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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on June 22, 2026 have been fully considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The following objection is from the previous Office Action . An annotated portion of Fig. 3 is included to clarify the issue.
In para 0072, it is stated that the first undefined region arises in the region of kx=ky=0 for the order of diffraction B+1 and a second undefined region arises in the region of kx=0, ky=−0.6 for the order of diffraction B−1. It is unclear which regions in Fig. 3, B_EF are the first undefined region and the second undefined region disclosed in para 0072.
PNG
media_image1.png
415
1020
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, it is unclear how an interpolation and/or an extrapolation is involved in compensation. What is being interpolated or extrapolated? The amendment adding “to determine or estimate the parameter of the diffraction property” does not clarify the issue. Outside of claim 4, the term “interpolation” appears once in para 0027 of the publication and the term “extrapolation” appears twice in para 0027 and in para 0029. It is still not clear from what the parameter of diffraction property is being interpolated or extrapolated or what the process of interpolation and extrapolation entails. In order to expedite prosecution, it is assumed that virtual shifting of intensity profile is considered interpolating or extrapolating.
The remaining claims, not specifically mentioned, are rejected for incorporating the defects from the base claim by dependency.
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) 1-13, 15 and 19-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamijo et al. (JP 6477850 in IDS, translation provided with Office Action, para number refers to translation).
Regarding claim 1, Kamijo discloses a method for characterizing a lithography apparatus (para 0001, 0002, “mask characteristic estimation technique”, “exposure apparatus…in lithography processes”, para 0041, “a method for estimating the state of extra-aperture diffracted light generated from the reticle R using the estimation device 10, and a method for exposing a wafer while correcting the imaging characteristics as optical characteristics of the projection optical system PL using the results obtained by this estimation method”) configured to cause an obscuration of radiation (35, Fig. 1, para 0023, “a variable aperture stop 35 is provided at or near the illumination pupil plane IPP” and AS, Fig. 1, para 0041, “the diffracted light passing through the projection pupil 71A (aperture stop AS), can be measured by the measurement unit 20, but the light intensity distribution of the diffracted light outside the aperture that cannot pass through the aperture stop AS cannot be measured by the measurement unit 20”), comprising: detecting a first substantially undiffracted radiation of the lithography apparatus (para 0044, 0045, “a clear glass substrate GP placed on the reticle stage RST…the glass substrate GP is illuminated with illumination light IL from the illumination optical system ILS…and the measurement unit 20 measures the light intensity distribution (hereinafter referred to as the zeroth-order intensity distribution) 72”, “ zero-order intensity distribution 72 measured”, 70AP, Fig. 6(A)); detecting a first diffracted radiation of the lithography apparatus, the first diffracted radiation having been diffracted at a characterization element (R, para 0046, 0047, “the glass substrate GP is unloaded from the reticle stage RST, and the reticle R is loaded”, “the reticle R is illuminated with illumination light IL from the illumination optical system ILS, and the light intensity distribution (hereinafter referred to as the diffraction intensity distribution) 74…is measured by the measurement unit 20”, “diffraction intensity distribution 74 measured…is a distribution formed by the diffracted light DL”, the diffraction intensity distribution 74 in the projection pupil 71A has…region 70BD1, where the ±1st-order diffracted light in the X direction is incident); determining a diffraction property of the characterization element, based at least in part on the first substantially undiffracted radiation and the first diffracted radiation (para 0041, “a method for estimating the state of extra-aperture diffracted light generated from the reticle R”, para 0063, “by simply determining the zero-order intensity distribution 72 and the diffraction intensity distribution 74, the light intensity distribution of the diffracted light outside the aperture can be accurately and efficiently estimated by calculation”, para 0066, “reticle characteristic estimation method of this embodiment is a method of estimating the state of diffracted light generated from the pattern of the reticle R using the estimation device 10”), wherein the diffraction property comprises a diffraction efficiency of the characterization element, an obscured diffraction beam of the radiation having been diffracted at the characterization element caused by an obscuration within a pupil of the lithography apparatus, and/or at least one order of diffraction of the first diffracted radiation (para 0047, Fig. 6(B), regions 70BD1 and 70AD2, “where the + 1st order diffracted light in the X direction is incident”, and para 0048-0055, Fig. 6(C) and 7, superimposing undiffracted zero order intensity distribution (72) on to the diffraction intensity distribution (74) by virtually shifting and obtaining light intensity distribution of obscured light or diffraction light with a diffraction angle large enough for it not to pass through the aperture AS).
Regarding claim 2, Kamijo discloses wherein said determining of the diffraction property is based further on a compensation comprising a mathematical operation to determine or estimate a parameter of the diffraction property (para 0041, “correcting the imaging characteristics as optical characteristics of the projection optical system PL using the results obtained by this estimation method”, para 0047, measured intensity distributions 72 and 74 is supplied to the calculation unit 54, which then performs calculation processes”, para 0048-0055 discloses mathematical operations, see the original Japanese text for equations used).
Regarding claim 3, Kamijo discloses wherein the compensation compensates an appearance of the diffraction property associated with the obscuration (para 0041, “a method for estimating the state of extra-aperture diffracted light generated from the reticle R using the estimation device 10”, para 0063, “by simply determining the zero-order intensity distribution 72 and the diffraction intensity distribution 74, the light intensity distribution of the diffracted light outside the aperture can be accurately and efficiently estimated by calculation”).
Regarding claim 4, Kamijo discloses wherein the compensation comprises an interpolation and/or an extrapolation (para 0041, “estimation device 10 estimates the virtual light intensity distribution of the extra-aperture diffracted light”, para 0055, “a virtual light intensity distribution 78b of the diffracted light outside the aperture on the projection pupil plane PLP can be estimated (obtained by calculation)) to determine or estimate the parameter of the diffraction property (para 0055).
Regarding claim 5, Kamijo discloses wherein the diffraction property is based at least in part on a relationship of the first diffracted radiation to the first substantially undiffracted radiation (para 0063, “by simply determining the zero-order intensity distribution 72 and the diffraction intensity distribution 74, the light intensity distribution of the diffracted light outside the aperture can be accurately and efficiently estimated by calculation”).
Regarding claim 6, Kamijo discloses wherein the diffraction property comprises a diffraction efficiency of the first diffracted radiation in relation to the first substantially undiffracted radiation in an angular space (para 0044-0055, Fig. 6(A)-6(C), the first substantially undiffracted radiation in an angular space (72), the first diffracted radiation in an angular space (74) and virtually shifting and superimposing the two in an angular space (76A-76C)).
Regarding claim 7, Kamijo discloses wherein said detecting of the first substantially undiffracted radiation comprises detecting an intensity of the first substantially undiffracted radiation in a pupil of the lithography apparatus; and/or wherein said detecting of the first diffracted radiation comprises detecting an intensity of the diffracted radiation in the pupil (Fig. 6(A), 6(B), para 0045, 0046).
Regarding claim 8, Kamijo discloses wherein the first substantially undiffracted radiation comprises a plurality of first substantially undiffracted radiation beams (Fig. 6(A), para 0045; and wherein the first diffracted radiation comprises a plurality of first diffracted radiation beams, each of which was diffracted at the characterization element (Fig. 6(B), para 0046).
Regarding claim 9, Kamijo discloses wherein said determining of the diffraction property comprises determining at least one order of diffraction of the first diffracted radiation (Fig. 6(B), para 0047, “regions 70BD1 and 70AD2 where the ±1st-order diffracted light in the X direction is incident”).
Regarding claim 10, Kamijo discloses wherein said determining of the diffraction property comprises determining at least one order of diffraction of the first diffracted radiation (para 0047); and wherein the order of diffraction is determined for at least one first diffracted radiation beam from the plurality of diffracted radiation beams (para 0047, “±1st-order diffracted light”).
Regarding claim 11, Kamijo discloses wherein a corresponding first substantially undiffracted radiation beam(70AP, 70BP) from the plurality of first substantially undiffracted radiation beams (70AP to 70DP) is determined for the at least one first diffracted radiation beam (70BD1, 70AD2, Fig. 6(B), para 0047, “the diffraction intensity distribution 74 in the projection pupil 71A has high light intensity in regions 70AP to 70DP where the zeroth-order light is incident and in regions 70BD1 and 70AD2 where the ±1st-order diffracted light in the X direction is incident”, para 0048, “the zero-order intensity distribution 72 is virtually shifted in the X direction and/or Y direction on the projection pupil plane PLP, and is superimposed on the diffraction intensity distribution 74”).
Regarding claim 12, Kamijo discloses wherein the diffraction property is determined for the at least one first diffracted radiation beam (para 0047, “diffraction intensity distribution 74 is expressed by the function dif[i][j]”).
Regarding claim 13, Kamijo discloses wherein the lithography apparatus is configured such that a subset of the first substantially undiffracted radiation (72, 70AP) is exposed to the obscuration (aperture stop AS at pupil plane PLP, Fig. 1, 5) and thereby forms an obscured subset (Fig. 6(A), para 0044, “zeroth-order intensity distribution) 72 (see FIG. 6A) within the projection pupil 71A”, pupil 71A is formed by obscuration or aperture stop AS).
Regarding claim 15, Kamijo discloses wherein the lithography apparatus is further configured such that a subset of the first diffracted radiation is not exposed to the obscuration and thereby forms an unobscured subset (para 0041, “the extra-aperture diffracted light is assumed to be incident on a region outside the projection pupil 71A on the projection pupil plane PLP of the projection optical system PL”).
Regarding claim 19, Kamijo discloses detecting a second substantially undiffracted radiation of the lithography apparatus; detecting a second diffracted radiation of the lithography apparatus, the second diffracted radiation having been diffracted at the characterization element; and determining a subset of the second substantially undiffracted radiation which is exposed to the obscuration, based at least in part on the diffraction property and the second diffracted radiation (Fig. 6(A) shows first and second substantially undiffracted radiation (70AP, 70BP), Fig. 6(B) shows first and second diffracted radiation (70BD1, 70AD2), determining a subset of the second substantially undiffracted radiation which is exposed to obscuration in Fig. 6(C) and 7, para 0044-0055).
Regarding claim 20, Kamijo discloses wherein the second substantially undiffracted radiation is associated with a beam path of the first substantially undiffracted radiation, with the second diffracted radiation being associated with a beam path of the first diffracted radiation (Fig. 6(A) and 6(B) show that the beam paths of the first and second substantially undiffracted radiation are associated and the beam paths of the first and second diffracted radiation are associated).
Regarding claim 21, Kamijo discloses adjusting a radiation emitting element of the lithography apparatus, based at least in part on said determining of the obscured subset of the first substantially undiffracted radiation (para 0044, “drives the spatial light modulator 32 of the illumination optical system ILS via the illumination control unit 46 so that the light intensity distribution 70 corresponding to these illumination conditions is set”, para 0069, “the light intensity distribution 70 at the illumination pupil 37 can be accurately set to a target distribution by the spatial light modulator 32”).
Regarding claim 22, Kamijo discloses wherein the characterization element is arranged in a reticle plane of the lithography apparatus (Fig. 1, 5, para 0040, “diffracted light generated from the pattern of the reticle R”).
Regarding claim 23, Kamijo discloses wherein the characterization element comprises a diffraction structure (para 0040, “diffracted light generated from the pattern of the reticle R”, Fig. 3, para 0042).
Regarding claim 24, Kamijo discloses wherein the obscuration is associated with a radiation projecting element of the lithography apparatus and/or an obscuration stop of the lithography apparatus (aperture stop AS at pupil PLP, Fig. 1, 5).
Regarding claim 25, Kamijo discloses wherein the first substantially undiffracted radiation comprises radiation reflected at a reticle plane of the lithography apparatus; and/or wherein the first diffracted radiation comprises radiation diffracted at the reticle plane (para 0046, “the diffracted light from the reticle R is measured by the measurement unit 20”).
Regarding claim 26, Kamijo discloses a lithography apparatus (Fig. 1, 5), comprising: a radiation detecting element (20, para 0046); a diffraction property determining element (10, para 0037, “estimation device 10 for estimating the characteristics of the reticle R”) of a characterization element, wherein the lithography apparatus is configured to perform a method as claimed in claim 1 (see above).
Regarding claim 27, Kamijo discloses wherein the lithography apparatus is configured to carry out the method automatically (para 0047, “programs executed by the main control device 14 and the calculation unit 54”).
Regarding claim 28, Kamijo discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer apparatus and/or a lithography apparatus, cause the computer apparatus and/or the lithography apparatus to carry out the method as claimed in claim 1 (para 0047, “programs executed by the main control device 14 and the calculation unit 54 are recorded on, for example, a recording medium 51 and can be read from the recording medium 51 by the recording/playback unit 50”, ” main control device 14 is connected to an input/output unit 48, a recording/playback unit 50 that records and plays back data on a recording medium 51 such as a DVD (digital versatile disk), CD-ROM, or flash memory, a storage unit 52 such as a magnetic disk device or a semiconductor non-volatile memory”).
Regarding claim 29, Kamijo discloses the lithography apparatus comprising a memory storing a computer program comprising the instructions as claimed in claim 28 (para 0037, “main control device 14 is connected to an input/output unit 48, a recording/playback unit 50 that records and plays back data on a recording medium 51 such as a DVD (digital versatile disk), CD-ROM, or flash memory, a storage unit 52 such as a magnetic disk device or a semiconductor non-volatile memory”).
Regarding claim 30, Kamijo discloses adjusting a radiation emitting element of the lithography apparatus, based at least in part on said determining of the obscured subset of the first substantially undiffracted radiation (para 0044, “drives the spatial light modulator 32 of the illumination optical system ILS via the illumination control unit 46 so that the light intensity distribution 70 corresponding to these illumination conditions is set”, para 0069, “the light intensity distribution 70 at the illumination pupil 37 can be accurately set to a target distribution by the spatial light modulator 32”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The reasons for allowance are provided in the previous Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on June 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kamijo reference does not disclose the claimed “characterization element”. Applicant cites specification para 0011-0013, which describe the characterization element as allowing “an optimal calculation of the radiation inaccessible to measurement technology and of the characterization or calibration of the lithography apparatus”. Under MPEP 2111, the examiner must read the specification to understand what the applicant means by a term, but cannot add unclaimed structural features or preferred embodiments. The reticle R of Kamijo is used to obtain an optimal calculation of radiation inaccessible to measurement (abstract, para 0041, estimating the state of diffraction light not measured by the measurement unit 20 because the diffracted light outside the aperture cannot pass through the aperture stop AS).
Applicant also argues that Kamijo does not disclose a lithography apparatus configured to cause an obscuration of radiation. Applicant argues that Kamijo includes an aperture stop 35 which merely limits the beam cross-section. However, obscuration of radiation means a specific parts of the light path is blocked by a beam blocker or a pupil filter. The aperture stop 35 of Kamijo blocks a specific parts of the light path, and the aperture stop AS of Kamijo also blocks a specific parts of the light path preventing diffraction light of certain angles from reaching the measurement unit 20. Therefore, Kamijo discloses a lithography apparatus configured to cause an obscuration radiation.
Applicant further argues that Kamijo does not disclose the diffraction property as claimed, which includes diffraction efficiency, an obscured diffraction beam caused by an obscuration within a pupil of the lithography apparatus or at least one order of diffraction of the first diffracted radiation. Kamijo discloses at least one order of diffraction of the first diffracted radiation (Fig. 6(B), para 0046, intensity distribution 74, light regions 70BD1 and 70AD2 where the + 1st order diffraction light is incident). Applicant’s specification discloses in para 0029 that the diffraction efficiency is based on the relationship between the first diffracted radiation and the first undiffracted radiation. Kamijo discloses such relationship in para 0044-0055). Kamijo discloses measuring an obscured diffraction beam caused by an obscuration within a pupil (AS) of the lithography apparatus (abstract, para 0044-0055).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 August 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights