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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 16, 24, 25, and 27 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims, 1, 9 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,139,196. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the application claims are broader than and anticipated by the claims of the patent.
Claims 16-35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 12-16, and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,249,535. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the application claims are broader than and anticipated by the claims of the patent.
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.
Claims 16, 18, 21-15, 27, 28, 31, 33, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koike [JP 2014-241357, provided by the Applicant].
For claim 16, Koike teaches a holder (see Figs. 1-4) for use in a lithographic apparatus and configured to support an object (5), the holder comprising:
a main body (10);
a plurality of main burls (pins 15 surrounded by seal 12, see Figs. 1 and 2) projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2);
a first seal member (12) projecting from the main body, the first seal member surrounding the plurality of main burls (see Figs. 1 and 2);
a second seal member (11) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located at an edge region of the main body and outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 1 and 2); and
a plurality of minor burls (13) projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2).
For claim 27, Koike teaches a holder (see Figs. 1-4) for use in a lithographic apparatus and configured to support an object (5), the holder comprising:
a main body (10);
a first seal member (12) projecting from the main body;
one or more main burls (pins 15 surrounding seal 12, see Figs. 1 and 2) projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object and is located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member;
a second seal member (11) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 1 and 2); and
a plurality of minor burls (13) projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2).
For claim 33, Koike teaches a holder (see Figs. 1-4) for use in a lithographic apparatus and configured to support an object (5), the holder comprising:
a main body (10);
a first seal member (12) projecting from the main body, a distal surface of the first seal member spaced from the object when the object is supported on the holder (see Figs. 1 and 2);
a second seal member (11) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 1 and 2);
a plurality of burls (13) projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2); and
a third seal member (third annular seal, see paragraph 4 on page 6 of the translation) projecting from the main body, the third seal member located outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the second seal member (third seal for the largest wafer of three) and a distal surface of the third seal member spaced from the object when the object is supported on the holder (seal member surfaces spaced from the surface of wafer 5, see Fig. 2).
For claims 18, 28, and 34 , Koike teaches a plurality of extraction openings (18, see Figs. 1 and 2) for the extraction of fluid into the main body from between the main body and the object, the plurality of extraction openings arranged outward, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the first seal member.
For claims 21 and 31, Koike teaches a third seal member (third annular seal, see paragraph 4 on page 6 of the translation) projecting from the main body, the third seal member located at the edge region of the main body and outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the second seal member (third seal for the largest wafer of three).
For claim 22, Koike teaches a plurality of extraction openings (exhaust ports 18 and 19, see Figs. 1-3) for the extraction of fluid into the main body from between the main body and the object, the plurality of extraction openings arranged between the second seal member and the third seal member (exhaust portion in space between the second and third seal, see paragraph 4 on page 6 of the translation).
For claim 23, Koike teaches a plurality of further minor burls (14) projecting from an upper surface of the first seal member or of the third seal member, and each further minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 3).
For claim 24, Koike teaches a plurality of second main burls projecting from the main body, wherein each second main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object, the second main burls being outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (pins 15 surrounding seal 12, see Figs. 1 and 2).
For claim 25, Koike teaches the second main burls are arranged between the first seal member and the second member or outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the second seal member (pins 15 surrounding seal 12 and surrounded by seal 11, see Figs. 1 and 2).
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.
Claims 16-19, 21-29, and 31-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunnen et al. [US 2013/0038854] in view of Koike.
For claim 16, Kunnen teaches a holder (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22) for use in a lithographic apparatus and configured to support an object, the holder comprising:
a main body (body of WT);
a plurality of main burls (burls supporting the substrate, see [0097]) projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object;
a first seal member (flow resisting structures radially inward of the openings 52, see Figs. 10, 12, 21, and 22) projecting from the main body; and
a second seal member (50 or 50b) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located at an edge region of the main body and outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22).
Kunnen teaches in paragraph [0097] the burls supporting the substrate W are not shown, but it will be appreciated that burls, or their equivalent, will be present, but fails to teach the arrangement of a plurality of main burls projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object; the first seal member surrounding the plurality of main burls; and a plurality of minor burls projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object.
Koike teaches a plurality of main burls (pins 15 surrounded by seal 12, see Figs. 1 and 2) projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2); a first seal member (12) projecting from the main body, the first seal member surrounding the plurality of main burls (see Figs. 1 and 2); a second seal member (11) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located at an edge region of the main body and outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 1 and 2); and a plurality of minor burls (13) projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the burl arrangement as taught by Koike in the substrate holder as taught by Kunnen in order to maintain the flatness of the substrate during chucking.
For claim 27, Kunnen teaches a holder (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22) for use in a lithographic apparatus and configured to support an object, the holder comprising:
a main body (body of WT);
a first seal member (flow resisting structures radially inward of the openings 52, see Figs. 10, 12, 21, and 22) projecting from the main body;
one or more main burls (burls supporting the substrate, see [0097]) projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object;
a second seal member (50 or 50b) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22).
Kunnen teaches in paragraph [0097] the burls supporting the substrate W are not shown, but it will be appreciated that burls, or their equivalent, will be present, but fails each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object and is located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member; and a plurality of minor burls projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object.
Koike teaches one or more main burls (pins 15 surrounding seal 12, see Figs. 1 and 2) projecting from the main body, wherein each main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object and is located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member; a second seal member (11) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 1 and 2); and a plurality of minor burls (13) projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the burl arrangement as taught by Koike in the substrate holder as taught by Kunnen in order to maintain the flatness of the substrate during chucking.
For claim 33, Kunnen teaches a holder (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22) for use in a lithographic apparatus and configured to support an object, the holder comprising:
a main body (body of WT); a distal surface of the first seal member spaced from the object when the object is supported on the holder (see Figs. 10, 12, 21, and 22);
a second seal member (50B) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22);
a third seal member (50A) projecting from the main body, the third seal member located outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the second seal member and a distal surface of the third seal member spaced from the object when the object is supported on the holder (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22).
Kunnen fails to teach a plurality of burls projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object.
Koike teaches a second seal member (11) projecting from the main body, the second seal member located outwards, relative to a central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (see Figs. 1 and 2); and a plurality of burls (13) projecting from at least an upper surface of the second seal member, wherein each burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the burl arrangement as taught by Koike in the substrate holder as taught by Kunnen in order to maintain the flatness of the substrate during chucking.
For claim 17, Kunnen teaches a plurality of inlet openings (one or more through holes 52, see [0107]) formed in the main body between the first seal member and the second seal member, the plurality of inlet openings open to the atmosphere or connected to a gas source (gas flow via 54, see [0113], [0140], and [0141]).
For claims 18, 28, and 34 , Kunnen teaches a plurality of extraction openings (42, see [0098]-[0099]) for the extraction of fluid into the main body from between the main body and the object, the plurality of extraction openings arranged outward, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the first seal member.
For claims 19 and 29, Kunnen teaches the extraction openings are formed in the upper surface of the second seal member (port 42 in structures 50, see Fig. 8).
For claims 21 and 31, Kunnen teaches a third seal member (50A) projecting from the main body, the third seal member located at the edge region of the main body and outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the second seal member (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22).
For claim 22, Kunnen teaches a plurality of extraction openings (42, see [0098]-[0099]) for the extraction of fluid into the main body from between the main body and the object, the plurality of extraction openings arranged between the second seal member and the third seal member (see Figs. 8, 10, 12, 21, and 22).
For claim 23, in the combination, Koike teaches a plurality of further minor burls (14) projecting from an upper surface of the first seal member or of the third seal member, and each further minor burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object (see Fig. 3).
For claim 24, in the combination, Koike teaches a plurality of second main burls projecting from the main body, wherein each second main burl has a distal end surface configured to support the object, the second main burls being outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the first seal member (pins 15 surrounding seal 12, see Figs. 1 and 2).
For claim 25, in the combination, Koike teaches the second main burls are arranged between the first seal member and the second member or outwards, relative to the central portion of the main body, of the second seal member (pins 15 surrounding seal 12 and surrounded by seal 11, see Figs. 1 and 2).
For claims 26, 32, and 35, Kunnen teaches a lithographic apparatus comprising the holder (see Fig. 1).
Claims 20 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunnen in view of Koike as applied to claims 16 and 27 above, and further in view of Kunnen et al. [US 2013/0094005, hereinafter Kunnen2].
For claims 20 and 30, Kunnen fails to teach the second seal member has a larger width in a direction outward relative to the central portion of the main body than that of the first seal member.
Kunnen2 teaches the second seal member has a larger width in a direction outward relative to the central portion of the main body than that of the first seal member (elongate protrusion 20 is wider than seals 47, see Fig. 20 and [0135]-[0138].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the linger width to the second seal as taught by Kunnen2 on the second seal as taught by Kunnen in order to increase the capillary pressure holding the immersion fluid in the gap so immersion fluid does not pass underneath the substrate.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven H Whitesell whose telephone number is (571)270-3942. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM (MST).
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/Steven H Whitesell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights