence or setting the initial angle of
incidence within a selected range of angles of incidence (See fig. 29, Para 119).
As per Claims 30, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22, which
further comprises selecting the thickness of the plate, the initial angle of incidence and
the at least one angle about the at least one axis of rotation, to produce a desired
displacement of the transmitted beam across the photomask (See fig. 22, Para 111,
wherein the plate 88 has a predetermined thickness).
As per Claims 31, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22, which
further comprises starting the rotation of the plate before the exposure of the photomask
(Para 111, wherein the rotation of the plate must be controlled depending on the start
point of imaging the mask).
As per Claims 32, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22, which
further comprises providing at least one additional plate composed of a material
transparent to the beam, placing the at least one additional plate in the
photolithographic system such that the transmitted beam illuminates the at least one
additional plate and the beam transmitted by the at least one additional plate illuminates
the photomask, and rotating the at least one additional plate about at least one axis of
rotation during the exposure (See fig. 29, Para 119).
As per Claim 40, Solak teaches the apparatus according to claim 33, wherein
the beam is monochromatic (Para 9), and a distance between the photomask and the
substrate being photoresist-coated and disposed in proximity to the photomask is varied during the exposure according to the method of Displacement Tailbot Lithography (Para 71 and 111).
As per Claim 43, Solak teaches the method according to claim 22, which further comprises carrying out step c) by rotating said plate such that the angle of incidence of the transmitted beam at the photomask remains substantially constant (Para 112, wherein the exposure process is performed by, firstly, rotating the wedge plate 88 so that the beam that would be incident on the mask 96 with the shutter 82 open is angularly deflected in the xz plane by -0.24.degree.,, i.e. orientation of the plates is adjusted to get a desired constant deflection angle -0.24, 30 and -30.degree. for the beam with the xz plane).
As per Claim 44, Solak teaches the method according to claim 33, which further comprises carrying out step c) by rotating said plate such that the angle of incidence of the transmitted beam at the photomask remains substantially constant (Para 112, wherein the exposure process is performed by, firstly, rotating the wedge plate 88 so that the beam that would be incident on the mask 96 with the shutter 82 open is angularly deflected in the xz plane by -0.24.degree.,, i.e. orientation of the plates is adjusted to get a desired constant deflection angle -0.24, 30 and -30.degree. for the beam with the xz plane).
As per Claim 45, Solak teaches the apparatus according to claim 41, wherein said plate is rotated such that the angle of incidence of the transmitted beam at the photomask remains substantially constant (Para 112, wherein the exposure process is performed by, firstly, rotating the wedge plate 88 so that the beam that would be incident on the mask 96 with the shutter 82 open is angularly deflected in the xz plane by -0.24.degree.,, i.e. orientation of the plates is adjusted to get a desired constant deflection angle -0.24, 30 and -30.degree. for the beam with the xz plane).
As per Claim 46, Solak teaches the apparatus according to claim 42, wherein said plate is rotated such that the angle of incidence of the transmitted beam at the photomask remains substantially constant (Para 112, wherein the exposure process is performed by, firstly, rotating the wedge plate 88 so that the beam that would be incident on the mask 96 with the shutter 82 open is angularly deflected in the xz plane by -0.24.degree.,, i.e. orientation of the plates is adjusted to get a desired substantially constant deflection angle of -0.24, 30 and -30.degree. for the beam with the xz plane).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 01, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remark section, with respect to the independent claims, Applicant argued that First, the object of applied prior art to Solak is to print a desired pattern of features having a desired shape, and is different that the objects of the invention by the instant application which is to improve the uniformity of exposure of a periodic pattern. Second, the plate employed in the instant application has opposing surfaces that are mutually parallel, whereas the plate employed in Solak is a “wedge plate” having surfaces which are not mutually parallel. And thirdly, whereas the parallel-sided plate of the instant application is rotated during the exposure of the mask in claims 22, 33, 41 and 42), the wedge plate employed in Solak is not rotated during the exposure of the mask. In Solak., the exposure includes 3 sequential sub-exposures, and the wedge plate is rotated by an angle of 120 degrees between the sub-exposures when there is no beam exposing the mask.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the object of the instant application which improves the uniformity of exposure of a periodic pattern is performed to get a desired pattern by a particular design, and in both cases, the object is to get a pattern with improved quality.
Second, the claimed limitation requires a plate having opposing surfaces being mutually parallel and separated by a thickness, but does not specify which surfaces of the plate. The plate to the prior art has six surfaces of which the top and bottom surfaces that the beam is transmitting through and four side surfaces, wherein the side surfaces are being mutually parallel and separated by a thickness.
Third, Para 112 of Solak, disclosed that wherein the exposure process is performed by, rotating the wedge plate 88 so that the beam that would be incident on the mask 96 with the shutter 82 open is angularly deflected in the xz plane by -0.24, 30 and -30.degree.,, i.e. orientation of the plates is adjusted to get a desired constant deflection angle -0.24, 30 and -30.degree. for the beam. Applicant also argued that the transmitting surfaces of the plate need to be accurately parallel in order to ensure that the angle of incidence of the transmitted beam at the mask remains substantially constant when the plate is rotated during the exposure. However, the claimed limitation does not explicitly expressed that the beam transmitting surfaces of the plate need to be accurately parallel in order to perform the claimed angle of incidence of the transmitted beam while the plate is rotating during exposure. Therefore, Applicant’s argument on the above points 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