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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendments filed 06/29/2026 responsive to the Restriction requirement filed 04/30/2026 has been entered. Claim 7 has been amended. Claims 8-20 have been canceled. New claims 21-33 have been added. Claims 1-7 and 21-33 are pending in this application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Group l, a method, claims 1-7 and 21-33, in the reply filed on 06/29/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-7 and 21-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mierlo et al. (US 2007/014.6657 A1).
With respect to claims 1, 2 and 4, Mierlo teaches a method, comprising:
performing patterning processes in a patterning chamber of a patterning tool (“The lithographic apparatus comprises a first chamber 30 (e.g. an evacuated or vacuum chamber 30), where exposure of the substrates W takes place”, Pa [0047]);
performing an inspection process to a first mask in at least one inspection chamber of the tool (“Detection of particle contamination may be undertaken prior to cleaning of the patterning device MA, in conjunction with cleaning of the patterning device MA”, Pa [0039]; “detection unit DU located in the second chamber 31”, Pa [0048]);
performing a cleaning process to the first mask in at least one cleaning chamber of the patterning tool (“Detection of particle contamination may be undertaken prior to cleaning of the patterning device MA, in conjunction with cleaning of the patterning device MA”, Pa [0039]; “detection unit DU located in the second chamber 31”, Pa [0048]);
transferring the first mask from the patterning chamber to the at least one inspection chamber (“the patterning device MA may be moved toward and relative to the detection unit DU.”, Pa [0043]); and
transferring a mask from the mask library to the patterning chamber (“different or replacement patterning devices MA may be located in the second chamber 31 for introduction into the evacuated chamber 30.”, Pa [0047]).
Mierlo further teaches that it will be appreciated that the invention may be used in other applications, for example imprint lithography (Pa [0057]), thus one would have found it obvious to apply the method in the imprint lithography with an imprint lithography apparatus and imprint lithography chamber in order to detect/clean the patterning device.
Mierlo further teaches that the patterning device is moved to a cleaning location or detection location, the cleaning location or detection location may comprise the patterning device storage chamber 31, or may comprise some other particular location within the lithographic apparatus (Pa [0054]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide cleaning chamber and detection chamber with the patterning device storage chamber separately and move the patterning device to the detection chamber, the cleaning chamber, the patterning device storage chamber 31 and the evacuated chamber 30 in order to detect/clean the patterning device before the imprinting process.
Mierlo further teaches that the lithographic apparatus may be of a type having two (dual stage) or more substrate tables (and/or two or more mask tables), and in such “multiple stage” machines the additional tables may be used in parallel, or preparatory steps may be carried out on one or more tables while one or more other tables are being used for exposure (Pa [0021]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide multiple evacuated chambers in order to perform multiple imprint processes in parallel in order for imprints to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly. In this modification, one would have found it obvious to perform moving, detecting, cleaning, imprinting multiple patterning devices simultaneously (in parallel) in order for imprints to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly.
With respect to claim 3, in Mierlo as applied to claim 1 above, one would have found it obvious to provide more than one inspection chamber and more than one cleaning chamber with the multiple evacuated chambers in order to perform multiple imprint processes with detection/cleaning in parallel in order for imprints to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly.
With respect to claim 5, Mierlo as applied to claim 1 above further teaches that a robot chamber (not shown) may for example form part of the first chamber 30, and may be arranged to handle objects received from the second chamber 31, the robot chamber may be provided with a gripping device to grip and handle the objects (Pa [0047]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide the gripping device in each evacuated chamber of the multiple evacuated chambers in order to grip and handle the objects.
With respect to claim 6, in Mierlo as applied to claim 1 above, when a number of the imprint chambers is N, each of the imprint chambers is able to process T wafers in an hour, an imprint mask in one of the imprint chambers is set to be inspected after processing Y wafers, an inspection time of the inspection process is X hour, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to set a number of the least one inspection chamber being a smallest positive integer that is greater than or equal to (X*T*N)/Y in order to achieve a seamless process flow with minimal cost.
With respect to claim 7, in Mierlo as applied to claim 6 above, one would have found it obvious to provide the same number of the at least one inspection chamber as a number of the at least one of the cleaning chamber in order to performing detection and then cleaning each patterning device before moving it to each evacuated chamber.
With respect to claims 21, 22 and 24, Mierlo teaches a method, comprising:
performing patterning processes in a process chamber of a process tool (“The lithographic apparatus comprises a first chamber 30 (e.g. an evacuated or vacuum chamber 30), where exposure of the substrates W takes place”, Pa [0047]);
performing an inspection process to a first mask in at least one inspection chamber of the process tool (“Detection of particle contamination may be undertaken prior to cleaning of the patterning device MA, in conjunction with cleaning of the patterning device MA”, Pa [0039]; “detection unit DU located in the second chamber 31”, Pa [0048]);
performing a cleaning process to the first mask in at least one cleaning chamber of the process tool (“Detection of particle contamination may be undertaken prior to cleaning of the patterning device MA, in conjunction with cleaning of the patterning device MA”, Pa [0039]; “detection unit DU located in the second chamber 31”, Pa [0048]);
transferring the first mask from the process chamber to the at least one inspection chamber (“the patterning device MA may be moved toward and relative to the detection unit DU.”, Pa [0043]); and
transferring a mask from the mask library to the process chamber (“different or replacement patterning devices MA may be located in the second chamber 31 for introduction into the evacuated chamber 30.”, Pa [0047]).
Mierlo further teaches that the patterning device is moved to a cleaning location or detection location, the cleaning location or detection location may comprise the patterning device storage chamber 31, or may comprise some other particular location within the lithographic apparatus (Pa [0054]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide cleaning chamber and detection chamber with the patterning device storage chamber separately and move the patterning device to the detection chamber, the cleaning chamber, the patterning device storage chamber 31 and the evacuated chamber 30 in order to detect/clean the patterning device before the patterning process.
Mierlo further teaches that the lithographic apparatus may be of a type having two (dual stage) or more substrate tables (and/or two or more mask tables), and in such “multiple stage” machines the additional tables may be used in parallel, or preparatory steps may be carried out on one or more tables while one or more other tables are being used for exposure (Pa [0021]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide multiple evacuated chambers in order to perform multiple patterning processes in parallel in order for patterns to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly. In this modification, one would have found it obvious to perform moving, detecting, cleaning, patterning multiple patterning devices simultaneously (in parallel) in order for patterns to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly.
With respect to claim 23, in Mierlo as applied to claim 21 above, one would have found it obvious to provide more than one inspection chamber and more than one cleaning chamber with the multiple evacuated chambers in order to perform multiple patterning processes with detection/cleaning in parallel in order for patterns to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly.
With respect to claim 25, Mierlo as applied to claim 21 above further teaches that a robot chamber (not shown) may for example form part of the first chamber 30, and may be arranged to handle objects received from the second chamber 31, the robot chamber may be provided with a gripping device to grip and handle the objects (Pa [0047]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide the gripping device in each evacuated chamber of the multiple evacuated chambers in order to grip and handle the objects.
With respect to claim 26, in Mierlo as applied to claim 21 above, when a number of the imprint chambers is N, each of the imprint chambers is able to process T wafers in an hour, an imprint mask in one of the imprint chambers is set to be inspected after processing Y wafers, an inspection time of the inspection process is X hour, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to set a number of the least one inspection chamber being a smallest positive integer that is greater than or equal to (X*T*N)/Y in order to achieve a seamless process flow with minimal cost.
With respect to claim 27, in Mierlo as applied to claim 26 above, one would have found it obvious to provide the same number of the at least one inspection chamber as a number of the at least one of the cleaning chamber in order to performing detection and then cleaning each patterning device before moving it to each evacuated chamber.
With respect to claims 28 and 32, Mierlo teaches a method, comprising:
performing patterning processes in a patterning chamber of a patterning tool (“The lithographic apparatus comprises a first chamber 30 (e.g. an evacuated or vacuum chamber 30), where exposure of the substrates W takes place”, Pa [0047]);
performing an inspection process to a first mask in at least one inspection chamber of the tool (“Detection of particle contamination may be undertaken prior to cleaning of the patterning device MA, in conjunction with cleaning of the patterning device MA”, Pa [0039]; “detection unit DU located in the second chamber 31”, Pa [0048]);
performing a cleaning process to the first mask in at least one cleaning chamber of the patterning tool (“Detection of particle contamination may be undertaken prior to cleaning of the patterning device MA, in conjunction with cleaning of the patterning device MA”, Pa [0039]; “detection unit DU located in the second chamber 31”, Pa [0048]);
transferring the first mask from the patterning chamber to the at least one inspection chamber (“the patterning device MA may be moved toward and relative to the detection unit DU.”, Pa [0043]); and
transferring a mask from the mask library to the patterning chamber (“different or replacement patterning devices MA may be located in the second chamber 31 for introduction into the evacuated chamber 30.”, Pa [0047]).
Mierlo further teaches that it will be appreciated that the invention may be used in other applications, for example imprint lithography (Pa [0057]), thus one would have found it obvious to apply the method in the imprint lithography with an imprint lithography apparatus and imprint lithography chamber in order to detect/clean the patterning device.
Mierlo further teaches that the patterning device is moved to a cleaning location or detection location, the cleaning location or detection location may comprise the patterning device storage chamber 31, or may comprise some other particular location within the lithographic apparatus (Pa [0054]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide cleaning chamber and detection chamber with the patterning device storage chamber separately and move the patterning device to the detection chamber, the cleaning chamber, the patterning device storage chamber 31 and the evacuated chamber 30 in order to detect/clean the patterning device before the imprinting process.
Mierlo further teaches that the lithographic apparatus may be of a type having two (dual stage) or more substrate tables (and/or two or more mask tables), and in such “multiple stage” machines the additional tables may be used in parallel, or preparatory steps may be carried out on one or more tables while one or more other tables are being used for exposure (Pa [0021]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide multiple evacuated chambers in order to perform multiple imprint processes in parallel in order for imprints to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly. In this modification, one would have found it obvious to perform moving, detecting, cleaning, imprinting multiple patterning devices simultaneously (in parallel) in order for imprints to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly.
With respect to claim 29, in Mierlo as applied to claim 28 above, when a number of the imprint chambers is N, each of the imprint chambers is able to process T wafers in an hour, an imprint mask in one of the imprint chambers is set to be inspected after processing Y wafers, an inspection time of the inspection process is X hour, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to manufacture the imprinting apparatus having the imprint chambers and the at least one inspection chamber, wherein a number of the least one inspection chamber is a smallest positive integer that is greater than or equal to (X*T*N)/Y in order to achieve a seamless process flow with minimal cost.
With respect to claim 30, in Mierlo as applied to claim 29 above, one would have found it obvious to provide the same number of the at least one inspection chamber as a number of the at least one of the cleaning chamber in order to performing detection and then cleaning each patterning device before moving it to each evacuated chamber.
With respect to claim 31, in Mierlo as applied to claim 28 above, one would have found it obvious to provide more than one inspection chamber and more than one cleaning chamber with the multiple evacuated chambers in order to perform multiple imprint processes with detection/cleaning in parallel in order for imprints to be undertaken more efficiently or quickly.
With respect to claim 33, Mierlo as applied to claim 28 above further teaches that a robot chamber (not shown) may for example form part of the first chamber 30, and may be arranged to handle objects received from the second chamber 31, the robot chamber may be provided with a gripping device to grip and handle the objects (Pa [0047]), thus one would have found it obvious to provide the gripping device in each evacuated chamber of the multiple evacuated chambers in order to grip and handle the objects.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUNJU KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1146. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00-4:00 EST M-Th; Flexing Fri.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached on 571-272-1176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YUNJU KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights