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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 9-11, 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 9 repeats limitations recited in claim 1 and is considered redundant. See 112(d) rejection below. Claim 10 is objected to for its dependence on claim 9
Claim 11 repeats limitations recited in claim 1 and is considered redundant. See 112(d) rejection below
Claim 18 repeats limitations recited in claim 3 and is considered redundant. Claim 19 is objected to for its dependence on claim 18
Claim 20 repeats limitations recited in claim 3 and is considered redundant. See 112(d) rejection below.
Claim 10 is objected to for its dependence on rejected claim 9, see 112d rejection of claim 9 below.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claims 12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are drawn to “a digital data carrier”. In the best understanding of the examiner, the specification fails to provide explicit limits as to what, exactly, comprises “a digital data carrier” (see instant specification, pg. 9, lines 27-29). Thus, the specification fails to explicitly state that the digital data carrier does not include signals or other transitory media. In its broadest reasonable interpretation, the digital data carrier as claimed can cover transitory media such as a signal per se. As signals are not a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, they do not qualify as patent-eligible subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 146, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 9, 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 9 repeats limitations presented in claim 1 while not further limiting the subject matter of the claims upon which it depends.
Claim 11 recites “The method according to claim 8” and further teaches the white light interferometer configured for implementing method limitations which are recited in method claim 1. However, claim 8 is directed to a white light interferometer rather than a method. For the purpose of this examination, “The method according to claim 8” will be interpreted as “The white light interferometer according to claim 8”.
Claim 20 recites “The method according to claim 17” and further teaches the white light interferometer configured for implementing method limitations which are recited in method claim 3. However, claim 17 is directed to a white light interferometer rather than a method. For the purpose of this examination, “The method according to claim 17” will be interpreted as “The white light interferometer according to claim 17”. Further, claim 20 repeats limitations presented in claim 3 while not further limiting the subject matter of the claims upon which it depends.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 13-17 are allowed.
Claims 9-11 and 20 would be allowable for the reasons given regarding claims 1 and 3 if the 35 USC 112(d) rejections are overcome.
Claims 18-19 would be allowable for reasons given regarding claim 3 if the objection to the claims are overcome.
Claims 12 and 21 would be allowable for the reasons given regarding claims 1 and 3 if the 35 USC 101 rejections are overcome.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a method for determining a height map of a sample surface of a sample through white light interferometry wherein use is made of a white light interferometer including a broad band light source and an optical sensor with multiple pixels, wherein the method includes: obtaining a stack of interferograms by vertical scanning of the surface through a focal plane of the optical sensor, wherein each interferogram includes a measured light intensity for each pixel of the optical sensor at a respective height of the surface relative to the focal plane; determining a covariance matrix for the stack of interferograms; determining principal components of the stack of interferograms by performing a singular value decomposition of the covariance matrix; selecting a first principal component associated with a biggest eigenvalue of the covariance matrix and a second principal component associated with a second biggest eigenvalue of the covariance matrix; determining a measured phase, for each pixel of the pixels, based on , a ratio of vector components of the first and second principal components, wherein the respective vector components are associated with the respective pixel; and determining the height map based on the measured phase for each pixel, wherein the determining the height map includes: performing a Hilbert transform on an eigenvector of the covariance matrix associated with the biggest eigenvalue thereof obtaining a complex Hilbert transformed eigenvector; determining a reference phase for a reference pixel of the pixels based on a ratio of vector components of the real part and imaginary part of the Hilbert transformed eigenvector, wherein the respective vector components are associated with the reference pixel; determining if the measured phase of the reference pixel corresponds to the reference phase of the reference pixel; and if the measured phase of the reference pixel does not correspond to the reference phase, reversing a global sign of the measured phase.
US 2011/0090511 A1 to Medicus discloses a method and apparatus for determining the height of a number of spatial positions on a sample. The interferometer uses a broadband light source (2) to direct light through beam splitters (4b, 5) where partial light (3a and 3b) split from beam splitter (5) is sent towards a reference mirror (8) and the sample (7). The imaging system scans the sample through the focal plane of a camera (10) collecting reflected light which is recombined to produce an interference pattern or correlogram indicating a path difference of the partial light beams where values at spatial locations allow for determining a height map of the sample (Fig. 1; [0029]-[0032]). In calculating the height map, methods are proposed which describe removing data that occurs outside of the correlogram and other edge effects ([0033]). In particular, Medicus discloses methods for calculating the phase of data using either Fourier or Wavelet transforms, and calculating a height map based on this phase ([0036]-[0037]; [0041]). However, Medicus does not disclose the limitations emphasized in bold wording above. Similarly, US 2022/0221272 A1 to Schmid discloses an interferometric measurement device and method for determining surface topography of a measurement object (1) using phase interferometry and the relationship between correlograms detected at neighboring surface points of a detector. Synthetic correlograms, created using Hilbert or Fourier transforms, and a principle component analysis method or other optimization methods are used to minimize noise or other disturbances, while determining individual measurement points ([0114]-[0118]; [0162]-[0163]; [0177]; [0262]-[0268]; [0276]). Schmid, however, does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation emphasized in bold wording above. Lastly, US 2018/0315207 A1 to Quaedackers discloses a method and system for calculating a height map of a surface object from an image stack captured by scanning the object surface through focal planes using long range and short range sensing, where the method allows for sensing and correcting errors caused by vibrations (Abstract; [0015]; [0018]-[0026]; [0031]-[0032]). However, Quaedackers also fails to disclose a processing method for eliminating vibrations where the method comprises the limitations emphasized in bold wording above.
All combinations of prior art reference listed above or previously cited failed to specifically disclose the limitations emphasized in bold wording above. Therefore, the Examiner has failed to find prior art that is analogous to the invention claimed or any motivation suggesting a similar method or purpose. As such, claim 1 has been found allowable. Claims 2 and 4-8 are allowed due to their dependence on claim 1. Claims 9-12 would be allowable due to their dependence on claim 1, if conditions outlined above are met.
Regarding claim 3, the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a method for determining a height map of a surface of a sample through white light interferometry wherein use is made of a white light interferometer including a broad band light source and an optical sensor with multiple pixels, wherein the method includes: obtaining a stack of interferograms by vertical scanning of the surface through a focal plane of the optical sensor, wherein each interferogram includes a measured light intensity for each pixel of the optical sensor at a respective height relative to the surface; determining a covariance matrix for the stack of interferograms; determining principal components of the stack of interferograms by performing a singular value decomposition of the covariance matrix; selecting a first principal component associated with a biggest eigenvalue of the covariance matrix and a second principal component associated with a second biggest eigenvalue of the covariance matrix; determining a measured phase, for each pixel of the pixels, based on a ratio of vector components of the first and second principal components, wherein the respective vector components are associated with the respective pixel; and determining the height map based on the determined measured phase for each pixel, wherein the determining the height map includes: taking a Fourier transform of a first eigenvector of the covariance matrix which is associated with the biggest eigenvalue and taking a Fourier transform of a second eigenvector of the covariance matrix which is associated with the second biggest eigenvalue; determining a highest magnitude frequency of the Fourier transformed first eigenvector; calculating a first Fourier phase of the Fourier transformed first eigenvector and a second Fourier phase of the Fourier transformed second eigenvector associated with the determined highest magnitude frequency; determining a difference between the first Fourier phase and the second Fourier phase by subtracting the second Fourier phase from the first Fourier phase; and if the difference between the First Fourier phase and the second Fourier phase is between 0 and π modulo 2π, reversing a global sign of the measured phase.
US 2011/0090511 A1 to Medicus discloses a method and apparatus for determining the height of a number of spatial positions on a sample. The interferometer uses a broadband light source (2) to direct light through beam splitters (4b, 5) where partial light (3a and 3b) split from beam splitter (5) is sent towards a reference mirror (8) and the sample (7). The imaging system scans the sample through the focal plane of a camera (10) collecting reflected light which is recombined to produce an interference pattern or correlogram indicating a path difference of the partial light beams where values at spatial locations allow for determining a height map of the sample (Fig. 1; [0029]-[0032]). In calculating the height map, methods are proposed which describe removing data that occurs outside of the correlogram and other edge effects ([0033]). In particular, Medicus discloses methods for calculating the phase of data using either Fourier or Wavelet transforms, and calculating a height map based on this phase ([0036]-[0037]; [0041]). However, Medicus does not disclose the limitations emphasized in bold wording above. Similarly, US 2022/0221272 A1 to Schmid discloses an interferometric measurement device and method for determining surface topography of a measurement object (1) using phase interferometry and the relationship between correlograms detected at neighboring surface points of a detector. Synthetic correlograms, created using Hilbert or Fourier transforms, and a principle component analysis method or other optimization methods are used to minimize noise or other disturbances, while determining individual measurement points ([0114]-[0118]; [0162]-[0163]; [0177]; [0262]-[0268]; [0276]). Schmid, however, does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation emphasized in bold wording above. Lastly, US 2018/0315207 A1 to Quaedackers discloses a method and system for calculating a height map of a surface object from an image stack captured by scanning the object surface through focal planes using long range and short range sensing, where the method allows for sensing and correcting errors caused by vibrations (Abstract; [0015]; [0018]-[0026]; [0031]-[0032]). However, Quaedackers also fails to disclose a processing method for eliminating vibrations where the method comprises the limitations emphasized in bold wording above.
All combinations of prior art reference listed above or previously cited failed to specifically disclose the limitations emphasized in bold wording above. Therefore, the Examiner has failed to find prior art that is analogous to the invention claimed or any motivation suggesting a similar method or purpose. As such, claim 3 has been found allowable. Claims 13-17 are allowed due to their dependence on claim 3. Claims 18-21 would be allowable due to their dependence on claim 3, if conditions outlined above are met.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHER YAZBACK whose telephone number is (703)756-1456. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571)270-5789. 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.
/MAHER YAZBACK/
Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights