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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8-17-26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments filed 8-17-26 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo does not teach of “the first range of depth of field partially overlaps with the second range of depth of field, and the first range of depth of field and the second range depth of field jointly form a continuous combined depth of field”. The Applicant argues this by stating that claim 1, in contrast to Carlo, the overlap between the first and second depth of field ranges is axial along the depth direction and substantially with the same perspective as depicted in Fig.2 where the axial ranges of focus extend from a common observation point along common observation axis toward the same viewing region that provide for the in-focus coverage over an extended range within the same viewing region.
The Applicant’s arguments have been noted. However, the claims do not recite where the overlap between the first and second depth of field ranges is axial along the depth direction and substantially with the same perspective as depicted in Fig.2 where the axial ranges of focus extend from a common observation point along common observation axis toward the same viewing region that provide for the in-focus coverage over an extended range within the same viewing region. The claims only recite “the first range of depth of field partially overlaps with the second range of depth of field, and the first range of depth of field and the second range depth of field jointly form a continuous combined depth of field” in which Carlo (Figs.5-7; [0085]-[0095]) clearly discloses.
The Examiner suggests clarifying the claims to include limitations present in the arguments of where the overlap between the first and second depth of field ranges is axial along the depth direction and substantially with the same perspective as depicted in Fig.2 where the axial ranges of focus extend from a common observation point along common observation axis toward the same viewing region that provide for the in-focus coverage over an extended range within the same viewing region while further distinguishing, how the same perspective is obtained with respect to a common observation point and what it means to be “substantially with the same perspective” as to advance prosecution and overcome the current rejection.
For the reasons stated above and detailed below, the rejections are maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
4. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamijo, CN 112113976 (Translation) in view of Kim et al., US 2025/0334524 and in further view of Carlo et al., CA 3115898.
Regarding claim 1, Kamijo teaches of a system for wafer inspection, comprising:
a multi-wavelength light source, configured to emit a first light having a
first wavelength and a second light having a second wavelength to irradiate a wafer
to be tested, wherein the first wavelength is different from the second wavelength (See Pages 6-7 and 9-11 which discloses the light source to emit and illuminate a first and second light having different wavelengths);
a camera lens set, configured to receive and guide a first reflected light of
the first light reflected by the wafer to be tested, and receive and guide a second
reflected light of the second light reflected by the wafer to be tested (Pages 3-7 and Page 12, camera lens/shotting part and polarized camera having mirror and reflection component), the camera lens set having a first range of depth of field corresponding to the first wavelength and a second range of depth of field corresponding to the second wavelength (See Pages 3-7 and 9-11 which discloses of the lens having a first depth with respect to the first wavelength range a second depth corresponding to the second wavelength range); and
an image sensor, configured to receive the first reflected light from the
camera lens set to generate a first inspection image corresponding to the first range
of depth of field, and receive the second reflected light from the camera lens set to
generate a second inspection image corresponding to the second range of depth of
field (See Pages 3-7 and 9-12 which discloses of the polarized camera/image sensor and receiving light from the lens to generate the first and second inspection images).
Kamijo is silent with respect to wherein the first range of depth of field is different from the second range of depth of field.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches of wherein the first range of depth of field is different from the second range of depth of field (See [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Kamijo to have incorporated the teachings of Kim for the mere benefit of allowing for a better in depth inspection for defects.
The combination of Kamijo and Kim is silent with respect to the first and second range of depth partially overlapping and jointly forming a continuous combined depth of field.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carlo teaches of first and second range of depth partially overlapping and jointly forming a continuous combined depth of field (See Figs.5-7; [0085]-[0095]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Kamijo and Kim to have incorporated the teachings of Carlo for the mere benefit of being able to have cohesive combined seamless imagery.
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1, further comprising:
an image processor, configured to generate an inspection image having a
large range of depth of field according to the first inspection image and the second
inspection image (See Kamijo, analysis of claim 1; Page 8, the shooting part obtains an image having a range of depth including and according to the first and second image; Kim, [0005]);
wherein a range of depth of field corresponding to the inspection image
having the large range of depth of field comprises the first range of depth of field
and the second range of depth of field (See Kamijo, analysis of claim 1; Page 8, the shooting part obtains an image having a range of depth including and according to the first and second image; Kim, [0005]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1, wherein a difference between the first wavelength and the second wavelength is greater than 150 nm (See Kim, [0040]-[0042] differences of wavelengths being greater than 150 nm).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1, wherein the first wavelength and the second wavelength respectively correspond to any two of ultraviolet light, visible light and infrared light (See Kamijo, Pages 12 blue, green, and/or red light).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1, wherein the first wavelength and the second wavelength respectively correspond to lights in different colors in visible light (See Kamijo, Pages 12 blue, green, and/or red light).
Regarding claim 10, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 4.
Regarding claim 14, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 15, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 6.
5. Claims 3, 8-9, 12, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamijo, CN 112113976 (Translation) in view of Kim et al., US 2025/0334524, in further view of Carlo et al., CA 3115898, and in further view of Fresquet, et al., EP 3222964.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo teaches of the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1, wherein:
the multi-wavelength light source emits the first light in a first period, and
the image sensor receives the first reflected light in the first period (See analysis of claim 1).
The combination is silent with respect to the multi-wavelength light source emits the second light in a second period, and the image sensor receives the second reflected light in the second period; and the first period and the second period do not overlap.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Fresquet teaches of the multi-wavelength light source emits the second light in a second period, and the image sensor receives the second reflected light in the second period (See [0123]-[0129] multiple wavelengths); and the first period and the second period do not overlap (See [0123]-[0129] sequentially directing the light).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo to have incorporated the teachings of Frequet for the mere benefit of having flexibility with regards to types of different lenses and a more in depth analysis of defects.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1, where the camera lens is set corresponding to the first wavelength to generate the first inspection image, and the camera lens set corresponding to the second wavelength to generate the second inspection image (See analysis of claims 1 and 2).
The combination of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo is silent with respect to where the image sensor has an adjustable sensing plane, the sensing plane of the image sensor is adjusted to a first focal length of the camera lens and is adjusted to a second focal length of the camera lens set.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Fresquet teaches of where the image sensor has an adjustable sensing plane, the sensing plane of the image sensor is adjusted to a first focal length of the camera lens and is adjusted to a second focal length of the camera lens set (See [0141]-[0157] which discloses of the rotational measurement head which can change sensing places to adjust to a first focal length and second focal length of the camera lens set).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo to have incorporated the teachings of Frequet for the mere benefit of having flexibility with regards to types of different lenses and a more in depth analysis of defects.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1.
The combination is silent with respect to wherein the camera lens set comprises a chromatic lens.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Fresquet teaches of wherein the camera lens set comprises a chromatic lens (See [0026]-[0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo to have incorporated the teachings of Frequet for the mere benefit of having flexibility with regards to types of different lenses and a more in depth analysis of defects.
Regarding claim 12, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 17, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claim 18, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 9.
6. Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamijo, CN 112113976 (Translation) in view of Kim et al., US 2025/0334524, in further view of Carlo et al., CA 3115898, and in further view of Tesar et al., US 2020/0318810.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo teaches the system for wafer inspection according to claim 1. The combination further teaches of the image sensor generates the first inspection image and generates the second inspection image (See analysis of claim 1).
The combination is silent with respect to wherein the image sensor has an adjustable sensing waveband and the images being generated when the first wavelength is set as a center of the sensing waveband and when the second wavelength is set as the center of the sensing waveband.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tesar teaches of wherein the image sensor has an adjustable sensing waveband and the images being generated when the first wavelength is set as a center of the sensing waveband and when the second wavelength is set as the center of the sensing waveband (See [0107]-[0111] and [0135]-[0149] which discloses of being able to adjust/switch modes where the wavelengths and wavebands are adjustable with respect to the center range and imaging by the camera(s) for display).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Kamijo, Kim, and Carlo to have incorporated the teachings of Tesar for the mere benefit of providing for a more accurate and reliable reading and analysis with respect to the desired waveband and wavelengths.
Regarding claim 16, the claim has been analyzed and rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 7.
Contact
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ricky Chin whose telephone number is 571-270-3753. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached on 571-272-3982. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Ricky Chin/
Primary Examiner
AU 2424
(571) 270-3753
Ricky.Chin@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights