Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/780,663

EXPOSURE METHOD, DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD, EXPOSURE DEVICE, AND EXPOSURE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 23, 2024
Examiner
KIM, PETER B
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nikon Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
776 granted / 938 resolved
+14.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
972
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 938 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on Sept. 12, 2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Japanese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Objections Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 3 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Claim 1 is directed to the first exposure pattern in the first region and the second exposure pattern in the second region. Claims 2 and 3 are substantial duplicates. 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 6-15 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. Regarding claim 6, it is not clear is “a first exposure pattern”, “a second exposure pattern” and “an exposure pattern” are different from “a first exposure pattern”, “a second exposure pattern” and “an exposure pattern” in claim 1. In order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that they are the same and the indefinite article is replaced with the definite article “the”. Claims 6 and 10, “an exposure device using a mask” is unclear. Is “a mask” different from “a first mask” and “a second mask”? In order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that “using a mask” is redundant and it should be deleted. The remaining claims, not specifically mentioned, are rejected for incorporating the defects from the base claim by dependency. 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) 1-10 and 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara et al. (Nara) (2008/0266539) in view of Hollerbach et al. (Hollerbach) (2020/0159132). Regarding claim 1, Nara discloses an exposure method comprising: forming a first exposure pattern (SH1-SH3, Fig. 13) in a first region in a pattern formation region on a substrate (P, Fig. 13, para 0085-0087); forming a second exposure pattern (SH4, SH5) in a second region spaced apart from the first region (P, Fig. 13) the second region being in the pattern formation region (para 0085-0087). Nara discloses using marks, AM1 and AM2 to determine the position of the exposure pattern to determine the positioning of the next exposure pattern (para 0085, 0087-0089). However, Nara does not disclose forming an exposure pattern in a third region between the first region and the second region based on measurement results of a position of the first exposure pattern and a position of the second exposure pattern. Hollerbach, which is in the same technical field as Nara, discloses a method for attaching wiring connection to a region between two components (Fig. 3, 4, para 0043, 0044) based on measurement results of a position of the two components (Fig. 5-7, para 0045, 0046, 0051, 0052) using microlithography system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide wiring to connect the components manufactured by the process of Nara using the method of Hollerbach in order to provide properly aligned connection between the components. Regarding claims 2 and 3, Nara does not disclose wherein the exposure pattern formed in the third region includes a pattern connected to the first exposure pattern formed in the first region and a pattern connected to the second exposure pattern formed in the second region. Hollerbach discloses in Fig. 4, (see below) the third region includes a pattern connected to a first component in the first region and a pattern connected to a second component in the second region. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select and provide the pattern that connects the first pattern and the second pattern depending on the intended requirement of the design. PNG media_image1.png 292 653 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 4, Nara discloses using SLM (para 0114). However, Nara does not disclose the forming of the exposure pattern in the third region. Hollerbach discloses wherein the forming of the exposure pattern in the third region is performed using an exposure device (Fig. 1A, 1B, 2A-2C) that uses a spatial light modulator (280, 289) that modulates exposure light based on an output from an exposure pattern determination unit (para 0036, 0040). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the exposure pattern in the third reason for the reason stated above of providing properly aligned connection between the components. Regarding claim 5, Nara does not disclose changing the exposure pattern formed in the third region based on the measurement results of the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern. Hollerbach discloses changing the exposure pattern in the third region (Fig. 3 to Fig. 4) based on the measurement results of the position of the first component and the position of the second component (Fig. 5-7, para 0045, 0046, 0051, 0052). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to change the exposure pattern based on the position of the first and second exposure patterns in order to accommodate for the position misalignment of the exposure patterns so that proper connection is made as taught by Hollerbach. Regarding claim 6, Nara discloses wherein the pattern formation region is provided in plural (R1-R3, R4, R5), wherein a first exposure pattern is formed in the first region of each of the pattern formation regions on the substrate with exposure light through a first mask, and a second exposure pattern is formed in the second region spaced apart from the first region in each of the pattern formation regions with exposure light through a second mask (Fig. 6, 7 para 0059, 0060, Fig. 13, para 0085-0087), by using an exposure device using a mask (M, Fig. 6). However, Nara does not disclose wherein an exposure pattern determined based on the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern is formed between the first region and the second region in each of the pattern formation regions with exposure light through a spatial light modulator, by using an exposure device that uses the spatial light modulator that modulates exposure light based on an output from an exposure pattern determination unit. Hallerbach discloses wherein an exposure pattern determined based on the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern is formed between the first region and the second region in each of the pattern formation regions with exposure light through a spatial light modulator (280, 289), by using an exposure device that uses the spatial light modulator that modulates exposure light (Fig. 5-7, para 0045, 0046, 0051, 0052) based on an output from an exposure pattern determination unit (processor, para 0045, Fig. 5-7, compare design data and in-situ data and calculate offset data). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the determination unit and the spatial light modulator of Hallerbach to exposure the region between the first and the second region in a plurality of pattern formation regions in order to readily modify the exposure pattern to accommodate different positioning of the first and the second exposure patterns in all of the pattern formation regions to increase throughput since merely duplicating and repeating the inventive process requires only the routine skill in the art. Regarding claim 7, Nara discloses using SLM (para 0114). However, Nara does not disclose changing the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator based on the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern. Hallerbach discloses changing the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator (280, 289, para 0036, 0040) based on the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern (Fig. 3-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the spatial light modulator of Hallerbach to exposure the region between the first and the second region in order to readily modify the exposure pattern to accommodate different positioning of the first and the second exposure patterns. Regarding claim 8, Nara discloses measuring a position of the first exposure pattern and a position of the second exposure pattern (using AM1 and AM2, para 0085-0088). However, Nara does not disclose wherein the changing of the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator includes changing the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator based on measurement results of the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern. Hallerback discloses wherein the changing of the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator includes changing the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator based on measurement results of the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern (Fig. 5-7, para 0036, 0040, 0045, 0046, 0051, 0052). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the changing of the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator includes changing the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator based on measurement results of the position of the first exposure pattern and the position of the second exposure pattern in order to readily modify the exposure pattern to accommodate different positioning of the first and the second exposure patterns. Regarding claim 9, Nara discloses wherein each of the pattern formation regions includes a first pattern formation region (R1-R3) and a second pattern formation region (R4, R5, Fig. 2, 13). However, Nara does not disclose wherein the exposure pattern formed between the first region and the second region in the first pattern formation region is different from the exposure pattern formed between the first region and the second region in the second pattern formation region. Hallerbach discloses wherein the exposure pattern formed between the first region and the second region in the first pattern formation region is different from the exposure pattern formed between the first region and the second region in the second pattern formation region (Fig. 3, 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to provide the accurate wiring connection which is different in each of the pattern formation region depending on the position of the first and second exposure patterns in the different pattern formation regions. Regarding claim 10, although Nara in view of Hallerbach does not disclose forming a third exposure pattern in a fourth region different from the first region and the second region in each of the pattern formation regions on the substrate with exposure light through a third mask by using an exposure device using a mask, wherein the first region and the second region are adjacent to each other in a first direction along a surface of the substrate, wherein the fourth region is adjacent to the first region in a second direction intersecting the first direction, and wherein the forming of the exposure pattern with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator includes forming the exposure pattern between the first region and the second region adjacent to each other in the first direction with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator, and forming the exposure pattern between the first region and the fourth region adjacent to each other in the second direction with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify Nara by providing a third exposure pattern in the fourth region using a third mask, the third region arranged with respect to the first and the second regions as claimed and forming the exposure pattern between the first region and the fourth region since merely duplicating and repeating the inventive process requires only the routine skill in the art. Regarding claim 13, Nara does not disclose wherein the exposure pattern formed in the third region includes a pattern connected to the first exposure pattern formed in the first region and a pattern connected to the second exposure pattern formed in the second region. Hollerbach discloses in Fig. 4, (see below) the third region includes a pattern connected to a first component in the first region and a pattern connected to a second component in the second region. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select and provide the pattern that connects the first pattern and the second pattern depending on the intended requirement of the design. Regarding claim 14, Nara does not disclose wherein the first exposure pattern and the second exposure pattern and the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator include a wiring pattern, and wherein a width of the wiring pattern is 200 nm or less. Hallerbach discloses wherein the first exposure pattern and the second exposure pattern and the exposure pattern formed with the exposure light through the spatial light modulator include a wiring pattern (Fig. 4-7). Although Hallerbach does not disclose the width of the wiring pattern, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the wiring pattern having width 200 nm or less depending on the intended use. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Nara by forming a wiring pattern as taught by Hallerbach in order to properly align and electrically connect the components. Regarding claim 15 Nara discloses wherein the first exposure pattern is formed by exposing the first region to an image of a pattern formed on the first mask, and wherein the second exposure pattern is formed by exposing the second region to an image of a pattern formed on the second mask different from the first mask (Fig. 6, 7 para 0059, 0060, Fig. 13, para 0085-0087). Regarding claim 16, although Nara in view of Hallerbach does not disclose a device manufacturing method including: processing a surface of the substrate using the first exposure pattern and the second exposure pattern formed using the exposure method according to claim 1 as a mask; and processing the surface of the substrate using the exposure pattern formed in the third region using the exposure method according to claim 1 as a mask, it would have been obvious to process the exposure patterns as a mask since such process if well known and obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claim 17, Nara discloses an exposure device (Fig. 6, 7) comprising: a substrate stage (PST) on which a substrate (P) on which patterns are formed in a plurality of regions spaced apart from each other is placed (Fig. 13). However, Nara does not disclose forming wiring pattern and an exposure pattern determination unit that determines an exposure pattern based on measurement results of positions of the wiring patterns; a spatial light modulator that modulates and emits incident light based on an output from the exposure pattern determination unit; an illumination optical system that irradiates the spatial light modulator with illumination light; and a projection optical system that projects an image of a light modulation surface of the spatial light modulator between adjacent regions among the plurality of regions. Hallerbach discloses forming a wiring pattern (Fig. 3, 4) and an exposure pattern determination unit that determines an exposure pattern based on measurement results of positions of the wiring patterns; a spatial light modulator that modulates and emits incident light based on an output from the exposure pattern determination unit; an illumination optical system that irradiates the spatial light modulator with illumination light; and a projection optical system that projects an image of a light modulation surface of the spatial light modulator between adjacent regions among the plurality of regions. (Fig. 5-7, para para 0045, 0046, 0051, 0052). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the wiring pattern forming device and process of Hallerbach to the invention of Nara in order to provide properly aligned connection between the components. Regarding claim 18, although Nara in view of Hallerbach does not disclose a metal wiring pattern, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a metal wiring pattern since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11 and 12 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. Regarding claim 11 and 12, none of the prior art of record teaches or discloses changing an orientation of the substrate as claimed or changing an orientation of the SLM as claimed. Nara in view of Hallerbach discloses the claimed invention as discussed above. However, neither Nara or Hallerbach discloses changing an orientation of the substrate or changing of an orientation of the spatial light modulator and forming the exposure pattern between the first region and the fourth region adjacent to each other in the second direction. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kijima et al. (2011/0139982) discloses providing a connection between two patterns (401, 402, Fig. 4). However, Kijima et al. does not disclose forming an exposure pattern in a third region as claimed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER B KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2120. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 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, 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. /PETER B KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 January 3, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596310
DETECTION DEVICE, LITHOGRAPHY APPARATUS, AND ARTICLE MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591183
A SENSOR POSITIONING METHOD, A POSITIONING SYSTEM, A LITHOGRAPHIC APPARATUS, A METROLOGY APPARATUS, AND A DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578181
MEASURING METHOD, MEASURING APPARATUS, LITHOGRAPHY APPARATUS, AND ARTICLE MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578661
APPARATUS FOR CLEANING AN EXTREME ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT CREATION CHAMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578185
ALIGNMENT DEVICE
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
92%
With Interview (+9.1%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 938 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month