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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because
the claimed invention is directed to “an estimation to estimate a minimum step time or an optimal exposure speed” and “a comparison to compare a measured wafer exposure time with a first or second optimal wafer exposure time” appear to be math/mental process without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) “a wafer exposure time inspection device” This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because it appears that the claimed inspection device is implemented as a series of circuits or processors configured to perform the estimation and comparison steps (See the instant spec paras [0051]-[0053]), which is generic to be a particular machine. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the inspection device performs the claimed method, and does not appear to be insignificant extra-solution activity.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 12 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park [US 20050078285 A1].
As per Claims 1, 12 and 19, Park teaches exposure equipment (Para 36, a photo-exposure unit 50) comprising:
an exposure device configured to transfer a pattern of a reticle to a wafer by using light (Para 6 and 35); and
a wafer exposure time inspection device (See fig. 1) configured to inspect appropriateness of a wafer exposure time during which the wafer is illuminated to transfer the pattern to the wafer (Para 16, wherein a system for adjusting a photo-exposure time in a semiconductor manufacturing apparatus),
wherein the wafer exposure time inspection device comprises:
an estimation unit (a pre-exposure step influence prediction unit 40) configured to estimate a minimum step time or an optimal exposure speed, wherein, in the minimum step time, a step time during which an exposure device completes exposure for one shot area from among a plurality of shot areas on a wafer and moves to a next shot area is minimized, and in the optimal exposure speed, a sum of the step time and a scan time during which the shot area is exposed is minimized (Para 16 and 36, wherein a pre-exposure step influence prediction unit for obtaining information about a semiconductor device in the manufacturing apparatus during a pre-exposure processing); and
a comparison unit 70 configured to compare a measured wafer exposure time with a first optimal wafer exposure time calculated from the minimum step time and the scan time or compare the measured wafer exposure time with a second optimal wafer exposure time calculated from the estimated optimal exposure speed (Para 41-44, wherein based on the target value. From these two values, a differential exposure time representing a difference between the standard photo-exposure time and a real photo-exposure time for the n.sup.th step, can be determined),
wherein the optimal wafer exposure time is a time during which a wafer exposure time is minimized, the wafer exposure time being a sum of a scan time for exposure for each of all shot areas of the wafer with a step time for movement between the shot areas (Para 48-50, desired photo-exposure time for the (n+1).sup.th step ET'.sub.n+1 is then obtained by correcting the n.sup.th determined photo-exposure time by the n.sup.th time correction value).
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) 2-4, 9-11 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Smeets et al. [US 20100157272 A1, hereafter Smeets].
As per Claims 2-4 and 20, Park teaches the exposure equipment of claim 1.
Park does not explicitly teach wherein the estimation unit is further configured to estimate the minimum step time or the optimal exposure speed by modeling, by using at least a 3rd-order system, a time model for each of a displacement of a wafer stage of the exposure device in a first direction, a displacement of the wafer stage in a second direction, and a displacement of a reticle stage in a third direction, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction in which the shot area is exposed, and the third direction is parallel to the second direction.
Smeets teaches a lithographic apparatus, including a substrate table constructed to hold a substrate, and being connected to a positioning device configured to move the substrate table in a scan direction and in a step direction, and a controller arranged to control a speed (V.sub.scan) of the substrate table in at least the scan direction during operation, the controller including a first input configured to receive a first signal representative of a first time period (T.sub.step) of a movement of the substrate table in the step direction, a second input configured to receive a second signal representative of a distance (d.sub.scan) in the scan direction to be covered by the substrate table during a scan movement thereof, a third input configured to receive a third signal representative of an acceleration (a.sub.scan) of the substrate table in the scan direction, and an output configured to provide an output signal to control the speed (V.sub.scan) of the substrate table in the scan direction (Para 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the control method as claimed in order to optimized scan speed and minimize the time required to cover the distance to be traveled during the scan movement and increase throughput.
As per Claim 9, Park in view of Smeets teaches the exposure equipment of claim 4.
Park further disclosed wherein the comparison unit is further configured to compare the minimum step time calculated from the first the first estimation unit with a measured step time, or calculate an optimal wafer exposure time from the minimum step time and the scan time and compares the optimal wafer exposure time with the measured wafer exposure time (Para 24).
As per Claim 10, Park in view of Smeets teaches the exposure equipment of claim 4.
Park further disclosed wherein the comparison unit is further configured to calculate the wafer exposure time from the optimal exposure speed calculated from the second estimation unit and compare the calculated wafer exposure time with the measured wafer exposure time (Para 24 and 54).
As per Claim 11, Park in view of Smeets teaches the exposure equipment of claim 1.
Park further disclosed further comprising an interface unit capable of exchanging information with the exposure device (See fig. 1).
As per Claim 13, Park in view of Smeets teaches the exposure equipment of claim 12.
Smeets further disclosed wherein the exposure device comprises: a reticle stage on which a reticle having a pattern formed therein is arranged; an ultriviolet (UV) source configured to generate UV light and emit the generated UV light toward the reticle; a first optical system configured to allow the UV light from the UV source to be incident on the reticle; a second optical system in which the reticle transmits the UV light that is reflected, refracted, or transmitted; and a wafer stage on which a wafer through which the UV light passing through the second optical system is projected and to which the pattern is transferred is arranged (See fig. 1, Para 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the control method as claimed in order to optimized scan speed and minimize the time required to cover the distance to be traveled during the scan movement and increase throughput.
As per Claim 14, Park in view of Smeets teaches the exposure equipment of claim 12.
Smeets further disclosed wherein the exposure device comprises: an illumination source configured to generate and emit light; a reticle stage which transmits light generated from the illumination source and on which a reticle is arranged; a transparent optical system that projects light passing through the reticle; and a wafer stage on which a wafer through which the light passing through the transparent optical system is projected and to which the pattern is transferred is arranged (See fig. 1, Para 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the control method as claimed in order to optimized scan speed and minimize the time required to cover the distance to be traveled during the scan movement and increase throughput.
As per Claims 15-16, Park in view of Smeets teaches the exposure equipment of claim 12.
Park does not explicitly teach wherein the estimation unit is further configured to estimate the minimum step time or the optimal exposure speed by modeling, by using at least a 3rd-order system, a time model for each of displacement of a wafer stage of the exposure device in a first direction, displacement of the wafer stage in a second direction, and displacement of a reticle stage in a third direction, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction in which the shot area is exposed, and the third direction is parallel to the second direction.
Smeets teaches a lithographic apparatus, including a substrate table constructed to hold a substrate, and being connected to a positioning device configured to move the substrate table in a scan direction and in a step direction, and a controller arranged to control a speed (V.sub.scan) of the substrate table in at least the scan direction during operation, the controller including a first input configured to receive a first signal representative of a first time period (T.sub.step) of a movement of the substrate table in the step direction, a second input configured to receive a second signal representative of a distance (d.sub.scan) in the scan direction to be covered by the substrate table during a scan movement thereof, a third input configured to receive a third signal representative of an acceleration (a.sub.scan) of the substrate table in the scan direction, and an output configured to provide an output signal to control the speed (V.sub.scan) of the substrate table in the scan direction (Para 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the control method as claimed in order to optimized scan speed and minimize the time required to cover the distance to be traveled during the scan movement and increase throughput.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 17, 18 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.
With regard to claim 5-8, 17, 18, the prior art of record does not anticipate nor render obvious to one skilled in the art the expressed equations in combination with the other elements required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MESFIN ASFAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 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.
/MESFIN T ASFAW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882