CTNF 18/722,800 CTNF 95539 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 5, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,465,781 B1 [hereinafter Nishimura ] in view of US 2007/0097370 A1 [hereinafter Chism ] . Regarding Claim 1 : Nishimura teaches an inspection device for inspecting a film quality of a film formed on a sample (2: 66-67 and 3:1-2: “an apparatus for inspecting or measuring a sample based on charged-particle beam imaging... sample which has an insulation film”), the inspection device comprising: a charged particle source (Fig. 1- 11) configured to irradiate the sample with a charged particle beam (5: 49-51: “The electron beam source 11 includes an electron gun of the thermal electric field radiation type which can have a large electron beam current”); a first light source (Fig. 1 – “laser irradiation optical system” of 19) configured to irradiate the sample with first light (5: 58-60: “height measuring device 19 consists of a laser irradiation optical system for projecting a laser beam in an oblique direction to the sample 16”); a photodetection system (Fig. 1 – “detection optical system” of 19) configured to detect signal light generated when the sample is irradiated with the first light (5: 60-62: “height measuring device 19 consists of…and a detection optical system including a linear image sensor which detects the shift position of the reflected light from the sample surface”); a charge control electrode (Fig. 1-24) configured to control an electric field on the sample or a second light source (Fig.1 -31) configured to irradiate the sample with second light (5:45-46 and 6: 3-10: “a grid electrode 24 disposed near the sample 16”; and “The UV light source 31 can be an excimer lamp which…to emit a UV light… and it is designed to irradiate the insulation film of SiO, SiN, etc. on the sample 16”); a control device (Fig. 1-8) configured to modulate an electronic state of the sample using the charged particle source and the charge control electrode or the second light source (6: 49-53 and 15: 40-41; 51-54: the general controller 8 “adjusts the potential of the electron beam source 11” via “beam source potential adjusting device 9”, “adjusts the potential of the grid electrode 24” via “grid potential adjusting device 25” and “operates on the UV irradiation controller 32 in advance of electron detection to activate the UV light source 31”). Nishimura teaches the electron detector 14 detects electrons released from the sample 16 and thereby producing a two-dimensional electron image of the sample, from which the defects can be analyzed by an image process 28 (see Fig. 1 and 7:13-19 of Nishimura ). However, Nishimura does not specially note that estimate the film quality of the film formed on the sample based on a detection signal of the signal light modulated, the detection signal being output from the photodetection system. Chism teaches using photo-reflectance (PR) signal to determine thin film physical properties such as strain (see para. [0012] of Chism ). Specifically, Chism teaches estimate the film quality of the film formed on the sample based on a detection signal of the signal light modulated, the detection signal being output from the photodetection system (Fig. 2 and paras. [0045-0048]: teaches a pump beam (from pump lase 5) to modulate the samples reflectance/electronic condition, while a probe beam (from probe laser 6) is directed to the same sample region for irradiation and reflected from the sample. The reflected probe light is detected by a photodetector/photodiode 12, and the detected signal represents the pump-induce change in reflectance so the strain in thin films can be inspected). Nishimura teaches a charged-particle inspection apparatus for semiconductor samples with an insulation film, where the sample charge/electric-field condition is controlled by controlling the beam-source potential, grid electrode potential, and UV irradiation. Chism teaches using pump/probe light to inspect semiconductor film quality by detecting reflected probe light from the sample and analyzing the detected optical signal. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to apply the optical film-quality inspection technique taught in Chism to the charged particle inspection system of Nishimura , to allow the system to inspect film quality while the sample’s charge/electric field condition is controlled, thereby providing more reliable and more complete information about the film than electron-beam inspection alone. Regarding Claim 2 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 1. Nishimura further teaches the device comprises both the charge control electrode (Fig. 1-24) and the second light source (Fig.1 -31), wherein the control device modulates the electronic state of the sample using at least one of the charged particle source, the charge control electrode, and the second light source (6: 49-53 and 15: 40-41; 51-54: the general controller 8 “adjusts the potential of the electron beam source 11” via “beam source potential adjusting device”, “adjusts the potential of the grid electrode 24” via “grid potential adjusting device 25” and “operates on the UV irradiation controller 32 in advance of electron detection to activate the UV light source 31”). Regarding Claim 3 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 2. Chism further teaches wherein the photodetection system outputs the detection signal indicating a change in the signal light due to the modulated electronic state of the sample (Claim 1: “the reflected alternating current probe light from the illumination of the semiconductor structure…contains the induced changes in the semiconductor material optical response, known as the photo-reflectance signal”). Regarding Claim 5 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 3. Nishimura further teaches wherein the control device modulates the second light source while changing an electric field intensity applied to the sample by the charge control electrode (5:45-46 and 6: 3-10: the general controller controls UV light source (second light source) and also controls grid electrode 24 by adjusting its potentials. Since the grid electrode 24 and the sample stage electrode 21 form the potential distribution near the sample, changing the grid potential changes the electric-field condition, e.g., intensity, applied to the sample). Regarding Claim 15 : Nishimura teaches a film quality inspection method for inspecting a film quality of a film formed on a sample (2: 39-44: “a method of inspecting or measuring a sample based on charged-particle beam imaging…[by] scanning a charged-particle beam to a sample which has the formation of an insulation film on at least part of the surface), the film quality inspection method comprising: irradiating the sample with a charged particle beam to charge the sample (5: 49-51: “The electron beam source 11 includes an electron gun of the thermal electric field radiation type which can have a large electron beam current”); irradiating the sample with probe light in a state in which an electronic state of the sample is modulated (5: 45-53: “height measuring device 19 consists of a laser irradiation optical system for projecting a laser beam in an oblique direction to the sample 16” while the general controller 8 adjusts the potential of the electron beam source 11, adjusts the potential of the grid electrode 24 and “operates on the UV irradiation controller 32 in advance of electron detection to activate the UV light source 31” to control/adjust the electric field near the sample). detecting signal light generated when the sample is irradiated with the probe light (5: 60-62: “height measuring device 19 consists of…and a detection optical system including a linear image sensor which detects the shift position of the reflected light from the sample surface”). However, Nishimura does not specially note that estimating the film quality of the film formed on the sample based on a detection signal of the signal light modulated according to the modulated electronic state of the sample. Chism teaches using photo-reflectance (PR) signal to determine thin film physical properties such as strain ([0012]). Specifically, Chism teaches estimate the film quality of the film formed on the sample based on a detection signal of the signal light modulated (Fig. 2 and paras. [0045-0048]: teaches a pump beam (from pump lase 5) to modulate the samples reflectance/electronic condition, while a probe beam (from probe laser 6) is directed to the same sample region for irradiation and reflected from the sample. The reflected probe light is detected by a photodetector/photodiode 12, and the detected signal represents the pump-induce change in reflectance so the strain in thin films can be inspected). Nishimura teaches a charged-particle inspection apparatus for semiconductor samples with an insulation film, where the sample charge/electric-field condition is controlled by controlling the beam-source potential, grid electrode potential, and UV irradiation. Chism teaches using pump/probe light to inspect semiconductor film quality by detecting reflected probe light from the sample and analyzing the detected optical signal. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to apply the optical film-quality inspection technique to the charged particle inspection system, to allow the system to inspect film quality while the sample’s charge/electric field condition is controlled, thereby providing more reliable and more complete information about the film than electron-beam inspection alone. Regarding Claim 16 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the film quality inspection method of claim 15. Nishimura further teaches the sample is irradiated with the probe light in a state in which the electronic state of the sample is modulated, while changing an electric field intensity applied to the sample (5: 45-53: “height measuring device 19 consists of a laser irradiation optical system for projecting a laser beam in an oblique direction to the sample 16” while the general controller 8 adjusts the potential of the electron beam source 11, adjusts the potential of the grid electrode 24 and “operates on the UV irradiation controller 32 in advance of electron detection to activate the UV light source 31” to control/adjust the electric field near the sample), and The combined references further teaches the film quality of the film formed on the sample is estimated based on electric field intensity dependency of the detection signal of the signal light modulated according to the modulated electronic state of the sample ( Chism teaches inspect the strain in thin film based on the detected signal which represents the pump-induce change in reflectance so the strain in thin films can be inspected; Nishimatsu teaches that the detected photo-induced signal depends on the applied voltage/surface-potential condition and that such voltage-dependent signal information is used to determine semiconductor surface/film quality characteristics (1: 9-14; 5:48-67; 6: 3-5)) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura in view of Chism , further in view of US 2008/0084567 A1 [hereinafter Fabrikant ] . Regarding Claim 4 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 3 . However, the combined references do not specially note that wherein the detection signal is expressed as a model formula including a plurality of fit parameters, and the computer includes a database in which film quality information on a combination of the plurality of fit parameters is registered, calculates the plurality of fit parameters of the detection signal by fitting the detection signal to the model formula, and collates the plurality of calculated fit parameters with the database Fabrikant teaches: wherein the detection signal is expressed as a model formula including a plurality of fit parameters (para. [0040]: irradiation beam penetrates each layer of the substrate, and the light reflectance “creates a complicated pattern in a reflectance spectrum, which can be used for measuring parameters of the structure”), and the computer includes a database in which film quality information on a combination of the plurality of fit parameters is registered, calculates the plurality of fit parameters of the detection signal by fitting the detection signal to the model formula, and collates the plurality of calculated fit parameters with the database (para. [0041]: storing a library/look-up table of optical spectra, where each spectrum corresponds to a particular set of parameter values. The measured spectrum is compared with spectra in the look-up table to find the best match, and the parameter values corresponding to the best match are determined). Nishimura teaches controlling the sample’s charge/electric field condition during inspection. Chism teaches using detected optical signal from the sample to determine semiconductor film/interface properties. Fabrikant teaches comparing measured optical information with stored library/model data associated with known parameter sets to determine sample/film characteristics. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to use Fabrikant ’s known library/model fitting approach in Chism ’ optical film quality analysis because it provides a predictable and systematic way to convert a measured optical signal into film-quality information, improving the liability and automation of the optical analysis by allowing the computer to identify film quality based on stored parameter-to-quality relationships instead of relying only on raw signal interpretation. Regarding Claim 6 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 5 . Nishimura further teaches the detection signal has dependency on the electric field intensity applied to the sample, and calculates the feature indicating the dependency based on the detection signal (1: 9-14; 5:48-67; 6: 3-5 : Nishimatsu teaches applying different bias/surface-potential conditions to a semiconductor sample using a transparent electrode, irradiating the sample with light, and measuring a surface photo-induced voltage at an arbitrary surface potential. Nishimatsu further teaches that this measurement allows surface electric charge, interface state density, and carrier lifetime to be obtained. Therefore, Nishimatsu teaches that the detected photo-induced signal depends on the applied voltage/surface-potential condition and that such voltage-dependent signal information is used to determine semiconductor surface/film quality characteristics). However, the combined references do not specially note that the computer includes a database in which film quality information on a feature is registered, and collates the calculated feature indicating the dependency with the database. Fabrikant teaches the computer includes a database in which film quality information on a feature is registered, and collates the calculated feature indicating the dependency with the database (para. [0041]: storing a library/look-up table of optical spectra, where each spectrum corresponds to a particular set of parameter values. The measured spectrum is compared with spectra in the look-up table to find the best match, and the parameter values corresponding to the best match are determined). Nishimura teaches controlling the sample’s charge/electric field condition by controlling source/electrode potentials. Chism teaches using detected optical signal from the sample to determine semiconductor film/interface properties. Fabrikant teaches comparing measured optical information with stored library/model data associated with known parameter sets to determine sample/film characteristics. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the Nishimura-Chism system with Fabrikant ’s library-based comparison technique for the electric-field dependent signal analysis, allowing the modified system to identify film quality from the relationship between applied electric-field condition and detected optical response, providing a predictable improvement in automated film-quality evaluation under controlled electrical condition. Regarding Claim 7 : Nishimura in view of Chism, and further in view of Fabrikant teaches the inspection device according to claim 6 . Nishimura further teaches a signal electron detector configured to detect signal electrons generated when the sample is irradiated with the charged particle beam (5: 39-41: “an electron detector 14 for detecting electrons, e.g., Secondary electrons or reflected electrons released from the sample 16”) Chism further teaches the computer calculates a surface voltage of the sample based on energy of the signal electrons detected by the signal electron detector (para. [0004]: teaches mathematic relationships among the free electron energy, the induced carrier density, and the surface voltage, accordingly, the surface voltage can be calculated based on the detected signal used the mathematical relationships as taught). Regarding Claim 8 : Nishimura in view of Chism, and further in view of Fabrikant teaches the inspection device according to claim 6 . Nishimura further teaches a surface electrometer configured to measure a surface voltage of the sample (5: 55-57: teaches measuring the surface photo indicated voltage by an AC surface photo-electromotive force measuring apparatus 24, which is a type of voltage measuring meter) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura in view of Chism , further in view of US 2015/0076347A1 [hereinafter Ominami ] . Regarding Claim 9 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 1. However, the combined references do not specially note that the sample is disposed in the atmosphere, the charged particle source is disposed in a lens barrel, and the charged particle beam penetrates the partition wall, and the sample is irradiated with the charged particle beam. Ominami teaches: the sample is disposed in the atmosphere (Fig. 1 shows sample 6 is placed in an atmospheric pressure second space), the charged particle source is disposed in a lens barrel (Fig. 1 -2) including a partition wall (Fig. 1-10) for maintaining the charged particle source in a vacuum atmosphere (Fig. 1, paras. [0027-0028]: “the interior of the charged particle optical column 2 and the first housing are evacuated to a vacuum”; and “The charged particle optical column 2 includes elements such as a charged particle source 0”), and the charged particle beam penetrates the partition wall, and the sample is irradiated with the charged particle beam (para. [0034]: “the thin film 10 is located immediately below the charged particle optical column 2… allows a primary charged particle beam emitted from the bottom end of the charged particle optical column 2 to penetrate or pass therethrough, so that the primary charged particle beam finally reaches the sample 6 through the thin film 10”). Nishimura teaches a charged particle inspection apparatus for semiconductor samples. Chism teaches using detected optical signal from the sample to determine semiconductor film/interface properties. Ominami teaches a known arrangement in which the charged particle column/source side is kept in vacuum while the sample is disposed in an atmospheric-pressure space. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the Nishimura-Chism inspection device with Ominami ’s atmospheric-pressure charged particle arrangement, to permit charged particle irradiation of a sample without requiring the sample itself to be placed in the vacuum column. This would have been a predictable use of a known atmospheric-pressure charged particle configuration to inspect samples under atmospheric conditions while maintaining the charged particle source in a suitable vacuum environment . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura in view of Chism , further in view of US 2002/0008536A1 [hereinafter Miller ] . Regarding Claim 10 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 1. However, the combined references do not specially note that the sample and the charged particle source are disposed in the atmosphere, and the charged particle source is an electrode that generates ions by corona discharge. Miller teaches: the sample and the charged particle source are disposed in the atmosphere (as shown in Fig. 2, the sample 18 and the charged particle source 26 are in direct contact with the atmosphere), and the charged particle source is an electrode that generates ions by corona discharge (paras. [0014-0015]: “a contactless calibrated corona discharge source or gun 26 for depositing corona charges,” including “one or more needles 38 and an electrode housing 40”). Nishimura teaches a charged particle inspection apparatus for semiconductor samples. Chism teaches using detected optical signal from the sample to determine semiconductor film/interface properties. Miller teaches a contactless corona discharge source having electrode needles for depositing corona charges on wafer in atmosphere. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the Nishimura-Chism inspection device with Miller ’s corona-discharge source as an alternative known charged particle source for controlling the sample charge condition in the Nishimura-Chism system when an atmospheric, contactless charging arrangement is desired, yielding the predictable result of generating ions in atmosphere and plying them to the sample without requiring a charge particle column or vacuum barrel around the source . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura in view of Chism , further in view of US 2014/0021350A1 [hereinafter Nishihama ] . Regarding Claim 11 : Nishimura in view of Chism teaches the inspection device according to claim 1. Chism further teaches wherein the sample is irradiated with the first light from a direction perpendicular to the film formed on the sample (Fig. 2 and para. [0046]: pump beam 5 and probe beam 6 are made collinear via beam splitters 7 and 8, and focused onto sample in a perpendicular direction to the sample, as illustrated in Fig. 2) However, the combined references do not specially note that the sample is irradiated with the charged particle beam obliquely with respect to the film formed on the sample. Nishihama teaches the sample is irradiated with the charged particle beam obliquely with respect to the film formed on the sample (para. [0036]: “The SEM of this embodiment further includes a beam tilting deflector 805 shown in FIG. 8, which is provided for irradiating an electron beam while obliquely inclining or tilting the beam with respect to its ideal light axis 802”). Nishimura teaches a charged particle inspection apparatus for semiconductor samples. Chism teaches irradiating the sample with first/probe light. Nishihama teaches using a beam-tilting deflector to irradiate a sample with an electron beam obliquely relative to the beam axis. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the Nishimura-Chism inspecting device with Nishihama ’s beam tilting technique, so that the optical probe light path and the charged particle beam path can be arranged at different angels while still irradiating the same sample region, allowing the optical beam to remain normal to the sample for optical detection while the charged particle beam is introduced from an oblique direction, providing the predictable result of permitting both optical inspection and charged particle irradiation without requiring both beams to share the same normal axis . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura in view of Chism , and Nishihama, further in view of US 4957358A [hereinafter Terada ] Regarding Claim 12 : Nishimura in view of Chism and Nishihama teaches the inspection device according to claim 11 . Nishimura teaches control electrode 24 located near the sample (Fig. 1). However, the combined the references do not specially note that an optical lens configured to focus the first light, and wherein a conductive film serving as the charge control electrode is formed on a surface of the optical lens on a sample side. Terada teaches forming a conductive film on the surface of the optical member, such as am optical lens (See. Fig. 1; 3: 29-33 and 4:59-66). As such, the modified device implements Nishimura ’s change control electrode as Terada ’s conductive film formed on the sample-side surface of the optical lens, so that the same optical member on the light path can focus the first light toward the sample while the conductive film provides the charge control function near the sample, as recited in claim 12. Nishimura teaches placing a charge control electrode near a sample to control the sample’s charge/electric field condition. Terada teaches that a conductive film may be formed on an optical lens. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the Nishimura-Chism inspecting device by implementing Nishimura ’s charge control electrode as Terada ’s conductive film formed optical lens, to allow the optical lens to focus/transmit the first light toward the sample while the conductive film provides the charge control electrode function near the sample, providing charge/electric field control in the optical path without substantially obstructing the first light, yielding the predictable result of combining optical focusing and charged control in a compact structure Regarding Claim 13 : Nishimura in view of Chism and Nishihama teaches the inspection device according to claim 11. Nishimatsu teaches the charge control electrode is a transparent electrode disposed between the optical lens and the sample (Fig. 9 depicts a transparent electrode 3b located between a glass plate 7 and the film 2 formed on semiconductor substrate 1). However, the combined references do not specially note that an optical lens configured to focus the first light. Terada in view of Nishimura in view of Chism teaches an optical lens configured to focus the first light (as discussed in claim 12, in the modified system, the optical lens as taught in Terada can be placed on the light path of Chism ). Nishimura teaches placing a charge control electrode near a sample to control the sample’s charge/electric field condition. Nishimatsu teaches using a transparent electrode near a sample so that light can pass through the electrode while a bias voltage is applied to control the sample surface potential. Terada teaches that a conductive film may be formed on an optical lens. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the Nishimura- Chism inspecting device by implementing Nishimatsu ’s transparent electrode as the charge control electrode and Terada ’s conductive film formed optical lens, so that light can pass through the electrode while a bias voltage is applied to control the sample surface potential, allowing the first light focused by the optical lens to reach there ample while still providing electric field/charge control near the sample, yielding the predictable result of a known transparent-electrode structure to maintain optical access while applying an electrical control field to the sample . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura in view of Chism , further in view of US 2006/0289755A1 [hereinafter Koyama ] . Regarding Claim 14 : Nishimura teaches an inspection device for inspecting a film quality of a film formed on a sample (2: 66-67 and 3:1-2: “an apparatus for inspecting or measuring a sample based on charged-particle beam imaging... sample which has an insulation film”), the inspection device comprising: a first light source configured to irradiate the sample with first light (Fig. 1- “laser irradiation optical system” of 19) configured to irradiate the sample with first light (5: 58-60: “height measuring device 19 consists of a laser irradiation optical system for projecting a laser beam in an oblique direction to the sample 16”); a photodetection system configured to detect signal light generated when the sample is irradiated with the first light (Fig. 1- “detection optical system” of 19) configured to detect signal light generated when the sample is irradiated with the first light (5: 60-62: “height measuring device 19 consists of…and a detection optical system including a linear image sensor which detects the shift position of the reflected light from the sample surface”); a charge control electrode (Fig. 1-24) configured to control an electric field on the sample (5:45-46 and 6: 52-53: “a grid electrode 24 disposed near the sample 16”, and “grid potential adjusting device 25 adjusts the potential of the grid electrode 24”); a fourth light source (Fig. 1-31) configured to irradiate the sample with fourth light to generate photoelectrons (6: 3-16: “The UV light source 31…to emit a UV light having a wavelength of…to irradiate the insulation film of SiO, SiN, etc. on the sample16…thereby causing charges on the insulation film to flow out…”) a control device configured to control a voltage applied to the charge control electrode, and the fourth light source to modulate an electronic state of the sample (6: 49-53 and 15: 40-41; 51-54: the general controller 8 “adjusts the potential of the grid electrode 24” via “grid potential adjusting device 25” and “operates on the UV irradiation controller 32 in advance of electron detection to activate the UV light source 31”). Nishimura teaches the electron detector 14 detects electrons released from the sample 16 and thereby producing a two-dimensional electron image of the sample, from which the defects can be analyzed by an image process 28 (see Fig. 1 and 7:13-19 of Nishimura ). However, Nishimura does not specially note that a third light source configured to irradiate the charge control electrode with third light to generate photoelectron, the third light source is controlled by the control device, and estimate the film quality of the film formed on the sample based on a detection signal of the signal light modulated, the detection signal being output from the photodetection system. Koyama teaches a third light source configured to irradiate the charge control electrode with third light to generate photoelectrons, and the third light source is controlled by the control device (Fig. 4 and paras. [0066, 0069 and 0072]: the ultraviolet light source 1 irradiate ultraviolet light to the charge control electrode 4 to emit photoelectrons. The ultraviolet light source 1 is controlled by the control system unit 60). Chism teaches using photo-reflectance (PR) signal to determine thin film physical properties such as strain ([0012]). Specifically, Chism teaches estimate the film quality of the film formed on the sample based on a detection signal of the signal light modulated, the detection signal being output from the photodetection system (Fig. 2 and paras. [0045-0048]: teaches a pump beam (from pump lase 5) to modulate the samples reflectance/electronic condition, while a probe beam (from probe laser 6) is directed to the same sample region for irradiation and reflected from the sample. The reflected probe light is detected by a photodetector/photodiode 12, and the detected signal represents the pump-induce change in reflectance so the strain in thin films can be inspected). Nishimura teaches a charged-particle inspection apparatus for semiconductor samples with an insulation film, where the sample charge/electric-field condition is controlled by controlling the beam-source potential, grid electrode potential, and UV irradiation. Chism teaches using pump/probe light to inspect semiconductor film quality by detecting reflected probe light from the sample and analyzing the detected optical signal. Koyama teaches irradiating a charge control electrode with ultraviolet light to generate photoelectrons. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to apply the optical film-quality inspection technique taught by Chism , to the charged particle inspection system of Nishimura with Koyama ’s photoelectron-based charge control technique, as another known way to control or modulate the sample’s charge/electric field condition during optical film quality inspection, allowing the system to control the sample electronic state through light-induced photoelectron emission, while Chism ’s optical detection analyzes the resulting film responses, such a modification is a predictable use of a known photoelectron charge control technique to provide controllable sample charging/electric field modulation for film quality inspection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2504. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:00. 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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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. /JING WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2881 /WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 2 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 3 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 4 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 5 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 6 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 7 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 8 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 9 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 10 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 11 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 12 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 13 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 14 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 15 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 16 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 17 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 18 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 19 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 20 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 21 Art Unit: 2881 Application/Control Number: 18/722,800 Page 22 Art Unit: 2881
Prosecution Insights