Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/725,049

ALIGNMENT METHOD BASED ON HOLOGRAPHIC LITHOGRAPHY, SYSTEM AND DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 02, 2024
Examiner
ASFAW, MESFIN T
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hyper-Optics (Beijing) Technologies Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
794 granted / 961 resolved
+14.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
994
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§112
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 961 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 preliminary amendment filed on July 02, 2024 has been entered. Claims 1-11 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) 1-3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Muraki [US 5182455 A]. As per Claim 1, Muraki teaches an alignment method based on holographic lithography (Column 8 lines 3-29, wherein the grating marks G.sub.R1 and G.sub.R2 of the reticle R are formed in accordance with a holographic method), applied to a holographic lithography system, wherein the holographic lithography system comprises a holographic mask (See fig. 1, the reticle R) and a silicon wafer (the wafer W) sequentially arranged along the transmission direction of an illumination light (See fig. 1), and the method comprises: controlling the illumination light to generate an alignment image after passing through an alignment image area of the holographic mask, wherein the alignment image comprises a first period image (G.sub.R1) and a second period image (G.sub.R2), and the period of the first period image is different from that of the second period image (Column 6 lines 41-61, Denoted at G.sub.R1 and G.sub.R2 are first and second grating marks formed on the reticle R for alignment purposes); obtaining a light intensity corresponding to the first period image and a light intensity corresponding to the second period image generated according to the alignment image (Column 1 lines 38-58, By detecting the intensity of such an interference beam, any relative positional deviation between the reticle and the wafer can be detected); and adjusting a relative position of the silicon wafer and/or the holographic mask to determine an alignment position between the silicon wafer and the holographic mask with respect to the holographic lithography according to a preset alignment condition, wherein the preset alignment condition is that the light intensity corresponding to the first period image and the light intensity corresponding to the second period image are equal and both reach a maximum value (Column 7 line 42 – Column 8 line 2 and Column 12 lines 36-43, the level of this signal, that is, the intensity of the interference beam, is variable, according to depending the relative position of the grating mark G.sub.W with respect to the beam spot formed thereon). As per Claim 2, Muraki teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein: the holographic lithography system further comprises a grating and a light intensity sensor (photoelectric converting element 8) sequentially arranged between the holographic mask and the silicon wafer along the transmission direction of the illumination light (Column 7 line 42 – Column 8 line 2), the grating (G.sub.W) and the silicon wafer W are relatively fixed (See fig. 1), the grating is correspondingly provided with a first alignment area corresponding to the first period image and a second alignment area corresponding to the second period image (the grating marks G.sub.R1 and G.sub.R2 illuminated with the laser beams serve to diffract the received laser beams), the first period image comprises a first period fringe and a second period fringe with the same period, the second period image comprises a third period fringe and a fourth period fringe with the same period (See fig. 4), a length direction of the first period fringe and a length direction of the third period fringe are the same and perpendicular to a length direction of the second period fringe and a length direction of the fourth period fringe (Column 9 lines 39-50), the first alignment area comprises a first alignment grating and a second alignment grating with the same shapes as the first period fringe and the second period fringe respectively, and the second alignment area comprises a third alignment grating and a fourth alignment grating with the same shapes as the third period fringe and the fourth period fringe respectively (Column 9 lines 39-50, The grating lines of the holograms G.sub.R1 and G.sub.R2 are parallel to each other and are oriented in the Y-axis direction. This direction of orientation is perpendicular to the direction of array (X-axis direction) of the chromium patterns forming the holograms G.sub.R1 and G.sub.R2. The direction of array coincides with the direction with respect to which any positional deviation between the reticle R and the wafer W should be detected). As per Claim 3, Muraki teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein obtaining the light intensity corresponding to the first period image and the light intensity corresponding to the second period image generated according to the alignment image comprises (Column 9 lines 15-26): obtaining a light intensity corresponding to the first alignment grating, a light intensity corresponding to the second alignment grating, a light intensity corresponding to the third alignment grating, and a light intensity corresponding to the fourth alignment grating when the illumination light sequentially passes through the alignment image area and the grating (Column 9 lines 39-50). As per Claim 11, Muraki teaches a computer device, comprising a memory and a processor in a communication connection to each other, wherein: computer instructions are stored in the memory, and the processor executes the alignment method based on holographic lithography according to claim 1 by executing the computer instructions (Column 8 lines 48-59). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muraki as applied above, in view of Prosyentsov et al. [US 20130050674 A1, hereafter Prosyentsov]. As per Claim 10, Muraki teaches a holographic lithography system, and the holographic lithography system is configured to implement the alignment method based on holographic lithography according to claim 1, comprising a holographic mask, a grating, a light intensity sensor, and a silicon wafer sequentially arranged along the transmission direction of an illumination light, the light intensity sensor is connected to a computer device (See fig. 1 Column 6 lines 41-61, the photoelectric converting elements 8 and 10 are used in combination with a central processing unit (not shown)). Muraki does not explicitly teach wherein: the grating is fixed on a workpiece table on which the silicon wafer is placed. Prosyentsov teaches a substrate table WT that corresponds with the substrate table shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. An alignment sensor AS is provided in the substrate table WT. The alignment sensor AS includes a grating 1, which is represented schematically by a series of lines. Although only three lines are shown in FIG. 3, the grating 1 may comprise any suitable number of lines. The grating 1 may for instance be a diffraction grating used for alignment (i.e. an alignment grating) (See fig. 3, Para 62). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate an alignment grating on the substrate table in order to improve the alignment accuracy while increasing the amount of device production. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. With regard to claim 4, the prior art of record does not anticipate nor render obvious to one skilled in the art a method as claimed, more specifically the method comprising steps of adjusting a relative position of the silicon wafer and/or the holographic mask in a first direction to determine a first position where the light intensity corresponding to the first alignment grating and the light intensity corresponding to the third alignment grating are equal and both reach a maximum value, wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the length direction of the first period fringe; and adjusting a relative position of the silicon wafer and/or the holographic mask in a second direction to determine a second position where the light intensity corresponding to the second alignment grating and the light intensity corresponding to the fourth alignment grating are equal and both reach a maximum value, wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the length direction of the second period fringe, in combination with the other elements required by claim 4. Claims 5-9 are allowable by virtue of their dependency. Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601981
RETICLE STORAGE POD AND METHOD FOR SECURING RETICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596308
MODULAR WAFER TABLE AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURING THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585194
METHOD AND SWAPPING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578656
EUV LIGHT GENERATION APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578658
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND DEVICES FOR THERMAL CONDITIONING OF RETICLES IN LITHOGRAPHIC APPARATUSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+14.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 961 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month