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 Objections
Claims 19-21 and 33-34 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 19-21, there is lack of antecedent basis for the limitation, “each sub-target” and “sub-targets”. This appears to be due to typographical error, since claim 19 in line 2 introduces the term “two or more sub-targets”. Such as, the examiner suggest changing the limitation in claim 19-21 as:
In claim 19, lines 3 and 6, “each sub-target”, should be change to —each of the two or more sub-targets—.
In claim 20, lines 2 and 5, “sub-targets”, should be change to —the two or more sub-targets—.
In claim 21, line 2, “sub-target”, should be change to —of the two or more sub-targets—.
Claims 33-34, there is lack of antecedent basis for the limitation, “sub-target” and “sub-targets”. This appears to be due to typographical error, since claim 16 in line 2 introduces the term “one or more sub-targets”. Such as, the examiner suggest changing the limitation in claim 33-34 as:
In claim 33, lines 3 and 6, “sub-target”, should be change to —of the one or more sub-targets—.
In claim 34, lines 2, “sub-target”, should be change to —of the one or more sub-targets—.
In claim 34, lines 2 and 5, “sub-targets”, should be change to —the one or more sub-targets—.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 16-18, 26-32 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Slotboom et al. (US 2017/0090302 A1), hereafter Slotboom.
Regarding claim 16, Slotboom teaches a metrology method comprising:
illuminating a target (Fig. 3(b) element T, [0074]) comprising one or more sub-targets (Fig. 4 elements 32, [0086] and Fig. 12E elements 1284) on a substrate (Fig. 3(a) element W, [0074]) using underfilled illumination such that an illumination beam profile underfills each of the one or more sub-targets, (the illumination underfills each of the one or more sub-targets 1284),[0131]
capturing scattered radiation resultant from the illuminating the target, imaging the scattered radiation at a detection image plane (to obtain an image, (“the image DF of the target formed on sensor 23 is formed from the −1 or +1 first order beam”, [0079, 0091-0092]); and
determining a parameter of interest from the image, (overlay error, [0071, 0077, 0131]).
Regarding claim 17, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 16, wherein the illuminating the target comprises: configuring the illumination beam profile on the target to illuminate one or more target regions corresponding to one or more regions of interest on a detected image at the detection image plane while minimizing illumination of nuisance structures on the substrate outside of the one or more target regions, (the measurement spot is directed to the target 1280 comprising sub-targets 1284 wherein the size of the measurement spot is smaller than the sub-region, therefore it’s minimized the illumination to the near structures in the target 1280, [0131]).
Regarding claim 18, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 17, wherein the nuisance structures comprise one or more of: at least an edge of the target or of the one or more sub-targets and/or at least one surrounding structure, (since the measuring spot is underfilled the sub-target 1284 it would minimize the illumination of the others sub-targets 1284 and 1282 in the target 1280 as the other elements 1284 1282 are surrounding structures, [0131]).
Regarding claim 26, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 16, further comprising configuring the illumination beam profile at an illumination image plane, ( The illuminator IL may include an adjuster AD for adjusting the angular intensity distribution of the radiation beam, [0061], ”defining a spatial intensity distribution in a plane that presents the spatial spectrum of the substrate plane”, [0075]).
Regarding claim 27, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 16, configuring the illumination beam profile using a programmable illumination arrangement, [0081].
Regarding claim 28, Slotboom teaches metrology method of claim 27, wherein the programmable illumination arrangement comprises using a spatial light modulator or a grating light valve-based illumination arrangement, [0081].
Regarding claim 29, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 16, further comprising configuring the illumination beam profile using a mask (Fig. 3(a) element 13) comprising one or more apertures optimized for the illumination of the target, [0075].
Regarding claim 30, Slotboom teaches the metrology method as of claim 29, wherein the one or more apertures are configurable, [0080, 0081].
Regarding claim 31, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 16, further comprising additionally configuring an illumination pupil (Fig. 3(a) element 13) of the illumination at an illumination pupil plane, [0075].
Regarding claim 32, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 31, further comprising co-optimizing the illumination beam profile and the illumination pupil, (“ the angular range at which the radiation is incident on the substrate can be selected by defining a spatial intensity distribution in a plane that presents the spatial spectrum of the substrate plane”, [0075].
Regarding claim 35, Slotboom teaches the method of claim 16, wherein the parameter of interest is overlay or focus, (overlay and overlay error, [0071, 0077, 0086, 0131]).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 19-21 and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slotboom, in view of Hill et al. (US 20180031424 A1, included in IDS on 01/29/2025), hereafter Hill.
Regarding claims 19-21 and 33-34, Slotboom teaches the metrology method.
Slotboom is silent about:
(claim 19) wherein: the target comprises two or more sub-targets; the illuminating comprises substantially simultaneously illuminating each sub-target using underfilled illumination; and the capturing comprises substantially simultaneously capturing scattered radiation resultant from the illuminating each sub-target.
(claim 20) wherein: the illumination beam profile is configured for a single or proper subset of the sub-targets; and the illumination beam profile is divided into additional beams to provide illumination for all of the sub-targets.
(claim 21) varying the relative intensities of the illumination illuminating each respective sub-target.
(claim 33) further comprising varying the relative intensities of the illumination illuminating each respective sub-target.
(claim 34) wherein the illuminating the target comprises simultaneously illuminating each sub-target using underfilled illumination such that the illumination beam profile underfills each of the plurality of sub-targets.
However, Hil related to overlay metrology and the from the same field of endeavor teaches
(claim 19) the target comprises two or more sub-targets (Figs. 6 and 10 elements X1, X2, Y1, Y2, [0013]); the illuminating comprises substantially simultaneously illuminating each sub-target using underfilled illumination; and the capturing comprises substantially simultaneously capturing scattered radiation resultant from the illuminating each sub-target, (“systems 100 may be configured to have any type of illumination field stop, such as no field stop, a single aperture that overfills the target(s), multiple apertures wherein each aperture underfills an individual target (see e.g., systems 100 illustrated in FIGS. 6 and 12, and FIG. 10)”, [0040], “FIG. 10 illustrates schematically simultaneous capture of signals from four targets 113”, [0047]).
(claim 20) wherein: the illumination beam profile is configured for a single or proper subset of the sub-targets (Figs. 6 and 10 elements X1, X2, Y1, Y2, [0013]), [0040, 0047]; and the illumination beam profile is divided into additional beams (Fig. 10 element 101A) to provide illumination for all of the sub-targets, [0047].
(claim 21) varying the relative intensities of the illumination illuminating each respective sub-target, (the system is configured with different types of light truncation—such as hard aperture truncation, apodised (gradual) truncation, or a combination of both, therefore altering the illumination field through various truncations allows to precisely vary and control the spatial intensity profile of the light illuminating as it reshape how light intensity is distributed, [0047].
(claim 33) further comprising varying the relative intensities of the illumination illuminating each respective sub-target, (the system is configured with different types of light truncation—such as hard aperture truncation, apodised (gradual) truncation, or a combination of both, therefore altering the illumination field through various truncations allows to precisely vary and control the spatial intensity profile of the light illuminating as it reshape how light intensity is distributed, [0047].
(claim 34) wherein the illuminating the target comprises simultaneously illuminating each sub-target using underfilled illumination such that the illumination beam profile underfills each of the plurality of sub-targets, (“systems 100 may be configured to have any type of illumination field stop, such as no field stop, a single aperture that overfills the target(s), multiple apertures wherein each aperture underfills an individual target (see e.g., systems 100 illustrated in FIGS. 6 and 12, and FIG. 10)”, [0040], “FIG. 10 illustrates schematically simultaneous capture of signals from four targets 113”, [0047]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Slotboom by including the target comprises two or more sub-targets; the illuminating comprises substantially simultaneously illuminating each sub-target using underfilled illumination; and the capturing comprises substantially simultaneously capturing scattered radiation resultant from the illuminating each sub-target, wherein: the illumination beam profile is configured for a single or proper subset of the sub-targets; and the illumination beam profile is divided into additional beams to provide illumination for all of the sub-targets, varying the relative intensities of the illumination illuminating each respective sub-target, further comprising varying the relative intensities of the illumination illuminating each respective sub-target, wherein the illuminating the target comprises simultaneously illuminating each sub-target using underfilled illumination such that the illumination beam profile underfills each of the plurality of sub-targets, (as taught by Hill) for several advantages such as: allowing to minimize the contamination between neighboring targets and the contamination from objects in the periphery, thus increase the measuring accuracy, ([0028], Hill).
Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slotboom, in view of Van Voorst et al. (US 20190049861 A1), hereafter Van.
Regarding claims 22-24, Slotboom teaches the metrology method.
Slotboom fail to teach:
(claim 22) iteratively varying the illumination beam profile; and checking a performance indicator indicative of an acceptable image until the image is acceptable according to the performance indicator.
(claim 23) wherein the performance indicator comprises a measure of whether edge effects and/or unwanted imaging effects are present in the image.
(claim 24) further comprising: performing the method for a plurality of targets; and wherein each successive measurement is used to update an expected illumination beam profile for a next measurement,
Van related to metrology system of devices by lithographic techniques and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches:
(claim 22) iteratively varying the illumination beam profile; and checking a performance indicator indicative of an acceptable image until the image is acceptable according to the performance indicator, (“Target image data 816 is delivered to the metrology processing unit 720 for use in alignment of the spot of inspection radiation with the desired target”, the indicator is the intensity profile showing the edge of the target as shown in Fig. 8, [0125-0127, 0118]).
(claim 23) wherein the performance indicator comprises a measure of whether edge effects and/or unwanted imaging effects are present in the image, [0025-0027, 0118].
(claim 24) further comprising: performing the method for a plurality of targets; and wherein each successive measurement is used to update an expected illumination beam profile for a next measurement, [0116-0117]
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Slotboom by including iteratively varying the illumination beam profile; and checking a performance indicator indicative of an acceptable image until the image is acceptable according to the performance indicator, wherein the performance indicator comprises a measure of whether edge effects and/or unwanted imaging effects are present in the image, further comprising: performing the method for a plurality of targets; and wherein each successive measurement is used to update an expected illumination beam profile for a next measurement (as taught by Van) for several advantages such as: an edge can be detected in the image captured by target image sensor, thus allow a positional adjustment can be made prior to using captured data for measuring properties of target structure T, ([0126], Van).
Claims 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slotboom, in view of Raymond et al. (US 2006/0289789 A1, included in IDS on 01/29/2025), hereafter Raymond.
Regarding claim 25, Slotboom teaches the metrology method of claim 16.
Slootboom fail to teach further comprising performing an initial calibration of the illumination beam profile for the target.
However, Raymond related to metrology system and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches further comprising performing an initial calibration of the illumination beam profile for the target, [0046, 0072].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Slotboom by including further comprising performing an initial calibration of the illumination beam profile for the target, (as taught by Raymond) for several advantages such as: allowing to calibrate the system efficiency for accurately detecting the radiation distribution and maintain the accuracy of the system in real time. ([0072], Raymond).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS G PEREZ-GUZMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/CARLOS PEREZ-GUZMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights