Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/727,975

OPTICAL APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Examiner
ASFAW, MESFIN T
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Asml Netherlands B.V.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
794 granted / 961 resolved
+14.6% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
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
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
§102
38.3%
-1.7% 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

§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 10, 2024 has been entered. Claims 16-30 are pending in this application. Claim Objections Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 16 line 1, the statement “An optical apparatus for a reticle stage of a lithographic apparatus,” is not clearly stated as to what it stands for or what apparatus is the Applicant trying to claim. The Examiner suggests the statement to read as - - An optical apparatus of a reticle, on a reticle stage of a lithographic apparatus, - - or similarly descriptive statement. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 16-24 and 26-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinger et al. [US 20140285783 A1, hereafter Dinger] in view of Hakvoort et al. [US 20180164581 A1, hereafter Hakvoort]. As per Claims 16 and 28, Dinger teaches an optical apparatus 1100 (See fig. 11) for a reticle stage (object field in the object plane 1150) of a lithographic apparatus, the optical apparatus comprising: a reflective optical element (an EUV mirror arrangement 100) comprising a surface configured to receive radiation (See fig. 1, Para 69); at least two electrodes (a first electrode layer 142 and a second electrode layer 143) located at the surface (Para 74). Dinger does not explicitly teach a measurement system configured to measure one or more electrical characteristics of the reflective optical element between the at least two electrodes. Hakvoort teaches the resistance measurement can be performed by measuring a current flow Ii from the first electrode 9a through the interconnection arrangement 10 to the second electrode 9b and can be calculated to Ri by Ri=(Va−Vb)/Ii. Measuring the temperature distribution provides an estimation of a source for wavefront errors and thus may be used as a feedback-signal for the mirror arrangement 1 (See fig. 1, Para 91). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the measurement system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to avoid an imaging degradation due to wavefront error. As per Claim 17, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 16. Hakvoort further disclosed wherein the one or more electrical characteristics comprises at least one of: a capacitance; a resistance; an inductance; and/or a frequency response (See fig. 1, Para 91). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the measurement system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to avoid an imaging degradation due to wavefront error. As per Claim 18, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 16. Dinger further disclosed wherein the reflective optical element 100 comprises a plurality of layers 130 and the at least two electrodes (142, 143) extend through the plurality of layers (See fig. 1). As per Claim 19, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 18. Dinger further disclosed wherein the reflective optical element is configured as a distributed Bragg reflector configured to reflect extreme ultraviolet radiation (Para 76). As per Claim 20, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 18. Hakvoort further disclosed comprising at least one electrode disposed on each layer of the reflective optical element, and wherein the measurement system is configured to measure one or more electrical characteristics of each layer of the reflective optical element (See fig. 1, Para 91). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the measurement system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to avoid an imaging degradation due to wavefront error. As per Claim 21, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 16. Hakvoort further disclosed wherein the measurement system is configured to perform a plurality of measurements taken at different times of the one or more electrical characteristics of the reflective optical element to identify a degradation in reflectivity of the reflective optical element (See fig. 1, Para 91, for example, after each wafer swap, typically every 20 seconds). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the measurement system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to avoid an imaging degradation due to wavefront error. As per Claims 22 and 30, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 16. Hakvoort further disclosed comprising two or more electrodes located at the surface, wherein the measurement system is configured to measure the one or more electrical characteristics of the reflective optical element between pairs of the two or more electrodes (Para 91). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the feedback system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to avoid an imaging degradation due to wavefront error As per Claims 23 and 29, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the optical apparatus of claim 22. Hakvoort further disclosed wherein the measurement system is configured to determine a reflectivity profile of the reflective optical element based, at least in part, on measurements of the one or more electrical characteristics between the two or more electrodes (Para 43). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the measurement system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to avoid an imaging degradation due to wavefront error As per Claim 24, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches a lithographic apparatus comprising the optical apparatus of claim 16 (See Dinger fig. 11). As per Claim 26, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches a lithographic system comprising an EUV radiation source (a primary radiation source 1114) and a lithographic apparatus of claim 24 (See Dinger fig. 11). As per Claim 27, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the lithographic system of claim 26. Hakvoort further disclosed comprising a further system communicably coupled to the measurement system, wherein the further system is configured to adjust an intensity and/or a profile of a beam of radiation for exposing a substrate based, at least in part, on the measured one or more electrical characteristics of the reflective optical element (Para 32 and 91). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the feedback system of Hakvoort in the optical element of Dinger in order to improve quality of image transfer. Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinger in view of Hakvoort as applied above, further in view of Vles et al. [US 20210208500 A1, hereafter Vles]. As per Claim 25, Dinger in view of Hakvoort teaches the lithographic apparatus of claim 24. Dinger in view of Hakvoort does not explicitly teach comprising the reticle stage configured to hold a reticle, wherein the reflective optical element is mounted on or embedded in the reticle stage and configured to reflect the radiation towards a radiation sensor. Vles teaches the sensor assembly may comprise: a radiation source configured to couple a radiation beam into the pellicle such that radiation is transmitted along the pellicle; and a radiation sensor configured to receive radiation which is reflected back through the pellicle or to receive radiation which is transmitted through the pellicle, a change in the reflected or transmitted radiation received by the sensor being indicative of damage to the pellicle (Para 34). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the sensor element as disclosed by Vles in the exposure system of Dinger as modified by Hakvoort in order to improve quality of image transfer by reducing the impact of mirror degradation. 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 10, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 30, 2026
Response Filed

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
99%
With Interview (+26.9%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 961 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month