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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “if” in line 1 should be removed and the word “calculates” in line 3 should be changed to --calculate--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 2, 3, and 5 recites the limitation "the distance". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The reference to “the distance” appears to be referencing “a distance between the reference portion and the reference mark on the stage changes due to a temperature of the stage” initially recited in claim 2. However, distances are inherent between each of the objects that are claimed which introduces ambiguity as which distance is being referenced. The Examiner suggests the claim be amended to refer the first instance of “a distance” as --a first distance-- and all subsequent references to “the difference” be changed to --the first distance--. This interpretation is relied upon for examination.
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.
Claims 1 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taniguchi [US 2002/0006561].
For claims 1 and 12, Taniguchi teaches an exposure apparatus and associated control method (see Fig. 1) for exposing a substrate (W) through a projection optical system (PL), the apparatus comprising:
a stage (13, 14) configured to move while holding the substrate;
an image capturing device (12) configured to capture an image of a mark on the substrate without going through the projection optical system (see [0056]);
a measurement device (16) configured to measure a position of the stage (gathers the XY coordinates provided to the controller 19, see [0044]); and
a controller (19) configured to control alignment of the substrate based on a position of the mark (wafer mark coordinates, see [0057]) and interval information (base line amount, see [0058]), the position of the mark being obtained by using the image capturing device and the measurement device (wafer mark coordinates, see [0057]), and the interval information indicating an interval between an optical axis of the image capturing device and an optical axis of the projection optical system (base line amount, see [0058]),
wherein the controller is configured to: at a first timing at which the interval information is generated, cause the measurement device to measure, as a first position, a position of the stage in a predetermined state in which a reference mark on the stage is arranged within a visual field of the image capturing device (base line amount measurement using mark 42 measured by sensor 12 and using XY coordinates, see [0061]-[0062]); and
at a second timing after the first timing, cause the measurement device to measure, as a second position, a position of the stage in the predetermined state, and correct the interval information based on a difference between the first position and the second position (Base line amount measurement is performed periodically, difference between the measurement result and the original base line amount is an image shift amount. This value is used as an offset to adjust the image-forming position, see [0076]).
For claim 10, Taniguchi teaches the predetermined state is a state in which the reference mark is arranged at a predetermined position within the visual field of the image capturing device (image of mark 42 measured by the alignment sensor 12, see Fig. 3).
For claim 11, Taniguchi teaches the predetermined position is a visual field center of the image capturing device (image of mark 42 measured by the alignment sensor 12, see Fig. 3).
For claim 13, Taniguchi teaches a method of manufacturing an article, the method comprising: exposing a substrate by controlling an exposure apparatus using a control method defined in claim 12; processing the substrate having undergone the exposing; and manufacturing an article from the substrate having undergone the processing (a pattern on a mask onto a photosensitive substrate in a photolithographic process for manufacturing a semiconductor device, see [0001] and [0002]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Nishi [US 2002/0135776] teaches in Figs. 12 and 16 correcting base-line error due deformation of the reference surface 7X by measuring the reference mark groups on reference plate 6.
Magome [US 6,160,619] teaches in Figs. 5A-5B and col. 17 line 46 - col. 20 line 17 determining base-line error correction by comparing the difference between two marks 30-1 and 30-2.
Ota et al. [US 6,645,701] teaches in Figs. 9 and 11-12 using temperature sensors on the wafer stage to recognize wafer stage standby position so that wafer stage is maintained at temperature equilibrium so that the movable mirror of the interferometer is maintain in a state where measurement accuracy can be assured.
Arai [US 2009/0213357] teaches in [0074] that errors in the baseline value are caused by the fluctuation in the relative positional relationship between the first reference mark FM1 and the reflection surface 51X and the change in the relative positions owing to the thermal expansion or the like of the measurement table becomes larger as the distance therebetween is longer. Therefore, errors owing to the thermal expansion or the like of the measurement table are made as small as possible by disposing the first reference mark FM1 and near the reflection surface 51X, whereby errors in the baseline values are reduced.
The previously cited prior art fails to teach alone or in combination: a distance between the reference portion and the reference mark on the stage changes due to a temperature of the stage, and the controller is configured to obtain a distance difference which is a difference in the distance between the first timing and the second timing, based on a temperature difference which is a difference between a temperature of the stage at the first timing and a temperature of the stage at the second timing, and further correct the interval information by the obtained distance difference, as recited in claim 2. Claims 3-9 depend therefrom.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven H Whitesell whose telephone number is (571)270-3942. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM (MST).
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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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.
/Steven H Whitesell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759