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
Claims 1, 14, 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:.
In claim 1, line 4, “laser” should be “a laser”.
In claim 1, line 17, “supply operation” should be “a supply operation”.
In claim 14, “differs in accordance with what round of the exhaust operation” is ungrammatical. Examiner suggests “changes depending on the current round of the exhaust operation”.
In claim 19, line 12, “laser” should be “a laser”.
In claim 19, line 25, “supply operation” should be “a supply operation”.
In claim 20, line 12, “laser” should be “a laser”.
In claim 20, line 25, “supply operation” should be “a supply operation”.
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 9-10 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.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “a fourth threshold”, however claim 9 depends directly on claim 1 which does not recite a first, second or third threshold. Amending claim 9 to depend on claim 6 would overcome the rejection.
Claim 10 is rejected for its dependence on claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ueda (US 20210289611 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ueda teaches an extreme ultraviolet light generation chamber device (fig. 2) comprising:
A chamber (10) in which a target substance ([0051]) irradiated with a laser (laser device LD) is turned into plasma and ultraviolet light is generated ([0009]);
A tank (41) configured to store the target substance;
A nozzle (42) having an internal space which communicates with the tank and the chamber;
An exhaust device (exhaust pump 60) configured to exhaust the chamber;
A supply device configured to supply a purge gas to the chamber (purge gas such as argon or nitrogen, [0080]; inherently must be supplied to chamber by some supply device);
A pressure sensor (26) configured to measure a pressure in the chamber; and
A processor (120),
The processor causing, before the target substance is melted, the exhaust device to exhaust a gas from the chamber (exhausting atmospheric air, [0080]), and after the gas is exhausted, performing a supply operation to cause the supply device to supply the purge gas into the chamber and an exhaust operation to cause the exhaust device to exhaust the purge gas from the chamber (purging and exhausting is repeated using a purge gas, [0080]).
Regarding claim 17, Ueda teaches that the gas is atmosphere ([0080]).
Regarding claim 19, Ueda teaches an electronic device manufacturing method ([0002]), comprising:
Outputting extreme ultraviolet light generated using an extreme ultraviolet light generating apparatus including an extreme ultraviolet light generation chamber device (100) to an exposure apparatus (200); and
Exposing a photosensitive substrate to the extreme ultraviolet light in the exposure apparatus to manufacture an electronic device (exposing a workpiece to manufacture a semiconductor, [0048]),
The extreme ultraviolet light generation chamber device comprising:
A chamber (10) in which a target substance ([0051]) irradiated with a laser (laser device LD) is turned into plasma and ultraviolet light is generated ([0009]);
A tank (41) configured to store the target substance;
A nozzle (42) having an internal space which communicates with the tank and the chamber;
An exhaust device (exhaust pump 60) configured to exhaust the chamber;
A supply device configured to supply a purge gas to the chamber (purge gas such as argon or nitrogen, [0080]; inherently must be supplied to chamber by some supply device);
A pressure sensor (26) configured to measure a pressure in the chamber; and
A processor (120),
The processor causing, before the target substance is melted, the exhaust device to exhaust a gas from the chamber (exhausting atmospheric air, [0080]), and after the gas is exhausted, performing a supply operation to cause the supply device to supply the purge gas into the chamber and an exhaust operation to cause the exhaust device to exhaust the purge gas from the chamber (purging and exhausting is repeated using a purge gas, [0080]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 9-10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda.
Regarding claim 9, Ueda teaches that the supply device supplies the purge gas to the chamber. The gas is implicitly supplied at some pressure, so that the act of supplying the gas ensures that the pressure in the chamber will be equal to or higher than some (arbitrary) threshold.
Regarding claim 10, Ueda does not teach that the fourth threshold is 1 atmospheric pressure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to supply the purge gas of Ueda so that the pressure in the chamber is greater than or equal to 1 atmospheric pressure, as a matter of adjusting the purge gas pressure through routine experimentation to optimize the removal of contaminants and atmospheric gases (since one of ordinary skill in the art would be aware that the purge gas amount flow rate is a major factor determining the amount of contaminants, and adjusting a gas pressure is a simple matter for one of ordinary skill in the art). The applicant has not shown that this particular pressure range is critical or produces an unexpected result. (MPEP 2144.05 [R-01.2024]).
Regarding claim 18, the exhausting of the atmospheric gas of Ueda inherently takes some time and the exhaustion of the purge gas inherently takes some time. One of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of independently adjusting the exhaust times through routine experimentation in order to ensure proper removal of both sets of gases, which may result in the times being different from each other.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda in view of Nimi (US 20220141945 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Ueda teaches an electronic device manufacturing method, comprising:
Exposing and transferring a pattern formed on a mask onto a photosensitive substrate (exposing a workpiece, [0048]) by outputting extreme ultraviolet light generated using an extreme ultraviolet light generating apparatus including an extreme ultraviolet light generation chamber (100),
The extreme ultraviolet light generation chamber device comprising:
A chamber (10) in which a target substance ([0051]) irradiated with a laser (laser device LD) is turned into plasma and ultraviolet light is generated ([0009]);
A tank (41) configured to store the target substance;
A nozzle (42) having an internal space which communicates with the tank and the chamber;
An exhaust device (exhaust pump 60) configured to exhaust the chamber;
A supply device configured to supply a purge gas to the chamber (purge gas such as argon or nitrogen, [0080]; inherently must be supplied to chamber by some supply device);
A pressure sensor (26) configured to measure a pressure in the chamber; and
A processor (120),
The processor causing, before the target substance is melted, the exhaust device to exhaust a gas from the chamber (exhausting atmospheric air, [0080]), and after the gas is exhausted, performing a supply operation to cause the supply device to supply the purge gas into the chamber and an exhaust operation to cause the exhaust device to exhaust the purge gas from the chamber (purging and exhausting is repeated using a purge gas, [0080]).
Ueda does not teach inspecting a defect of a mask by irradiating it with the extreme ultraviolet light and selecting a mask using a result of the inspection.
Nimi teaches a method of using an extreme ultraviolet light apparatus to inspect a defect of a mask and select a mask for an exposure process using a result of the inspection ([0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Ueda to include a step of defect inspection and selection of a mask as taught by Nimi, in order to ensure that a desired mask pattern is transferred to a substrate without any defects.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8 and 11-16 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: the prior art does not disclose or make obvious an EUV device in which a processor repeats a purge gas supply and exhaust operation until an oxygen partial pressure in an air gap between a target substance and an inner wall of a nozzle becomes lower than a first threshold.
In the prior art, Ishihara (US 20190159328 A1) teaches preventing tin oxide formation by removing oxygen from the chamber until a particular partial pressure is reached, and Shiraishi (US 20130221587 A1) teaches removing gas from a space above a tank to reduce an oxygen partial pressure, but the references do not teach adjusting the partial pressure of oxygen in a gap between a frozen target material and a nozzle surface. Applicant has discovered that this is a result-effective variable which itself depends on multiple variables (the chamber pressure and the size of the nozzle opening) and must be calculated either before or during the purging process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:30 AM-5:00 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, Robert Kim can be reached at 22293. 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.
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights