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 .
Status
Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed on 5/20/2026, which amended claims 2, 4, 5, 15, and cancelled claim 16, and added new claim 21. Claims 1-15 and 17-21 are currently pending.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 5/20/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patent No. 11,681,235 and US Patent No. 12,099,310 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 19, line 1, “the debris capture electrode” should be changed to --the cleaning electrode-- to improve antecedence.
Appropriate correction is required to place claims in better form.
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 15 and 17-21 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 15, the limitations “a cleaning electrode including a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode, the reticle cleaning system configured to support a debris capture film on the pins separated from the cleaning electrode by a gap; and a voltage source configured to draw debris from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity when the cleaning electrode is adjacent to the photolithography reticle” in lines 3-9 are vague and indefinite. The language “the reticle cleaning system configured to support a debris capture film on the pins separated from the cleaning electrode by a gap” and “a voltage source configured to draw debris from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity when the cleaning electrode is adjacent to the photolithography reticle” is functional language reciting the manner of operating the reticle cleaning system and the voltage source. It is unclear if debris capture film is a required part of the structure of the claimed system. That is, the functional language renders the claim scope indefinite since it is unclear whether the system positively requires the debris capture film to be present on the cleaning electrode as the voltage source draws debris toward the cleaning electrode or if the cleaning reticle system is merely capable of supporting a debris capture film. The language does not provide a clear cut indication of the scope of the subject matter of the claim, the language does not set forth well-defined boundaries of the invention, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not know from the claim language what structure is clearly encompassed by the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(g). For the purposes of examination, the limitations are being interpreted as requiring a cleaning electrode including a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode, the reticle cleaning system capable to support a debris capture film on the pins separated from the cleaning electrode by a gap; and a voltage source configured to draw debris from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity when the cleaning electrode is adjacent to the photolithography reticle. Thus, claim 15 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
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 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Yonekawa et al. (US PGPub 2008/0246939, Yonekawa hereinafter) in view of Van Duivenbode et al. (US PGPub 2020/0096881, Van Duivenbode hereinafter).
Regarding claim 15, as best understood, Yonekawa discloses a system (Figs. 1-5, 8-22), comprising:
a reticle cleaning system (Figs. 1-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], [0062]-[0063], [0065], the wire electrode with reticle stage 3 cleans the reticle 2) including:
a cleaning electrode including a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode, the reticle cleaning system configured to support a debris capture film on the pins separated from the cleaning electrode by a gap (the language “the reticle cleaning system configured to support a debris capture film on the pins separated from the cleaning electrode by a gap” is functional language that recites the manner of operating the system and does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the structure as taught by Yonekawa. See MPEP 2114. Figs. 1-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], [0062]-[0063], [0065], the reticle stage 3 includes an electrostatic reticle chuck 7 and wire electrode 31); and
a voltage source configured draw debris from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity when the cleaning electrode is adjacent to the photolithography reticle (Figs. 2-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], [0062]-[0063], [0065], an AC voltage waveform with continuously varying voltage polarity (see Figs. 3, 4, 8 for example) is applied to the wire electrode 31). Yonekawa does not appear to explicitly describe a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode.
Van Duivenbode discloses a cleaning electrode including a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode (Figs. 1-4, paras. [0078]-[0080], the electrostatic clamp 4 includes burls 12a, 12b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included including a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode as taught by Van Duivenbode in the cleaning electrode in the system as taught by Yonekawa since including a cleaning electrode including a plurality of pins extending from a surface of the cleaning electrode is commonly used to define a plane to clamp an object to the support (Van Duivenbode, para. [0079]).
Regarding claim 20, Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode discloses wherein the reticle is an extreme ultraviolet reticle (Yonekawa, Figs.1-5, 8-22, paras. [0036]-[0041], the wafer 1 is exposed in an EUV exposure apparatus using a reticle 2).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Onvlee et al. (US PGPub 2015/0241797, Onvlee hereinafter).
Regarding claim 17, Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the debris capture film is a flexible film.
Onvlee discloses wherein the debris capture film is a flexible film (Figs. 6-8, paras. [0080]-[0085], a cleaning system 500 includes a layer of flexible tape 502 to capture particles from the patterning device 302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the debris capture film is a flexible film as taught by Onvlee as the debris capture film in the system as taught by Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode since including wherein the debris capture film is a flexible film is commonly used to provide conformation to the reticle surface to completely remove particle contaminants.
Claims 18, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Scaccabarozzi et al. (US PGPub 2011/0037960, Scaccabarozzi hereinafter)
Regarding claim 18, Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the debris capture film is a rigid film.
Scaccabarozzi discloses wherein the debris capture film is a rigid film (Figs. 1-4, paras. [0039], [0064], the adhesive coating is a formaldehyde resin).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the debris capture film is a rigid film as taught by Scaccabarozzi in the system as taught by Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode since including wherein the debris capture film is a rigid film is commonly used to adhere the contaminant particles for improved particle removal (Scaccabarozzi, paras. [0009]-[0010], [0039], [0053], [0064]).
Regarding claim 19, Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode discloses the debris capture electrode has a planar surface (Yonekawa, Figs. 1-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], [0062]-[0063], [0065], the reticle stage 3 includes an electrostatic reticle chuck 7, and as modified by Van Duivenbode, Figs. 1-4, paras. [0078]-[0080], the electrostatic clamp 4 has a planar surface), but Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the debris capture electrode facing the debris capture film.
Scaccabarozzi discloses wherein the debris capture electrode has a planar surface facing the debris capture film (Figs. 1-4, paras. [0039], [0064], the adhesive coating is formed facing the electrode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the debris capture electrode has a planar surface facing the debris capture film as taught by Scaccabarozzi in the system as taught by Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode since including wherein the debris capture electrode has a planar surface facing the debris capture film is commonly used to adhere the contaminant particles for improved particle removal (Scaccabarozzi, paras. [0009]-[0010], [0039], [0053], [0064]).
Regarding claim 21, Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the debris capture film includes a polymer material.
Scaccabarozzi discloses wherein the debris capture film includes a polymer material (Figs. 1-4, paras. [0039], [0064], the adhesive coating is a formaldehyde resin).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the debris capture film includes a polymer material as taught by Scaccabarozzi in the system as taught by Yonekawa as modified by Van Duivenbode since including wherein the debris capture film includes a polymer material is commonly used to adhere the contaminant particles for improved particle removal (Scaccabarozzi, paras. [0009]-[0010], [0039], [0053], [0064]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity; and capturing debris particles with the first debris capture film by drawing the debris particles from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 1 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious placing a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a support structure extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; and capturing, with the first debris capture film, debris from an exposure face of the reticle by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 8 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
The dependent claims are likewise allowable by virtue of their dependency upon an allowable independent claim as stated above.
Yonekawa et al. (US PGPub 2008/0246939, Yonekawa hereinafter) discloses positioning a cleaning electrode adjacent to an exposure face of a photolithography reticle (Figs. 2-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], the wire electrode 31 faces the reflection face of the reticle 2); applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity (Figs. 2-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], an AC voltage waveform with continuously varying voltage polarity (see Figs. 3, 4, 8 for example) is applied to the wire electrode 31); and drawing debris particles from the photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform (Figs. 2-5, 8-22, paras. [0037], [0043]-[0045], [0048], [0055]-[0058], particles are drawn away from the reticle 2 with application of the AC voltage waveform to the electrode 31). Yonekawa does not describe or render obvious positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; and capturing debris particles with the first debris capture film by drawing the debris particles from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform, or placing a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a support structure extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode, capturing, with the first debris capture film, debris from an exposure face of the reticle by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform.
Perez-Falcon et al. (US PGPub 2020/0348606, Perez-Falcon hereinafter) discloses capturing the debris particles with a first film positioned between the cleaning electrode (Fig. 5, para. [0071], an electrode 510 is below the upper surface of the electrostatic cleaning substrate 500 having an upper layer 540 of a material that assists in retention of particulate contaminants). Perez-Falcon does not describe or render obvious positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode. Perez-Falcon also fails to describe or suggest a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity.
Scaccabarozzi et al. (US PGPub 2011/0037960, Scaccabarozzi hereinafter) discloses a debris capture film supported adjacent to the cleaning electrode (Figs. 1-4, paras. [0037], [0039], [0045]-[0046], [0048], [0050]-[0053], [0062]-[0064], an adhesive layer is coated on the cleaning electrode to retain particles on the electrode during cleaning). However, Scaccabarozzi does not describe or suggest positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode. Scaccabarozzi also fails to describe or suggest a voltage waveform beginning with a first polarity and changing in a continuous manner to a second polarity opposite to the first polarity.
Onvlee et al. (US PGPub 2015/0241797, Onvlee hereinafter) discloses wherein the debris capture film is a flexible film (Figs. 6-8, paras. [0080]-[0085], a cleaning system 500 includes a layer of flexible tape 502 to capture particles from the patterning device 302), but Onvlee does not describe or render obvious positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; and capturing debris particles with the first debris capture film by drawing the debris particles from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform, or placing a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a support structure extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode, capturing, with the first debris capture film, debris from an exposure face of the reticle by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform.
Markoya et al. (WO2013/083332) discloses cleaning particles from the surface of a clamping structure using a flexible layer whose conductivity is controlled while voltage is applied to the clamping structure to draw the flexible layer to the burls of the clamping structure (Figs. 7-10, paras. [0069]-[0073], flexible layer 802, 902, 1002 is used to clean clamping structure 404). That is, the voltage is applied to the surface being cleaned (see at least paras. [0069], [0070]) rather than to a cleaning electrode. Markoya does not describe or render obvious positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; and capturing debris particles with the first debris capture film by drawing the debris particles from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform, or placing a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a support structure extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode, capturing, with the first debris capture film, debris from an exposure face of the reticle by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform.
Kim et al. (US PGPub 2018/0164694) discloses applying voltage to a reticle to influence the direction of particles (Figs. 2-14, paras. [0039]-[0047], [0052]-[0064]), but Kim et al. does not describe or render obvious positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; and capturing debris particles with the first debris capture film by drawing the debris particles from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform, or placing a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a support structure extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode, capturing, with the first debris capture film, debris from an exposure face of the reticle by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform.
Bruls et al. (US PGPub 2021/0041795) discloses enhancing the attraction of particles to a cleaning reticle by alternating the polarity of the supplied voltage (Figs. 3-5, paras. [0054]-[0059]). Bruls does not describe or suggest positioning a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode; and capturing debris particles with the first debris capture film by drawing the debris particles from a photolithography reticle toward the cleaning electrode while applying the voltage waveform, or placing a first debris capture film on a plurality of pins extending from a support structure extending from a surface of a cleaning electrode, capturing, with the first debris capture film, debris from an exposure face of the reticle by applying, to the cleaning electrode, a voltage waveform.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 5/20/2026, with respect to the objections to claims 2, 4-5, and 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendments to the claims. The objections to claims 2, 4-5, and 15 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 5/20/2026, with respect to the nonstatutory double patenting rejections of claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-14, 17-20 over US Patent No. 11,381,235 and over US Patent No. 12,099,310 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the proper Terminal Disclaimer filed 5/20/2026. The nonstatutory double patenting rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 5/20/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejection of claim 16 have been fully considered and are persuasive owing to the cancellation of the claim. The 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejection of claim 16 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 5/20/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 101 statutory double patenting rejection of claim 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive owing to the amendment to the claim. The 35 U.S.C. 101 statutory double patenting rejection of claim 15 has been withdrawn. However, the amendment to claim 15 changed the scope of the claim, and as a result of the amendment, the claim is rejected as set forth above.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA A. RIDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7538. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30AM-5PM.
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, Minh-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.
/CHRISTINA A RIDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights