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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to claims 1 and 11 , the limitation of “the control unit is configured to measure a degree of degradation of each unit mirror of the plurality of unit mirrors” is vague and indefinite because the claim does not recite any structure capable of performing a physical measurement of degradation (e.g., detector, sensor, monitoring optics). A control unit, by itself, would not be understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art as being capable of directly measuring physical degradation without receiving measurement signals from a measurement device. Therefore, the scope and breadth of the claims are unclear. Further, the term “degradation” is broad and encompasses multiple unrelated mechanism, including contamination, reflectivity loss, structural cracking, coating delamination, or other performance deviations. The claim does not define what parameter constitutes degradation or how the degree of degradation is measured. Therefore, the scope, meaning and breadth of the claims are unclear.
As to claim 15, the limitation of “the control unit is configured to determine an extreme ultraviolet light loss...by measuring the intensity of extreme ultraviolet light...is initialized” is ambiguous since it is unclear how the control unit can perform its function as recited while there are no structural devices/elements to measure the intensity of the ultraviolet light. Please clarify.
For the purpose of examination, and under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, this limitation is interpreted broadly as the control unit being configured to determine degradation based on measurement information obtained from an unspecified measurement mechanism. With respect to the term “degradation”, it is interpreted as including any reduction in optical performance contamination, structural damage, or other condition resulting in reduced mirror performance.
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.
At best, the claims are understood (see rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph supra). Claims are anticipated/unpatentable by/over references .
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim (U.S.Pat. 2013/0208253 A1) in view of Elm et al (U.S.Pat. 12,140,877).
With respect to claims 1 and 15-20, Sim discloses a semiconductor process apparatus comprising: an extreme ultraviolet light source (10) configured to output extreme ultraviolet light within an extreme ultraviolet wavelength band (see paragraph [0031]): a mask stage (40) configured to support a mask (50) configured to reflect extreme ultraviolet light in a pattern to result in patterned extreme ultraviolet light; a substrate stage (80) configured to support a substrate (90), wherein the substrate is configured to position a substrate support by the substrate stage to be irradiated by the patterned extreme ultraviolet light reflected from the mask (see figure 1); an optical light system (70) including a plurality of projection mirrors (22-23; 71-74) configured to guide the patterned extreme ultraviolet light from the mask stage to the substrate stage; a control unit (30) configured to control the light source, the mask stage, the substrate stage, the optical lighting and the projection optical system (70) and an optical intensity adjuster (64) disposed between the mask stage (40) and the optical projection system (70) and configured to adjust the intensity of the patterned extreme ultraviolet light and wherein among the plurality of mirrors, a first light mirror includes a plurality of unit mirrors (see paragraph [0031]). Sim explicitly discloses optical intensity distribution can be varied among mirror domains and the controller (30) generates uniformity correction map and control programs for photolithography operation (see paragraphs [0030-0032]). Sim does not expressly disclose the control unit (30) configured to measure degree of degradation of each unit mirror. However, this feature is well known per se. For example, Elm discloses a semiconductor process apparatus (see figure 1) and teaches determining degradation of optical elements based on optical measurement and degradation modeling. Elm explicitly discloses determining an extreme ultraviolet light loss of the optical projection system by measuring an intensity of extreme ultraviolet light that is incident to the optical system and the intensity of the extreme ultraviolet light emitted from the projection optical system in a state in which an offset of the optical intensity adjuster is initialized (see col.11, lines 20 thru col.13, line 31). In view of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sim and Elm to obtain the claimed invention as recited in the claims of the present application. It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to incorporate the degradation monitoring as suggested by Elm into the apparatus of Sim in order to improve reliability and optical performance of EUV photolithography system. Furthermore, in view of the teachings of Sim and modified by Elm, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to replace at least defected mirror of the plurality of unit mirrors with at least one other unit mirror for the purpose of improving the quality of the semiconductor process apparatus, as intended by Sim.
With respect to claims 11, in view of the teachings of Sim and Elm, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use spare mirror elements or unused mirror regions to replace degraded mirror to maintain reflectivity and system performance.
With respect to claims 2-4, the claims recite structural refinement of mirror structures and mirror element control. As discussed, Sim discloses mirror domain structures and mirror array architectures and control of mirror domain operation. Thus, claims 2-4 are unpatentable over Sim in view of Elm for at least the same reasons set forth for claim 1.
As to claims 6-8 and 9, 11-14, further recite optical intensity distribution adjustment and optical system control refinements. Sim discloses adjusting optical intensity distribution using mirror domains and generating correction maps and control programs. Thus, claims 6-8 and 9 are unpatentable over Sim in view of Elm for at least the reasons set forth for claim 1.
With respect to claims 5, 10, Sim as modified by Elm, does not expressly disclose the total number of the mirrors, as recited in the instant claims. It is the Examiner’s position that it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to select a proper number of mirrors of the projection optical system to increasing the quality of the intensity of the illumination light since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Feldmann (U.S.Pat. 11,947,265); Becker et al (US 2024/0319621 A1) discloses semiconductor process devices and have been cited for technical background.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG HENRY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00AM-4:30PM.
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 Minh 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.
HUNG HENRY NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2882
Hvn
1/30/26
/HUNG V NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882