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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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, 5-6, 17, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Urano et al. (US Pub. 2010/0004875 A1, hereinafter "Urano").
Claim 1: Urano teaches An information processing apparatus comprising a processor (“Urano”, Fig. 1, [0062], signal processing section 105 and overall control unit 53 process inspection data; display unit 54 and input unit 55 provide user I/O),
wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a display selection instruction from an operation unit operated by a user (“Urano”, Figs. 13A-13B, [0089], the user designates a defect type or size range through input unit 55. That designation determines which defects are displayed);
acquire discontinuity information that is information related to a discontinuity of a component and includes positional information of the discontinuity on the component (“Urano”, [0068], detected defect type and size are associated with the defect’s position (defect coordinate));
acquire an occurrence position distribution of the discontinuity based on the discontinuity information (“Urano”, Figs. 13A-13B, [0089], steps 1301-1310, extracts defects satisfying the user selected type/size and obtains their “detection position distribution (defect map) on the object); and
display the occurrence position distribution on an image of the component in response to the display selection instruction (“Urano”, Figs. 13A-13B, and 17A-17B, [0089], [0094], display unit 54 displays the selected defects as a defect map on the inspected object/sample representation. Fig. 17B shows the resulting defect map by defect type after GUI selection/reprocessing).
Claim 5: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the discontinuity is detected by transmission of radiation (“Urano”, Fig. 1, [0063]-[0064], [0066]-[0069], detecting a discontinuity by transmitting electromagnetic radiation, visible or infrared laser light into the component and detecting the resulting scattered radiation).
Claim 6: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the processor is configured to display the discontinuity information in relation to the occurrence position distribution (“Urano”, Figs. 17A-17B, [0068], [0094], displays discontinuity information such as defect type, size, review image and feature information).
Claim 17: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the image is a radiation image of the component, a plurality of the radiation images subjected to registration, or a design drawing of the component (“Urano”, Fig. 1, [0063]-[0064], [0066]-[0069], detecting a discontinuity by transmitting electromagnetic radiation, visible or infrared laser light into the component and detecting the resulting scattered radiation).
Claim 23: claim 23 is directed to An information processing method for implementing the method steps of claim 1. Therefore, claim 23 is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 24: claim 24 is directed to A non-transitory, computer-readable tangible recording medium for implementing the method steps of claim 23. Therefore, claim 24 is rejected under similar rationale.
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 2-4, 7, 9-12, 15-16, 18-19, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US Pub. 2010/0004875 A1, hereinafter "Urano") in view of HORI (US 2011/0025844 A1, hereinafter "Hori").
Claim 2: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, including displaying an occurrence position distribution of detected discontinuities (“Urano”, Figs. 13A-13B, and 17A-17B, [0089], [0094], display unit 54 displays the selected defects as a defect map on the inspected object/sample representation. Fig. 17B shows the resulting defect map by defect type after GUI selection/reprocessing). Urano does not expressly teach that
wherein the display selection instruction gives an instruction for positions of arrangement of a plurality of the components.
Hori explicitly teaches wherein the display selection instruction gives an instruction for positions of arrangement of a plurality of the components (“Hori”, Figs. 44-46, Fig. 55; [0299], displays sixteen blades (components) at respective positions in a blade arrangement illustration; [0301],[0314], receives a user instruction by pressing a blade at a selected position; and [0315]-[0316], determines the selected blade number based on the position on the arrangement illustration designated by the user).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Hori’s arrangement position selection interface into Urano’s defect map system so a user could select one or more arranged components by position and display the corresponding defect distributions, thereby facilitating efficient inspection of repeatedly arranged components.
Claim 3: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the arrangement has a component in time (“Hori”, Figs. 7, 20; [0203], [0208], [0211]-[0214], performs date and time selection).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s discontinuity distribution display using Hori’s date-and-time organization and selection functionality so that a user could retrieve and display the discontinuity distribution associated with a component inspected at a selected time, thereby facilitating review and comparison of component conditions over different inspection periods.
Claim 4: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the time is related to manufacturing or inspection of the component (“Hori”, Fig. 1, [0110], Hori teaches a blade-inspection system; [0203], [0208], [0211]-[0214]).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s discontinuity distribution display using Hori’s date-and-time organization and selection functionality so that a user could retrieve and display the discontinuity distribution associated with a component inspected at a selected time, thereby facilitating review and comparison of component conditions over different inspection periods.
Claim 7: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, Urano further teaches the display selection instruction is received by the user interface display defect information and a defect position distribution (“Urano”, [0062], [0068], and [0092]-[0094]).
Urano does not explicitly teach that the GUI indicates and receives selection of a point in time associated with component inspection. Hori explicitly teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform a user interface display indicating a point in time of manufacturing of the component or inspection of the component on a display unit, and the display selection instruction is received by the user interface display and is composed of the point in time of manufacturing of the component or inspection of the component (“Hori”, [0148]-[0150], [0203], [0208], and [0211]-[0214], GUI includes date-and-time selection box 724, which displays record start dates and times for respective blade inspection images sets).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include Hori’s date-and-time selection interface so that a user could retrieve and display the discontinuity distribution associated with a component inspected at a selected time, thereby facilitating review and comparison of component conditions over different inspection periods.
Claim 9: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the processor is configured to also display the discontinuity information on the user interface display (“Urano”, Figs. 17A-17B, [0068], [0092], [0094], displays the inspection results as a defect map and defect size distribution).
Claim 10: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the discontinuity information displayed on the user interface display is the number of discontinuities or a total area of the discontinuities (“Urano”, Figs. 13A-13B, [0089], Steps 1305-1310, after defects are selected according to defect type or size, “the number of the defects,” a defect position distribution, or a size distribution is displayed on display unit 54; [0094], Figs. 17A-17B).
Claim 11: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the discontinuity information is displayed on the user interface display according to a set reference value (“Urano”, [0088], a defect is determined to belong to the designated defect type when its evaluated similarity exceeds a designated decision threshold value constitutes the claimed “set reference value”).
Figs. 13A-13B, [0089]; [0094], Figs. 17A-17B).
Claim 12: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the discontinuity information includes information on a type of the discontinuity, and the user interface display displays the discontinuity information for each type of the discontinuity (“Urano”, [0068], [0092]-[0094], Figs. 16, 17A-17B).
Claim 15: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, however, Urano does not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by Hori who teaches wherein the display of the occurrence position distribution is movable (“Hori”, [0474]-[0478], Figs. 99-100, permits the user to move the displayed composite blade image using scroll bar).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include Hori’s the display of the occurrence position distribution is movable. Such modification would improve inspection efficiency by allowing closer examination of particular defect locations while preserving the ability to review the overall defect distribution.
Claim 16: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, however, Urano does not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by Hori who teaches wherein the display of the occurrence position distribution is enlargeable or reducible (“Hori”, [0299]-[0301] and [0314]-[0317], Figs. 44-46, when the user presses a selected blade, obtains its blade number and displays the corresponding blade image).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include Hori’s the display of the occurrence position distribution is enlargeable or reducible. Such modification would improve inspection efficiency by allowing closer examination of particular defect locations while preserving the ability to review the overall defect distribution.
Claim 18: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, however, Urano does not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by Hori who teaches wherein the display selection instruction is a selection of the component to be displayed (“Hori”, [0470]-[0472], Figs. 95-96, permits switching between display of entire composite image and only a partial composite image).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include Hori’s the display selection instruction is a selection of the component to be displayed. Such modification would improve inspection efficiency by allowing closer examination of particular defect locations while preserving the ability to review the overall defect distribution.
Claim 19: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, however, Urano does not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by Hori who teaches wherein the occurrence position distribution is displayed as an occurrence region (“Hori”, [0254]-[0258], and [0279]-[0281], Figs. 33 & 38, superimposes the resulting defect region/contour on the blade image).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include Hori’s the occurrence position distribution is displayed as an occurrence region. Such modification would improve inspection efficiency by allowing closer examination of particular defect locations while preserving the ability to review the overall defect distribution.
Claim 22: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 19, however, Urano does not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by Hori who teaches wherein the occurrence region is a region formed from a boundary line based on the discontinuity information (“Hori”, [0254]-[0258], and [0280]-[0281], Figs. 33 & 38, extracts the contour of a remaining blob as a defect contour, records its coordinates, and superimposes that contour on the component image).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include Hori’s the occurrence region is a region formed from a boundary line based on the discontinuity information. Such modification would improve inspection efficiency by allowing closer examination of particular defect locations while preserving the ability to review the overall defect distribution.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US Pub. 2010/0004875 A1, hereinafter "Urano") in view of JP2000200358A.
Claim 8: Urano teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, however, Urano does not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by JP2000200358A who teaches wherein the processor is configured to perform a user interface display indicating a manufacturing number of the component on a display unit, and the display selection instruction is received by the user interface display and is composed of the manufacturing number (“JP2000200358A”, page 4, performs a user interface display indicating a manufacturing number of the component, including lot No. 1039 and wafer No. 1040 (correspondence to a manufacturing number identifying an individual component).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include JP2000200358A’s to perform a user interface display indicating a manufacturing number of the component on a display unit, and the display selection instruction is received by the user interface display and is composed of the manufacturing number so that allow a user to identify a particular component or manufacturing lot and efficiently retrieve its corresponding discontinuity information and occurrence position distribution.
Claims 13-14 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US Pub. 2010/0004875 A1, hereinafter "Urano") in view of HORI (US 2011/0025844 A1, hereinafter "Hori"), and further in view of JP2000200358A.
Claim 13: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, however, Urano and Hori do not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by JP2000200358A who teaches wherein the display selection instruction selects a period on the user interface display, and the occurrence position distribution corresponding to the period is displayed on the image (“JP2000200358A”, Figs. 17 & 20, page 5, displaying the corresponding occurrence position distribution as a foreign matter map showing defect positions on the wafer, based on defect coordinate data retrieved according to the selected inspection date).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include JP2000200358A’s to the display selection instruction selects a period on the user interface display, and the occurrence position distribution corresponding to the period is displayed on the image so that a user could retrieve and display the discontinuity distribution associated with a component inspected at a selected time, thereby facilitating review and comparison of component conditions over different inspection periods.
Claim 14: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, however, Urano and Hori do not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by JP2000200358A who teaches wherein the user interface display is a timeline bar (“JP2000200358A”, Fig. 17, 29-30, page 5, a time series defect graph having horizontal time axis selectable by wafer, lot, day, week, or month, with horizontal scrolling by mouse).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include JP2000200358A’s to the user interface display is a timeline bar so that a user could retrieve and display the discontinuity distribution associated with a component inspected at a selected time, thereby facilitating review and comparison of component conditions over different inspection periods.
Claim 20: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 19, however, Urano and Hori do not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by JP2000200358A who teaches wherein the occurrence region is a region in which positions of respective discontinuities are aggregated based on the discontinuity information (“JP2000200358A”, page 5, each defect coordinate is assigned to a corresponding chip region, and the defects belonging to each chip region are counted).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include JP2000200358A’s wherein the occurrence region is a region in which positions of respective discontinuities are aggregated based on the discontinuity information so that enable a user to more efficiently identify component regions having concentrated defect occurrences.
Claim 21: Urano and Hori teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 19, however, Urano and Hori do not explicitly teach the following feature, taught by JP2000200358A who teaches wherein the occurrence region is a region in which occurrence frequency of discontinuities are displayed in density based on the discontinuity information (“JP2000200358A”, page 5, displaying the defect adhesion condition by changing the fill color or adding a mesh pattern according to the number of foreign substances in each chip).
It would have been obvious to one having the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Urano’s defect distribution GUI to include JP2000200358A’s the occurrence region is a region in which occurrence frequency of discontinuities are displayed in density based on the discontinuity information so that allow a user to quickly distinguish high and low defect density regions and would improve visual analysis of the discontinuity position distribution.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Numata et al. (U.S. 2006/0093082 A1) discloses method of inspection for inner defects of an object and apparatus for the same.
Worster et al. (U.S. Patent 5,479,252 A1) discloses laser imaging system for inspection and analysis of sub-micron particles.
Examiner has cited particular columns and line and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Point of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1300. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-4:00 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, William Bashore can be reached at 571-272-4088. 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.
/PHUONG H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights