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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/14/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph [0043], Fig. 2 should read Fig. 3 as the recited structure in “a method of fixing a purge plate 46 (stage 4) and the encoder scales 40 and 41.” Are clearly depicted, but not in Fig. 2.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim Interpretation: The limitation “that transfers a pattern of an original to a substrate” has not been given patentable weight because the recitation occurs in the preamble. A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See MPEP 2111.02.
Claims 1-2, 8-10, 12-13, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US 2021/0382405 A1), in view of Shibazaki (US 2015/0002833 A1), in view of Yoo et al. (KR 199-000565).
Regarding claims 1-2, Nishimura discloses a lithography apparatus for performing a process of transferring a pattern of an original to each of shot regions two-dimensionally arrayed on a substrate, see abstract.
The apparatus to include as depicted in FIG. 1C components – (construed as a stage mechanism). The stage mechanism to include an XY driving unit 4 – (construed as a stage) configured to hold the substrate 1. And components of an X detection unit 31 and X scale 30 – (both are considered as an encoder system), where the X detection unit 31 is – (construed as an encoder head) and the X scale 30 is (construed as an encoder scale). The stage mechanism further includes a Y driving unit 5 of which the X scale 30 is coupled to, see at least FIG. 1C – (construed as a scale holding portion configured to hold the encoder scale).
Nishimura does not explicitly disclose the scale holding portion is configured to hold the encoder scale by an attraction force or the scale holding portion includes a plurality of attractors capable of individually controlling attraction.
Shibazaki discloses an exposure apparatus, see abstract, [0281] – (construed as a lithography apparatus). The apparatus is configured to have a wafer stage WST – (construed as a stage) and a reticle stage RST – (construed as a scale holding portion) that is configured to hold movement scales 24A, 24B – (construed as encoder scales). The scales are fixed to the RST by vacuum suction – (construed as an attraction force) to influence expansion/contraction locally. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation afforded the examiner: Each scale has an independent vacuum suction and thus the plurality of vacuum sources are representative of a plurality of attractors, see at least FIG. 2, [0082] - [0083] – (construed as the scale holding portion is configured to hold the encoder scale by an attraction force and the scale holding portion includes a plurality of attractors).
Yoo discloses an alignment scheme for a lithography process, see abstract. The scheme includes controlling the operation of scales by a control circuit unit – (construed as a controller) by cycling power to a vacuum source of the scales in an on/off manner, see at least page 13 paragraph 6 – (construed as a controller configured to control an operation state of attractors). Wherein such a scheme minimizes impacts on a wafer.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimura’s scale holding portion to have a scale holding portion configured to hold the encoder scale by an attraction force and the scale holding portion includes a plurality of attractors as reasonably suggested by Shibazaki and to have the plurality of attractors be capable of individually controlling attraction to include the use of a controller in doing so, as reasonably suggested by Yoo to form a lithography apparatus capable of locally influencing expansion/contraction of the substrate while minimizing impacts on the substrate.
Regarding claims 8-10, modified Nishimura discloses the plurality of attractors are arranged to constitute a plurality of rows and a plurality of columns; and/or constitute a plurality of strip regions, see at least Shibazaki scales in figures 2-3. As to the claimed inner/outer region orientation. Modified Nishimura discloses the claimed invention except for the claimed inner/outer region orientation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the scale holding portion as claimed, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination. Further, one would have been motivated to select the inner/outer region orientation for the purpose of arranging the plurality of attractors in a shape to locally influence the expansion/contraction of the substrate, see MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 12, while modified Nishimura discloses the XY driving unit 4/stage has a mark, see [0039] – (construed as second reference mark); it does not explicitly disclose the encoder scale has a first reference mark. However, as Nishimura discloses an off-axis measurement system to include the use of the aforementioned XY driving unit mark and an additional alignment mark provided on the substrate, see [0039]. One would readily envision providing an alignment/reference mark on the encode scale in practicing the off-axis measurement as a matter of routine experimentation.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust modified Nishimura’s off-axis measurement system to include the encoder scale having a first reference mark as this would predictably extend the capabilities contemplated by Nishimura’s off-axis measurement system.
Regarding claim 13, modified Nishimura discloses the lithography apparatus is configured to bring a mold as an original into contact with an imprint material on the substrate and cure the imprint material, thereby transferring the pattern of the original to the substrate, see Nishimura [0023].
Regarding claim 15, modified Nishimura discloses a supply unit 17 configured to supply the imprint material to a shot region of the substrate, see at least [0038], [0046]; and wherein the plurality of attractors include a plurality of strip attractors extending in a direction in which the pattern region of the original and the supply unit are connected, see at least Nishimura FIG. 3A, Shibazaki FIGS 2-3.
Regarding claim 16, modified Nishimura discloses the lithography apparatus is constituted as an exposure apparatus configured to transfer the pattern of the original to the substrate by projecting the pattern of the original to the substrate by a projection optical system, see [0024].
Regarding claim 17, modified Nishimura discloses an article manufacturing method comprising: transferring a pattern of an original to a substrate using a lithography apparatus defined in claim 1; and processing the substrate having undergone the transferring, thereby obtaining an article, see at least the rejection of claim 1 and Nishimura claim 15, [0101] – [0104].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US 2021/0382405 A1), in view of Shibazaki (US 2015/0002833 A1), in view of Yoo et al. (KR 199-000565) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aoki (US 2021/0048754 A1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Nishimura does not explicitly disclose a second scale holding portion configured to regulate a position of the encoder scale in a horizontal direction.
Aoki discloses a movable body apparatus. The apparatus is configured to have a scale bases 84, 92 – (construed as scale holding portions). Scale base 84 – (construed as a second scale holding portion) extends parallel to the X-axis having disposed thereon scale 72 and being movable horizontally, see at least Fig. 3 – (construed as a second scale holding portion configured to regulate a position of the encoder scale in a horizontal direction). Aoki discloses such an arrangement allows for ascertaining positional relationships between encoder heads and encoder scales, see at least [0132].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust modified Nishimura’s scale holding portion to include a second scale holding portion as taught by Aoki to provide the lithography apparatus with the aforementioned benefits.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US 2021/0382405 A1), in view of Shibazaki (US 2015/0002833 A1), in view of Yoo et al. (KR 199-000565).
Nishimura discloses as depicted by the components in FIG. 1C, as a stage apparatus. The stage apparatus to include an XY driving unit 4 – (construed as a stage) configured to hold a substrate 1, and an X scale 30 – (construed as an encoder scale). The stage apparatus further includes a Y driving unit 5 of which the X scale 30 is coupled to, see at least FIG. 1C – (construed as a scale holding portion configured to hold the encoder scale).
Nishimura does not explicitly disclose the scale holding portion is configured to hold the encoder scale by an attraction force or the scale holding portion includes a plurality of attractors capable of individually controlling attraction.
Shibazaki discloses an exposure apparatus, see abstract, [0281]. The apparatus is configured to have a wafer stage WST – (construed as a stage) and a reticle stage RST – (construed as a scale holding portion) that is configured to hold movement scales 24A, 24B – (construed as encoder scales). The scales are fixed to the RST by vacuum suction – (construed as an attraction force) to influence expansion/contraction locally. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation afforded the examiner: Each scale has an independent vacuum suction and thus the plurality of vacuum sources are representative of a plurality of attractors, see at least FIG. 2, [0082] - [0083] – (construed as the scale holding portion is configured to hold the encoder scale by an attraction force and the scale holding portion includes a plurality of attractors).
Yoo discloses an alignment scheme for a lithography process, see abstract. The scheme includes controlling the operation of scales by a control circuit unit by cycling power to a vacuum source of the scales in an on/off manner, see at least page 13 paragraph 6 – (construed as a controller configured to control an operation state of attractors). Wherein such a scheme minimizes impacts on a wafer.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimura’s scale holding portion to have a scale holding portion configured to hold the encoder scale by an attraction force and the scale holding portion includes a plurality of attractors as reasonably suggested by Shibazaki and to have the plurality of attractors be capable of individually controlling attraction to include the use of a controller in doing so, as reasonably suggested by Yoo to form a lithography apparatus capable of locally influencing expansion/contraction of the substrate while minimizing impacts on the substrate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 14 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:
Nishimura (US 2021/0382405 A1) discloses a lithography apparatus for performing a process of transferring a pattern of an original to each of shot regions two-dimensionally arrayed on a substrate. The apparatus to include a stage mechanism. The stage mechanism to include an XY driving unit configured to hold the substrate, and an X detection unit and X scale. The stage mechanism further includes a Y driving unit of which the X scale is coupled too.
Shibazaki (US 2015/0002833 A1) discloses an exposure apparatus. The apparatus is configured to have a wafer stage WST and a reticle stage that is configured to hold movement scales. The scales are fixed to the RST by vacuum suction.
Aoki (US 2021/0048754 A1) discloses a movable body apparatus. The apparatus is configured to have a scale bases. The scale bases extend parallel to the X-axis having disposed thereon scales and being movable horizontally.
However, the prior art individually or in combination teach nor reasonably suggests forming the apparatus such that: the substrate has a plurality of shot regions, and the controller individually controls the operation state of each of the plurality of attractors in accordance with a position of a shot region where the pattern is formed; nor further comprising a controller configured to, in a period in which the original is brought into contact with the imprint material and the imprint material is cured in a state in which the stage is arranged to make a shot region of the substrate face a pattern region of the original after the imprint material is arranged in the shot region, control the plurality of attractors to set an attraction force of an attractor selected from the plurality of attractors to be weaker than an attraction force of remaining attractors, wherein the selected attractor is, of the plurality of attractors, at least an attractor facing the encoder head in the state.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CEDRICK S WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-9776. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached on 5712705545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CEDRICK S WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights