CTNF 18/915,918 CTNF 84924 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a process without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a series of steps. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because all the process limitations recite an abstract idea of math and/or mental process. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because while the step of measuring a light intensity distribution is simply appending well-understood conventional activity previously known to the industry, the remaining steps do not present any technical solution in technology. Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because: The first step of measuring a light intensity distribution is just a step of gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques using conventional measurement or metrology device. Furthermore, the step of specifying a plurality of candidates is amounted to mere data gathering, wherein the step of selecting one algorithm used to determine a position is the step of Selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated (See MPEP 2106.05). Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a process without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a series of steps. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because all the process limitations recite an abstract idea of math and/or mental process. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because while the step of measuring a light intensity distribution is simply appending well-understood conventional activity previously known to the industry, the remaining steps do not present any technical solution in technology. Claim 16 recites a computer program product that performs the steps of specifying a plurality of candidates (data of substrate edge position data) and selecting an algorithm from the plurality of algorithms, which are an abstract idea that is math and/or mental process (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Claim 16 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because: The first step of measuring a light intensity distribution is just a step of gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques using conventional measurement or metrology device. Furthermore, the step of specifying a plurality of candidates is amounted to mere data gathering, wherein the step of selecting one algorithm used to determine a position is the step of Selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated. Claims 2-13 are rejected by virtue of their dependency to a rejected claim. Claims 2-13 define characteristics of measuring a light intensity distribution, specifying a plurality of candidates and selecting one algorithm used to determine a position, fails to add a meaningful limitation that amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception and is rejected for the same reasoning provided for claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ishi et al. [US 20080013089 A1, hereafter Ishi] . As per Claims 1 and 16 , Ishii teaches a substrate processing method of processing a substrate (Para 20), comprising: measuring a light intensity distribution obtained from a peripheral edge portion of the substrate when the peripheral edge portion is illuminated with light from a light source unit (Para 237, wherein variation in the intensity of the wafer edge pattern, a curvature of the edge of the wafer that is obtained from the imaging data); specifying a plurality of candidates (VA, VB and VC) for an edge position of the substrate from the light intensity distribution measured in the measuring, by applying each of a plurality of types of algorithms to the light intensity distribution (See fig. 6, Para 120-122, wherein imaging signals from three measurement units 40a, 40b and 40c are processed by the controller built in pre-alignment unit main body 34, and based on signals from the controller, an X error, a Y error and a .theta.z error of wafer W are obtained by stage controller 19); and selecting one algorithm used to determine a position of the substrate from the plurality of types of algorithms based on the plurality of candidates specified in the specifying (Para 208 and 214, wherein mark detection parameters (parameters related to types of algorithms used to measure marks and processing algorithm of selected signal waveforms). As per Claim 2 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of types of algorithms is set to specify the edge position based on a point where a light intensity matches a determination threshold in the light intensity distribution (a notch of wafer W), and the plurality of types of algorithms include at least two types of algorithms different from each other in the determination threshold (Para 121). As per Claim 3 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of types of algorithms is set to specify the edge position based on, if there are a plurality of points where a light intensity matches a determination threshold in the light intensity distribution, a point that satisfies a predetermined condition among the plurality of points, and the plurality of types of algorithms include at least two types of algorithms different from each other in the predetermined condition (See fig. 6, Para 121). As per Claim 4 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising obtaining an evaluation value for each of the plurality of candidates specified in the specifying, wherein in the selecting, one algorithm is selected from the plurality of types of algorithms based on the evaluation value obtained for each of the plurality of candidates obtained in the obtaining (Para 185 and 208). As per Claim 5 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein in the obtaining, the evaluation value is obtained for each of the plurality of candidates based on a similarity between an outer shape of the substrate obtained from the edge position and a first reference shape (Para 121 and 144). As per Claim 6 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein in the obtaining, the evaluation value is obtained for each of the plurality of candidates based on a circularity of an outer shape of the substrate obtained from the edge position (Para 93). As per Claim 7 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein in the obtaining, the evaluation value is obtained for each of the plurality of candidates based on a similarity between a shape of a cutout portion of the substrate obtained from the edge position and a second reference shape (Para 214, The optimization processing is performed by, for example, comparing the obtained detection result of the edges of wafer W and the detection result of the edges of wafer W that have been logged in storage unit 21). As per Claim 8 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein in the obtaining, the evaluation value is obtained for each of the plurality of candidates specified in the specifying, based on a plurality of evaluation indices obtained from the edge position, and the plurality of evaluation indices include at least two of a similarity between an outer shape of the substrate obtained from the edge position and a first reference shape, a circularity of an outer shape of the substrate obtained from the edge position, and a similarity between a shape of a cutout portion of the substrate obtained from the edge position and a second reference shape (See fig. 6, Para 121). As per Claim 9 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein in the obtaining, the evaluation value is obtained based on a result of applying a predetermined weighting to each of the plurality of evaluation indices (Para 237). As per Claim 10 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 4, further comprising: remeasuring, after positioning the substrate such that the peripheral edge portion of the substrate is arranged in an optical path of light from the light source unit, a light intensity distribution obtained from the peripheral edge portion; and determining a position of the substrate by applying the one algorithm selected in the selecting to the light intensity distribution measured in the remeasuring, wherein the obtaining is performed in parallel with positioning of the substrate in the remeasuring (See fig. 6, Para 121). As per Claim 11 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein positioning of the substrate in the remeasuring is performed based on a candidate of the edge position specified in the specified using one of an algorithm designated in advance and an algorithm used in the previous deciding among the plurality of types of algorithms (Para 208). As per Claim 12 , Ishii teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the measuring and the specifying are performed in parallel (Para 149). As per Claim 13 , Ishii teaches an article manufacturing method comprising: processing a substrate by using a substrate processing method according to claim 1; forming a pattern on the substrate having undergone the processing; and manufacturing an article from the substrate having undergone the forming (Para 6). As per Claim 14 , Ishii teaches a substrate processing apparatus for processing a substrate (Para 20 and 126), comprising: a measurement device configured to measure a light intensity distribution obtained from a peripheral edge portion of the substrate when the peripheral edge portion is illuminated with light (Para 237, wherein intensity of a wafer edge pattern (i.e. contrast between a bright portion and a dark portion near the edge) that is obtained from detection results (imaging data), variation in the intensity of the wafer edge pattern); and a controller 19 configured to control positioning of the substrate (See fig. 2, Para 292), wherein the controller specifies a plurality of candidates (VA, VB and VC) for an edge position of the substrate from the light intensity distribution by applying each of a plurality of types of algorithms to the light intensity distribution measured by the measurement device (See fig. 6, Para 120-122, wherein imaging signals from three measurement units 40a, 40b and 40c are processed by the controller built in pre- alignment unit main body 34, and based on signals from the controller, an X error, a Y error and a .theta.z error of wafer W are obtained by stage controller 19), and selects one algorithm used to determine a position of the substrate from the plurality of types of algorithms based on the plurality of candidates (Para 208 and 214, wherein mark detection parameters (parameters related to types of algorithms used to measure marks and processing algorithm of selected signal waveforms). As per Claim 15 , Ishii teaches a lithography apparatus for forming a pattern of a substrate, comprising: a substrate processing apparatus according to claim 14; and a formation device configured to form a pattern on the substrate processed by the substrate processing apparatus (Para 6). 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 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 2 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 3 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 4 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 5 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 6 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 7 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 8 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 9 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/915,918 Page 10 Art Unit: 2882
Prosecution Insights