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 .
The preliminary amendment filed on December 18, 2024 has been entered. Claims 1-16 are pending in this application.
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) 7-9, 11 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kadkly et al. [US 7385688 B1, hereafter Kadkly].
As per Claim 7, Kadkly teaches a lithography or metrology system (See fig. 1, Column 3 lines 51-61) comprising:
an illumination source (not shown) configure to output a radiation beam (Column 7 lines 18-30); and
at least two variable focal length lenses configured to receive the radiation beam, wherein the variable focal length lenses are controllable to control an illumination spot size at a wafer (Column 4 lines 5-13).
As per Claim 8, Kadkly teaches the lithography or metrology system of claim 7, wherein the variable focal length lenses are positioned in an illumination system (Column 3 lines 51-61).
As per Claim 9, Kadkly teaches the lithography or metrology system of claim 8, wherein the variable focal length lenses are positioned in the illumination system between an illumination relay lens 24 and an aperture stop10 (See fig. 1).
As per Claim 11, Kadkly teaches the lithography or metrology system of claim 7, wherein one variable focal length lens is offset from an optical axis of the radiation beam (Column 9 lines 39-51).
As per Claim 16, Kadkly teaches the lithography or metrology system of claim 7, wherein the at least two variable focal length lenses comprise: a first set of variable focal length lenses 18 configured to receive the radiation beam, wherein the first set of variable focal length lenses are controllable to control the illumination spot size at the wafer; a second set of variable focal length lenses 22, one positioned in an output channel and another positioned in an objective system, wherein the second set of variable focal length lenses are controllable to control a height of focus of an output from the objective system; and a third set of variable focal length lenses 24 positioned in a pupil plane downstream of the objective system, wherein the third set of variable focal length lenses are controllable to control at least one of spot shift and higher order diffraction orders (Column 11 line 19 – Column 12 line 51).
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) 1-3, 5 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feijen et al. [US 20160291479 A1, hereafter Feijen] in view of Kadkly.
As per Claims 1 and 12, Feijen teaches a wafer alignment measurement system (Para 47) comprising:
Feijen further disclosed an inspection apparatus for measuring properties of a target structure on a substrate, the apparatus comprising: an optical system for illuminating the target structure with radiation and collecting diffracted radiation from the target structure, the optical system comprising imaging optics and an image sensor; wherein the imaging optics includes a liquid lens and a controller, the controller being operable to control the liquid lens to maintain said image stationary during said image acquisition interval while allowing for relative movement between the optical system and the target structure (Para 11-15).
Feijen does not explicitly teach a first set of variable focal length lenses configured to receive a radiation beam, wherein the first set of variable focal length lenses are controllable to control an illumination spot size at a wafer; a second set of variable focal length lenses, one positioned in an output channel and another positioned in an objective system, wherein the second set of variable focal length lenses are controllable to control a height of focus of an output from the objective system; and a third set of variable focal length lenses positioned in a pupil plane downstream of the objective system, wherein the third set of variable focal length lenses are controllable to control at least one of spot shift and higher order diffraction orders.
Kadkly teaches set of optical elements includes two optical elements. The two optical elements are decentered with respect to x and y axes of a plane of the entrance pupil. The two optical elements are also tilted with respect to the y axis. In one such embodiment, the set of optical elements also includes a third optical element. The third optical element is decentered with respect to the x and y axes of the plane of the entrance pupil. The third optical element is also tilted with respect to the x axis (See fig. 1, Column 4 lines 5-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the optical elements as claimed in order to focus the individual beams to a wafer plane to form spatially separated spots on the wafer plane and produce an improved measurement result.
As per Claims 2 and 13, Feijen in view of Kadkly teaches the wafer alignment measurement system of claim 1.
Kadkly further disclosed wherein the first set of variable focal length lenses are positioned in an illumination system (See fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the optical elements as claimed in order to focus the individual beams to a wafer plane to form spatially separated spots on the wafer plane and produce an improved measurement result.
As per Claims 3 and 14, Feijen in view of Kadkly teaches the wafer alignment measurement system of claim 2.
Kadkly further disclosed wherein one first variable focal length lens is offset from an optical axis of the radiation beam (Column 9 lines 39-51).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the optical elements as claimed in order to focus the individual beams to a wafer plane to form spatially separated spots on the wafer plane and produce an improved measurement result.
As per Claim 5, Feijen in view of Kadkly teaches the wafer alignment measurement system of claim 1.
Kadkly further disclosed wherein the third set of variable focal length lenses is positioned in a pupil plane (Column 11 lines 19-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the optical elements as claimed in order to focus the individual beams to a wafer plane to form spatially separated spots on the wafer plane and produce an improved measurement result.
Claim(s) 4 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feijen in view of Kadkly, further in view of Kurahashi [US 20210109336 A1].
As per Claims 4 and 15, Feijen in view of Kadkly teaches the wafer alignment measurement system of claim 1.
Feijen in view of Kadkly does not explicitly teach wherein there are “N” output channels and “N+1” second variable focal length lenses, wherein there is one second variable focal length lens in each output channel and one second variable focal length lens in the objective system.
Kurahashi teaches a variable focal length lens whose focal length is cyclically changeable in accordance with an inputted drive signal; an image detector configured to detect an image of a measurement target through the variable focal length lens; a pulsed light illuminator configured to emit a pulsed light to illuminate the measurement target; and an illumination controller configured to control the pulsed light illuminator so that the pulsed light is emitted twice in one cycle of the drive signal based on two detection phases corresponding to a designated focal distance of the variable focal length lens (See fig. 4, Para 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the optical elements as claimed in order to produce a measurement system capable of obtaining a sufficiently bright image within a shorter time.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feijen in view of Kadkly, further in view of Dowsk et al. [US 7710658 B2, hereafter Dowski].
As per Claim 6, Feijen in view of Kadkly teaches the wafer alignment measurement system of claim 1.
Feijen in view of Kadkly does not explicitly teach wherein the first, second, and third sets of variable focal length lenses are controllable by applying voltage to the first, second, and third sets of variable focal length lenses.
Dowski teaches "zoom lens system" and "zoom imaging system" are used interchangeably, and "variable optical element" is intended to encompass optical elements with optical properties (such as, but not limited to, focal length, transmittance, and refractive index) that are modifiable by using techniques such as (but not limited to) application of voltage and/or pressure to one or more of the optical elements, and translation and/or rotation of one or more of the optical elements (Column 5 lines 25-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the zoom optical elements as claimed in order to focus the individual beams to a wafer plane to form spatially separated spots on the wafer plane and produce an improved measurement result.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feijen in view of Dowsk.
As per Claim 10, Feijen teaches the wafer alignment measurement system of claim 7.
Feijen does not explicitly teach wherein the first, second, and third sets of variable focal length lenses are controllable by applying voltage to the first, second, and third sets of variable focal length lenses.
Dowski teaches "zoom lens system" and "zoom imaging system" are used interchangeably, and "variable optical element" is intended to encompass optical elements with optical properties (such as, but not limited to, focal length, transmittance, and refractive index) that are modifiable by using techniques such as (but not limited to) application of voltage and/or pressure to one or more of the optical elements, and translation and/or rotation of one or more of the optical elements (Column 5 lines 25-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the zoom optical elements as claimed in order to focus the individual beams to a wafer plane to form spatially separated spots on the wafer plane and produce an improved measurement result.
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
Prosecution Insights