CTNF 18/990,783 CTNF 89526 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status1. 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA 2. Claim s 2, 9, 12, 15-16 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding Claim 2, line 2, change “correponds” to – corresponds--. Regarding Claim 9, line 2, change “grating grating” to – grating--. Regarding Claim 12, line 3, change “iilumination” to – illumination --. Regarding Claim 15, line 4, change “a image” to – an image--. Regarding Claim 16, line 2, change “correponds” to – corresponds--. Regarding Claim 19, line 1, change “compirses” to – comprises --. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 3. 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. 07-21-aia AIA 4. Claim s 1-2, 4-6, 12-13, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Pub. No. 2009/0059196 A1 by Bakshi et al. (hereinafter Bakshi ) in view of US Patent Pub. No. 2014/0168758 A1 by Rose et al. (hereinafter Rose ) . Regarding Claim 1, Bakshi teaches a reflective imaging system (Fig. 1A) comprising (Fig. 1A-3) : an illumination source (Fig. 1A @ 101, Par. [0022]) configured to generate an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) illumination beam (Par. [0006]) ; one or more first detectors (Fig. 1A @ 108, Par. [0027]) positioned in an image plane of the first optical path configured to detect the EUV light (Par. [0027]) ; one or more second detectors (Fig. 1A @ 109, Par. [0027]) positioned in an image plane of the second optical path configured to detect the OOB light (Par. [0027]) ; and a controller (Fig. 1A @ 111, Par. [0027]) communicatively coupled (Par. [0009, 0023]) to the one or more first detectors (Fig. 1A @ 108, Par. [0009, 0023, 0027]) and the one or more second detectors (Fig. 1A @ 109, Par. [0009, 0023, 0027]) , the controller (Fig. 1A @ 111, Par. [0027]) including one or more processors (Par. [0035]) configured to receive data pertaining to the detected EUV light and the detected OOB light (Par. [0009, 0023, 0029]) but does not explicitly teach a reflective spectral filter configured to receive the EUV illumination beam and spectrally filter the received EUV illumination beam by reflecting spectrically filtered EUV light along a first optical path and reflecting out-of-band (OOB) light along a second optical path. However, Rose teaches a reflective spectral filter (Fig. 4-6 @ 10, Par. [0050-0052]) configured to receive the EUV illumination beam (Fig. 4-6 @ 14, Par. [0050-0052]) and spectrally filter (Title, Par. [0048, 0050-0052, 0064, 0069) the received EUV illumination beam (Fig. 4-6 @ 14, Par. [0050-0052]) by reflecting spectrically filtered EUV light along a first optical path (Fig. 4-6 @ 20, Par. [0050-0052]) and reflecting out-of-band (OOB) light along a second optical path (Fig. 4-6 @ 22, Par. [0050-0052]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakshi by Rose as taught above such that a reflective spectral filter configured to receive the EUV illumination beam and spectrally filter the received EUV illumination beam by reflecting spectrically filtered EUV light along a first optical path and reflecting out-of-band (OOB) light along a second optical path and to detect the spectrally filtered EUV light is accomplished in order to enhance the EUV (in the 3 nanometers to 20 nanometer spectrum band) inband reflectivity for grazing incident optical components while suppressing the reflectivity at other spectral regions (Rose, Par. [0006]) . Regarding Claim 2, Bakshi teaches the first optical path corresponds to the +1 st order (Par. [0027]: in-band, i.e. the +1 st order ) and the second optical path correponds to the 0 th order (Par. [0027]: out-of-band, i.e. the 0 th order ) . Regarding Claim 4, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the reflective spectral filter (Rose, Fig. 4-6 @ 10, Par. [0050-0052]) is angled relative to an incident angle (Rose, Fig. 4-6, illustrates such configuration) of the EUV illumination beam (Rose, Fig. 4-6 @ 14, Par. [0050-0052]) . Regarding Claim 5, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the reflective spectral filter (Rose, Fig. 4-6 @ 10, Par. [0050-0052]) comprises a substrate (Rose, Fig. 4-6 @ 26, Par. [0050-0052]) , a multilayer stack (Rose, Fig. 6, Par. [0018, 0069, 0073]) disposed on the substrate (Rose, Fig. 4-6 @ 26, Par. [0050-0052]) , and a capping material (Rose, Par. [0002-0003, 0008, 0069]) disposed on the multilayer stack (Rose, Fig. 6, Par. [0018, 0069, 0073]) . Regarding Claim 6, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the multilayer stack comprises alternating pairs of molybdenum and silicon layers (Rose, Par. [0071]) . Regarding Claim 12, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches a method for spectrally filtering extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light (See Claim 1 rejection above. Note: an apparatus claim can be used to implement a method claim) , the method comprising: receiving, by a reflective spectral filter, EUV light from an EUV iilumination beam (See Claim 1 rejection above) ; separating, by the reflective spectral filter, the EUV light into spectrally filtered EUV light and out-of-band (OOB) light (See Claim 1 rejection above) ; reflecting, by the reflective spectral filter, the spectrally filtered EUV light along a first optical path and the OOB light along a second optical path (See Claim 1 rejection above) ; detecting, by at least one first detector positioned in an image plane of the first optical path, the EUV light reflected along the first optical path (See Claim 1 rejection above) ; and detecting, by at least one second detector positioned in an image plane of the second optical path, the OOB light reflected along the second optical path (See Claim 1 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 13, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches receiving, by a controller communicatively coupled to the at least one second detector, data pertaining the OOB light reflected along the second optical path (See Claim 1 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 16, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the first optical path corresponds to the +1 st order and the second optical path correponds to the 0 th order (See Claim 2 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 17, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the reflective spectral filter is angled relative to an incident angle of the EUV illumination beam (See Claim 4 rejection above) . 07-22-aia AIA 5. Claim s 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bakshi in view of Rose as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of US Patent No. 6822251 B1 by Arenberg et al. (hereinafter Arenberg ) . Regarding Claim 3, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the first path and the spectrally filtered EUV light (See Claim 1 rejection above) but does not explicitly teach is directed to at least one of a downstream optic, a further reflective spectral filter, and a target substrate. However, Arenberg teaches at least one of a downstream optic (Fig. 1 @ 34, Col. 2, line 13-15) , a further reflective spectral filter (Col. 2, line 38-51) , and a target substrate (Col. 2, line 13-15: The EUV radiation 32 is collected by collector optics 34 and is directed to the photolithography apparatus (not shown), or other system using the EUV radiation 32 thus teaches the target substrate ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakshi as modified by Rose by Arenberg as taught above such that the spectrally filtered EUV light is directed to at least one of a downstream optic, a further reflective spectral filter, and a target substrate to be illuminated by the spectrally filtered EUV light is accomplished in order to direct the EUV radiation 32 is collected by collector optics 34 to the photolithography apparatus (not shown), or other system using the EUV radiation 32 (Arenberg, Col. 2, line 13-15, line 27-37) . Regarding Claim 14, Bakshi as modified by Rose as modified by Arenberg teaches directing the spectrally filtered EUV light to at least one of a downstream optic, a further reflective spectral filter, and a target substrate, wherein the target substrate is configured to by illuminated by the spectrally filtered EUV light (See Claim 3 rejection above) and reflect the spectrally filtered EUV light to be detected by the at least one first detector (See Claim 1 rejection above) . 07-22-aia AIA 6. Claim s 7-8, 10-11 and 19-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bakshi in view of Rose as applied to Claim 5 above and further in view of US Patent Pub. No. 2017/0160646 A1 by Banine et al. (hereinafter Banine ) . Regarding Claim 7, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the multilayer stack (See Claim 5 rejection above) but does not explicitly teach comprises a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch. However, Banine teaches a binary grating (Fig. 5, 10, 11 @ 110, 120, 121, Par. [0090, 0093]) having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (Par. [0096]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakshi as modified by Rose by Banine as taught above such that a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch is accomplished in order to for removing or suppressing DUV radiation from the optical path of the lithographic apparatus and also to control the divergence between the first direction, namely the direction of radiation that is reflected by the multilayer stack 100 , and the second and third directions, namely the direction of the radiation reflected by the first and second pluralities of recesses 110 , 120 , 121 (Banine, Par. [0093, 0097]) . Regarding Claim 8, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the multilayer stack (See Claim 5 rejection above) further comprising an absorber layer disposed on the multilayer stack (Rose, Fig. 5-6 @ 39, Par. [0071-0073]) , but does not explicitly teach the absorber layer having a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch. However, Banine teaches an absorber layer (Fig. 6-7, @ 204, 205, Par. [0106-0108, 0110]) disposed on the multilayer stack (Fig. 5 @ 100, Par. [0067]) , the absorber layer having a binary grating (Fig. 5, 10, 11 @ 110, 120, 121, Par. [0090, 0093]) having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (Par. [0096]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakshi as modified by Rose by Banine as taught above such that an absorber layer disposed on the multilayer stack, the absorber layer having a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch is accomplished in order to direct radiation of the desired wavelength such that it forms the conditioned beam of radiation while radiation having undesired wavelengths is directed in one or more different directions and may be absorbed by an appropriate radiation absorber for removing or suppressing DUV radiation from the optical path of the lithographic apparatus and also to control the divergence between the first direction, namely the direction of radiation that is reflected by the multilayer stack 100, and the second and third directions, namely the direction of the radiation reflected by the first and second pluralities of recesses 110, 120, 121 (Banine, Par. [0093, 0097, 0110]) . Regarding Claim 10, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches EUV refractory material disposed on the multilayer stack, the EUV refractory material having a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (Banine, Fig. 5, 10, 11 @ 110, 120, 121, Par. [0067, 0090, 0091, 0093, 0096]) . Regarding Claim 11, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches the reflective spectral filter comprises a diffraction grating having a blazed-phase configuration (Banine, Par. [0031, 0092]) . Regarding Claim 18, Regarding Claim 10, Bakshi as modified by Rose as modified by Banine teaches the reflective spectral filter comprises a substrate, a multilayer stack disposed on the substrate, and a capping material disposed on the multilayer stack (See Claim 4 rejection above) , and wherein the multilayer stack comprises a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (See Claim 7 rejection above) configured to reflect the spectrally filtered EUV light along the first optical path and reflect the OOB light along the second optical path (See Claim 1 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 19, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches the reflective spectral filter further compirses an absorber layer disposed on the multilayer stack, the absorber layer having a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (See Claim 8 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 20, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches a reflective spectral filter configured to spectrally separate out-of-band (OOB) light from a plasma extreme ultraviolet (EUV) illumination beam (Bakshi, Par. [0006]. See Claim 1 rejection above) , comprising: a substrate (See Claim 5 rejection above) ; a multilayer stack positioned on the substrate (See Claim 5 rejection above) ; and a capping layer positioned on the multilayer stack (See Claim 5 rejection above) ; wherein at least one of the substrate and the multilayer stack comprises a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (See Claim 7 rejection above) configured to reflect spectrally filtered EUV light along a first optical path and reflect the OOB light along a second optical path (See Claim 1 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 21, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches the first optical path corresponds to the +1 st order and the second optical path corresponds to the 0 th order (See Claim 2 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 22, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches the multilayer stack comprises alternating pairs of molybdenum and silicon (See Claim 6 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 23, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches an absorber layer disposed on the multilayer stack, the absorber layer having a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (See Claim 8 rejection above) . Regarding Claim 24, Bakshi as modified by Roseas modified by Banine teaches EUV refractory material disposed on the multilayer stack, the EUV refractory material having a binary grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (See Claim 10 rejection above) . 07-22-aia AIA 7. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bakshi in view of Rose as applied to Claim 5 above in view of Banine as applied to Claim 7 above and further in view of US Patent Pub. No. 2006/0274325 A1 by Hetzler et al. (hereinafter Hetzler ) . Regarding Claim 9, Bakshi as modified by Rose teaches the multilayer stack (See Claim 5 rejection above) the substrate, and the multilayer stack has a binary grating (See Claim 7 rejection above) but does not explicitly teach the substrate has a binary grating grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch, and the multilayer stack has a binary grating matching the binary grating of the substrate. However, Hetzler teaches the substrate has a binary grating grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch (Fig. 2, Par. [0019, 0058, 0073]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakshi as modified by Rose as modified by Banine by Hetzler as taught above such that the substrate has a binary grating grating having a preselected depth and preselected pitch is accomplished in order to analyzing interferometric measurements performed on optical surfaces during manufacture of optical elements of a high accuracy (Hetzler, Abstract) . Still lacking limitation such as: the multilayer stack has a binary grating matching the binary grating of the substrate. However, it is considered obvious to try all known solutions when there is a recognized need in the art ( matching ) , there had been a finite number of identified, predictable solutions to the recognized need (matching, non-matching) , and when one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP § 2143, E. Furthermore, such an arrangement would imply to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to match the multilayer stack has a binary grating with the binary grating of the substrate in order to produce the high diffraction efficiency of a structured surface (i.e. the binary grating of the substrate) with the high reflectivity of a stacked mirror (i.e. the multilayer stack) . 07-22-aia AIA 8. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bakshi in view of Rose and Arenberg as applied to Claim 14 above and further in view of US Patent Pub. No. 2023/0229094 A1 by Huisman et al. (hereinafter Huisman ) . Regarding Claim 15, Bakshi as modified by Rose a modified by Arenberg teaches determining, by a controller communicatively coupled to the at least one first detector (See Claim 1 rejection above) and the target substrate (See Claim 14 rejection above) , but does not explicitly teach a presence or absence of at least one of an alignment error and a defect based on a image of the target substrate. However, Huisman teaches a presence or absence of at least one of an alignment error and a defect based on a image of the target substrate (Fig. 1 @ W, Par. [0034, 0036]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakshi as modified by Rose as modified by Arenberg by Huisman as taught above such that determining a presence or absence of at least one of an alignment error and a defect based on a image of the target substrate is accomplished in order to ensure that new patterns are applied in exactly the correct position on a substrate that has already been subjected to one or more cycles of patterning and processing. These processing steps progressively introduce distort ions in the substrate that must be measured and corrected for, to achieve satisfactory overlay performance (Huisman, Par. [0034]) . Additional Prior Art 07-96 AIA 9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The reference listed teaches of other prior art method/apparatus of multi-layered extreme ultraviolet (EUV) in-band (IB) light and out-of-band (OOB) light system . US Patent Pub. No. 2015/0049321 A1 by Bieling et al (Fig. 7, 8). US Patent Pub. No. 2025/0164895 A1 by Rajendran et al (Fig. 9). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMIL AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1950. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, Kara Geisel can be reached on 571-272-2416 . 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. /JAMIL AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 2 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 3 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 4 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 5 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 6 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 7 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 8 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 9 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 10 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 11 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 12 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 13 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 14 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/990,783 Page 15 Art Unit: 2877
Prosecution Insights