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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 04/21/2026 has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 1-11 are pending. Applicant’s amendment to the claims have overcome 112(a)/112(f) rejection/interpretation previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/05/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1-5, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwatani (WO 2021065591 A1), in view of at least one of Kawasaki (US 2020/0089108 A1 – of record), or Hirano (US 2019/0255760 A1 – of record).
Regarding claims 1-2, Iwatani discloses a flattening device and method – (construed as a planarization apparatus and method). The recitation “apparatus configured to perform a planarization process of forming a planar layer on a substrate by bringing a planar surface of a template into contact with a curable composition on the substrate and then curing the curable composition” has not been given patentable weight because the recitation occurs in the preamble. A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See MPEP 2111.02
The device is configured to have a substrate transport mechanism 204 – (corresponds to a substrate transport unit) including a transport hand 202 configured to adsorb and transport the substrate or the template, see page 49 paragraph 5; a mold drive mechanism 308 which holds a mold holding portion 302, see page 50 paragraph 2, page 53 paragraph 9 – (construed as a first holding unit configured to hold the substrate or the template transported by the substrate transport unit; and the first holding unit includes a template holding unit that holds the template in the planarization process); a substrate stage 305 which holds a substrate holding unit 340, see page 51 paragraph 3 – (construed as a second holding portion configured to receive the substrate or the template held by the first holding unit from the first holding unit and to hold the substrate or the template after transfer from the first holding unit in a state where the substrate or the template is no longer held by the first holding unit; and the second holding unit includes a substrate holding unit that holds the substrate in the planarization process).
While Iwatani discloses the use of an alignment mechanism; it does not explicitly disclose the alignment mechanism is configured to measure a position of the substrate or the template held by the second holding unit in a plane direction, wherein the measuring unit obtains an amount of positional shift of the position from a reference position.
Kawasaki discloses a planarization apparatus. The apparatus being configured to use an alignment scope 23 for observing a reference mark provided on a substrate stage 3 and an alignment mark provided on a mold 11. And for measuring the positional deviation therebetween, see [0027] – (construed as the measuring unit is configured to measure a position of the substrate or the template held by the second holding unit in a plane direction, wherein the measuring unit obtains an amount of positional shift of the position from a reference position).
Hirano discloses a planarized layer forming apparatus. The apparatus is configured to perform an alignment between a mold 18 and a substrate stage 7 that is performed based on the measurement result of an alignment measurement device 12. This includes a mark (alignment mark) detected by the alignment measurement device formed on the substrate stage 7 as a dedicated reference mark or may be formed on a dedicated alignment substrate, see [0057]. Further, an off-axis scope is used in a pre-alignment performed with accuracy such that the alignment mark formed in each shot region of the substrate 1 falls within the measurement range of the alignment measurement device in the mark measurement processing (step S107) performed before the mold is brought into contact with the imprint material on the substrate, see [0058].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the alignment mechanism of Iwatani to measure the position of the substrate and mold/template to include positional changes therebetween, as taught by Kawasaki and/or Hirano to ensure alignment between the mold/template and substrate as suggested by Kawasaki [0027] and/or Hirano, [0058].
Regarding claim 3, while the discussion of claim 1, presented the first holding unit as the mold/template and second holding unit as the substrate stage; one of ordinary skill would readily envision the reverse. That is, the first holding unit is the substrate stage 305 which holds a substrate holding unit 340 in the planarization process, and the second holding unit is the mold drive mechanism 308 which holds a mold holding portion 302 in the planarization process.
Regarding claims 4-5, 8, as previously discussed, modified Iwatani discloses alignment is performed for the first time after loading the substrate 1 into the imprint apparatus, the substrate 1 is moved under the off-axis scope 24, and the off-axis scope 24 measures the position of the substrate 1. This pre-alignment is performed with accuracy such that the alignment mark formed in each shot region of the substrate 1 falls within the measurement range of the alignment measurement device 12 in the mark measurement processing performed before the mold 18 is brought into contact with the imprint material on the substrate 1, see Hirano [0058] – (construed as an adjustment of a position of the substrate holding unit, and the substrate held by the substrate holding unit in the plane direction is performed in the planarization process on the basis of the amount of positional shift; and where the adjustment is performed so that the template and the substrate are aligned in the plane direction before the planar surface of the template is brought into contact with the surface of the substrate to which the curable composition is applied; and where the reference position is a position of the substrate held by the substrate holding unit in the plane direction which is measured using the measuring unit after the substrate is transported to the substrate holding unit in the planarization process).
Regarding claim 7, as modified Iwatani discloses the off-axis scope is supported by the alignment scope shelf. The off-axis scope is used for a global alignment process for detecting alignment marks provided in a plurality of shot regions of the substrate to determine the position of each shot region, see Kawasaki [0026]. And where the pre-alignment of the substrate and substrate stage is performed before contact with the template. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide modified Hirano’s planarization apparatus with the claimed functionality since: modified Hirano clearly contemplates such functionality. This being suitable for performing a global alignment scheme.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 9-11 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 6, 9-11 present structure and/or functionality not taught or reasonably suggested by the closest prior art Iwatani, in view of Kawasaki or Hirano, as set forth in the rejection of claims 1-4 above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5, 7-8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 extension fee 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.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CEDRICK S WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571) 272-9776. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached on (571) 270-5545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/CEDRICK S WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights