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 § 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 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.
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, 8-10, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto et al. (Iwamoto) (2023/0024469) in view of May et al. (May) (2024/0111090).
Regarding claim 1, Iwamoto discloses a method of alignment, comprising: generating a first set of microfabrication alignment patterns (35-4, 35-5, 35-9, 35-10, right halves of 35-3, 35-8, “second alignment marks”, Fig. 2B, Fig. 5, step S1, Fig. 6, step T3, Fig. 9B, para 0212, 0213, 0251, 0253, 0256) on a wafer (1, Fig. 2A, para 0176, 0177); generating a second set of microfabrication alignment patterns (35-1, 35-2, 35-6, 35-7, left halves of 35-3 and 35-8, “first alignment marks”, Fig. 2B, Fig. 5, step S1, Fig. 6, step T2, Fig. 9A, para 0212, 0213, 0251, 0253, 0255); wherein at least one of a distance or an orientation between one or more of the first set of microfabrication alignment patterns and one or more of the second set of microfabrication alignment patterns is predetermined (“second alignment marks” are for the left half of the exposure region and “first alignment marks” are for the right half of the exposure region, para 0255, 0258, so distance and the orientation of the alignment patterns are predetermined); aligning one or more microfabrication processes to the one or more of the second set of microfabrication alignment patterns (35-1, 35-2, 35-6, 35-7, left halves of 35-3 and 35-8, Fig. 10, step U4, para 0283, 0284, the wafer “is placed are moved relatively to each other, to perform aligning so that the reticle RLk and the left half of the exposure region face each other”, “the reticle RLk and the left half of the exposure region are aligned with each other, on the basis of the position information about the first alignment marks measured in the mark formation process”); processing the wafer via microfabrication process based on the alignment of the one or more microfabrication process (Fig. 5, step S2, Fig. 10, step U4, para 0252, 0285, “the left half of the exposure region is irradiated with exposure light emitted from the light source through the reticle RLk and the projection optical system”); aligning one or more microfabrication processes to the one or more of the first set of microfabrication alignment patterns (35-4, 35-5, 35-9, 35-10, right halves of 35-3, 35-8, Fig. 10, step U5, para 0290, 0291, the wafer “is placed are moved relatively to each other, to perform aligning so that the reticle RRk and the right half of the exposure region face each other”, “the reticle RRk and the right half of the exposure region are aligned with each other, on the basis of the position information about the second alignment marks measured in the mark formation process”); and processing the wafer via microfabrication steps based on the alignment of the one or more microfabrication processes (Fig. 5, step S2, Fig. 10, step U4, para 0252, 0292, “the right half of the exposure region is irradiated with exposure light emitted from the light source through the reticle RRk and the projection optical system”).
However, the difference between the claimed invention and Iwamoto is that instead of dividing the wafer into left and right regions for two separate microfabrication or photolithography exposure processes, claim 1 is directed to one microfabrication process and one laser writing process. Iwamoto does not disclose one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns on the wafer, wherein at least one of a distance or an orientation between the one or more microfabrication alignment patterns and the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns is predetermined; aligning one or more laser writing processes to the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns; laser writing features into the wafer based on the alignment of the one or more laser writing processes. May discloses a device comprising a substrate (702, Fig. 17) and a photonic integrated circuit (PIC 704, abstract, para 0056). May discloses using a laser tool to write features (waveguides 708, para 0056) that has good alignment with the optical port (728) of the PIC, and disclosed fiducial markers used to determine the position of PIC with the substrate on which laser writing process is performed to form features or waveguides (para 0034, 0056). Although not explicitly stated, the components of PIC, as disclosed in May, are typically formed using microfabrication processes such a photolithography. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Iwamoto to provide a hybrid application on a single wafer where a microfabrication process is used to for one region and direct laser writing is provided for another region after performing alignment as taught by May (para 0034, 0056) by providing separate alignment mark for microfabrication process and laser-to-microfabrication alignment mark for laser writing process in a predetermined orientation and distance, aligning one or more laser writing process to the laser-to-microfabrication alignment mark and performing laser writing, and then aligning one or more microfabrication process to the microfabrication alignment mark, and performing microfabrication in order to use microfabrication for main chip layers and to rely on laser writing that does not require costly reticles for circuit edits or waveguide production.
Regarding claim 10, Iwamoto discloses a wafer (1, Fig. 2A, para 0176, 0177), comprising: a first set one or more microfabrication alignment patterns (35-4, 35-5, 35-9, 35-10, right halves of 35-3, 35-8, “second alignment marks”, Fig. 2B, Fig. 5, step S1, Fig. 6, step T3, Fig. 9B, para 0212, 0213, 0251, 0253, 0256); a second set of one or more microfabrication alignment patterns (35-1, 35-2, 35-6, 35-7, left halves of 35-3 and 35-8, “first alignment marks”, Fig. 2B, Fig. 5, step S1, Fig. 6, step T2, Fig. 9A, para 0212, 0213, 0251, 0253, 0255); wherein at least one of a distance or an orientation between one or more of the first set of microfabrication alignment patterns and one or more of the second set of microfabrication alignment patterns is predetermined (“second alignment marks” are for the left half of the exposure region and “first alignment marks” are for the right half of the exposure region, para 0255, 0258, so distance and the orientation of the alignment patterns are predetermined); first features generated by one or more microfabrication processes (Fig. 5, step S2, Fig. 10, step U4, para 0252, 0285, “the left half of the exposure region is irradiated with exposure light emitted from the light source through the reticle RLk and the projection optical system”) aligned to the first set of one or more microfabrication alignment patterns (35-1, 35-2, 35-6, 35-7, left halves of 35-3 and 35-8, Fig. 10, step U4, para 0283, 0284, the wafer “is placed are moved relatively to each other, to perform aligning so that the reticle RLk and the left half of the exposure region face each other”, “the reticle RLk and the left half of the exposure region are aligned with each other, on the basis of the position information about the first alignment marks measured in the mark formation process”); and second features generated by one or more microfabrication processes (Fig. 5, step S2, Fig. 10, step U4, para 0252, 0292, “the right half of the exposure region is irradiated with exposure light emitted from the light source through the reticle RRk and the projection optical system”) aligned to the one or more microfabrication alignment patterns.
However, the difference between the claimed invention and Iwamoto is that instead of dividing the wafer into left and right regions for two separate microfabrication or photolithography exposure processes that forms first features and second features, claim 10 is directed to first features generated by one or more laser writing processes aligned to the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns; and second features generated by one or more microfabrication processes aligned to the one or more microfabrication alignment patterns. Iwamoto does not disclose one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns, wherein at least one of a distance or an orientation between the one or more microfabrication alignment patterns and the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns is predetermined; first features generated by one or more laser writing processes aligned to the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns. May discloses a device comprising a substrate (702, Fig. 17) and a photonic integrated circuit (PIC 704, abstract, para 0056). May discloses using a laser tool to write features (waveguides 708, para 0056) that has good alignment with the optical port (728) of the PIC, and disclosed fiducial markers used to determine the position of PIC with the substrate on which laser writing process is performed to form features or waveguides (para 0034, 0056). Although not explicitly stated, the components of PIC, as disclosed in May, are typically formed using microfabrication processes such a photolithography. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Iwamoto to provide a wafer by a hybrid application on a single wafer where a microfabrication process is used to for one region and direct laser writing is provided for another region after performing alignment as taught by May (para 0034, 0056) by providing separate alignment mark for microfabrication process and laser-to-microfabrication alignment mark for laser writing process in a predetermined orientation and distance, aligning one or more laser writing process to the laser-to-microfabrication alignment mark and performing laser writing, and then aligning one or more microfabrication process to the microfabrication alignment mark, and performing microfabrication in order to use microfabrication for main chip layers and to rely on laser writing that does not require costly reticles for circuit edits or waveguide production.
Alternatively, regarding claim 10, Iwamoto discloses a wafer (1, Fig. 2A, 2B), comprising a first set of alignment marks (35-4, 35-5, 35-9, 35-10, Fig. 2B, Fig. 9B) and a second set of alignment marks (35-1, 35-2, 35-6, 35-7, Fig. 2B, Fig. 9A) and a first feature (Fig. 10, U4) and a second feature (Fig. 10, U5).
MPEP 2113 II. states, “once the examiner provides a rationale tending to show that the claimed product appears to be the same or similar to that of the prior art, although produced by a different process, the burden shifts to applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an nonobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product.”
Regarding claims 8 and 15, Iwamoto discloses wherein the wafer is a glass wafer or a silicon wafer (para 0222).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, although Iwamoto does not disclose wherein generating the one or more microfabrication alignment patterns and generating the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns comprises generating the one or more microfabrication alignment patterns and the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns using a single mask, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a single mask to form the alignment patterns in order to increase throughput and cost by using a single mask.
Claim(s) 2-7 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto et al. (Iwamoto) in view of May et al. as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Ding (2015/0380369) and Lan et al. (Lan) (2011/0156285).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, the further difference between the claimed invention and the modified Iwamoto is wherein the laser writing includes generating one or more laser-written alignment marks for assessing an alignment of the one or more laser writing processes to one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks of the laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns. Ding discloses in para 0029 that laser writing is used to generate alignment marks on a substrate (101). Lan discloses alignment mark (12, Fig. 1A, para 0021) and forming alignment mark (13, Fig. 1B, para 0022) for assessing alignment of the photolithography process to alignment marks (abstract, para 0022, 0023). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify Iwamoto by generating laser-written alignment marks as taught by Ding and to assess the alignment of the laser writing process to alignment marks in order to ensure that the feature formed by laser writing is properly accomplished.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, the further difference between the claimed invention and the modified Iwamoto is wherein the processing of the wafer via the microfabrication steps includes generating one or more microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks for assessing an alignment of the one or more microfabrication processes to the one or more microfabrication alignment marks, one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks, one or more laser-written alignment marks, or a combination thereof. Lan discloses alignment mark (12, Fig. 1A, para 0021) and forming alignment mark (13, Fig. 1B, para 0022) for assessing alignment of the photolithography process to alignment marks (abstract, para 0022, 0023). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify Iwamoto by generating one or more microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks for assessing an alignment of the one or more microfabrication processes to the one or more microfabrication alignment marks, one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks, one or more laser-written alignment marks, or a combination thereof in order to ensure that the alignment of the one or more microfabrication processes to the one or more microfabrication alignment marks, one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks, one or more laser-written alignment marks, or a combination thereof is properly accomplished.
Regarding claims 4 and 5 the further difference between the claimed invention and the modified Iwamoto are determining at least one of a vertical linear misalignment, a horizontal linear misalignment, or an angular misalignment between the one or more laser-written alignment marks and the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks and determining at least one of a vertical linear misalignment, a horizontal linear misalignment, or an angular misalignment between the microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks and the one or more laser-written alignment marks. Lan discloses alignment mark (vertical and horizontal lines 12, Fig. 1A, para 0021) and forming alignment mark (vertical and horizontal lines 13, Fig. 1B, para 0022) for assessing vertical and horizontal misalignment of the photolithography process to alignment marks by (abstract, para 0022, 0023). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to assess misalignment in the vertical direction, horizontal direction between the one or more laser-written alignment marks and the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks and between the microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks and the one or more laser-written alignment marks to ensure proper alignment.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Iwamoto does not disclose wherein: the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks includes first vernier marks; the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes second vernier marks; and further comprising determining at least one of a vertical linear misalignment, a horizontal linear misalignment, or an angular misalignment between the one or more laser-written alignment marks and the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks based on the first vernier marks and the second vernier marks and does not disclose wherein: the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes first vernier marks; the one or more microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks includes second vernier marks; and further comprising determining at least one of a vertical linear misalignment, a horizontal linear misalignment, or an angular misalignment between the one or more microfabrication alignment marks and the laser-written alignment marks based on the first vernier marks and the second vernier marks. Lan discloses the first alignment marks of vertical and horizonal vernier marks (12, Fig. 1C) and the second alignment marks of vertical and horizontal lines (13, Fig. 1C) and the first and second alignment marks used to determine at least one of a vertical linear misalignment, a horizontal linear misalignment, or an angular misalignment between the first alignment marks and the second alignment marks (abstract, para 0022, 0023). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks includes vernier marks, the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes vernier marks, the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes vernier marks and the one or more microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks includes vernier marks in order to determine the vertical and horizonal misalignment as taught by Lan.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Iwamoto does not disclose wherein: the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks includes first vernier marks; and the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes second vernier marks and does not disclose wherein: the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes first vernier marks; and the one or more microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks includes second vernier marks. Lan discloses the first alignment marks of vertical and horizonal vernier marks (12, Fig. 1C) and the second alignment marks of vertical and horizontal lines (13, Fig. 1C). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment marks includes vernier marks, the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes vernier marks, the one or more laser-written alignment marks includes vernier marks and the one or more microfabrication-to-laser alignment marks includes vernier marks in order to determine the vertical and horizonal misalignment as taught by Lan.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lin et al. (2017/0220728) discloses a first set of alignment marks (30) of each exposure field and a second set of alignment marks (40) for each exposure field. Lin et al. does not disclose aligning one or more laser writing processes to the one or more laser-to-microfabrication alignment patterns; laser writing features into the wafer based on the alignment of the one or more laser writing processes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER B KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2120. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 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.
/PETER B KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 June 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights