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 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamono [US 20020192579 A1].
As per Claim 1, Kamono teaches a method, comprising:
loading a substrate onto a substrate stage (See fig. 1, Para 31);
activating an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light source 6 (Para 13) to pattern a photoresist layer on the substrate (Para 2);
directing light emitted by the EUV light source onto a photomask covered with a pellicle (Para 12), wherein the pellicle comprises:
a pellicle membrane (pellicle film 26) vertically overlapping with a patterned region of the photomask (See fig. 3, Para 20); and
a pellicle frame (support frame 25) disposed between the pellicle membrane and a non-patterned region of the photomask (See fig. 3), wherein the pellicle frame comprises a frame bar 25 and a vent hole (vent hole 27) extending through an inner surface and an outer surface of the frame bar (Para 20), wherein at least a portion of an inner surface of the vent hole extends in a direction non-parallel with a bottom surface of the photomask (See fig. 12, Para 164).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamono.
As per Claims 3-6, Kamono teaches the method of claim 1.
Kamono does not explicitly teach wherein a longitudinal axis of the vent hole extends into the non-patterned region of the photomask.
However, Kamono further disclosed a supply nozzle 329 and nozzle proximity mechanism 330 are arranged diagonally to a pellicle support frame 25 such that the injection direction of inert gas supplied from the inert gas supply nozzle 329 and an inert gas supply port a are substantially aligned (See fig. 12, Para 164).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the arrangement of the vent hole as claimed in order to direct the gas purge in a desired direction.
Claim(s) 2 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamono as applied above, in view of Wang [US 20070037067 A1].
As per Claims 2 and 7-9, Kamono teaches the method of claim 1.
Kamono does not explicitly teach wherein the inner surface of the vent hole has a sloped or stepped structure in a cross-sectional view.
Wang teaches at least one vent 26 of the pellicle frame may further include a first vent section 30 and a second vent section 32. The first vent section will often be defined by having a cross-sectional area that is greater than the second vent section, and the first vent section will often be located closer to the exterior surface 22 of the pellicle frame 12. Furthermore, the first vent section 30 is typically at least three times longer than the second vent section 32, and at least part of the vent 26 may extend through the pellicle frame 12 in a straight line. It is noted that the vent may be comprised of any number of sections, rather than just one or two (See fig. 3, Para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the arrangement of the vent hole as claimed in order to produce a desired gas purge pressure.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamono in view of Lin [US 20190137865 A1].
As per Claim 10, Kamono teaches the method of claim 1.
Kamono does not explicitly teach wherein the photomask comprises a plurality of particle trapping recesses in the non-patterned region.
Lin teaches the pellicle structure 28 protects the mask 18 from particles and keeps the particles out of focus so that they do not produce an image, which may cause defects during the lithography process (Para 25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the particle trapping recesses as claimed in order to avoid patterning defect and improve quality of image transfer.
Claim(s) 11-14 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Kamono.
As per Claims 11 and 17, Lin teaches a method, comprising:
transferring a wafer (a semiconductor wafer 22) coated with a photoresist layer onto a wafer stage (See fig. 1, a substrate stage 24); and
performing a lithographic exposure process to the photoresist layer by using an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) tool (Paa 26), the EUV tool comprising:
an EUV illumination source 12;
a pellicle (the pellicle membrane 116) and a photomask on a downstream optical path of the EUV illumination source (See fig. 2A, Para 52),
wherein the pellicle covers a patterned region (mask pattern 104) of the photomask (the mask 18), the pellicle comprises a pellicle frame disposed on a non-patterned region of the photomask, the pellicle frame has a vent hole (the vent structure 110) having a first port on an inner surface of the pellicle frame and a second port on an outer surface of the pellicle frame (See fig. 2A, Para 44-46), and
a plurality of optics (projection optics box (POB) 20) on a reflective path from the photomask (See fig. 1, Para 26).
Lin does not explicitly teach wherein the first port of the vent hole is at an elevation different from an elevation of the second port of the vent hole.
Kamono teaches a supply nozzle 329 and nozzle proximity mechanism 330 are arranged diagonally to a pellicle support frame 25 such that the injection direction of inert gas supplied from the inert gas supply nozzle 329 and an inert gas supply port a are substantially aligned (See fig. 12, Para 164).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the arrangement of the vent hole as claimed in order to direct the gas purge in a desired direction.
As per Claims 12-14, 18 and 19, Lin in view of Kamono teaches the method of claim 11.
Kamono further disclosed wherein the first port of the vent hole is at the elevation higher than the elevation of the second port of the vent hole (See fig. 12, Para 164).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the arrangement of the vent hole as claimed in order to direct the gas purge in a desired direction.
As per Claims 16 and 20, Lin in view of Kamono teaches the method of claim 11.
Lin in view of Kamono does not explicitly teach wherein the photomask comprises a plurality of particle trapping recesses in the non-patterned region.
However, Lin further disclosed the pellicle structure 28 protects the mask 18 from particles and keeps the particles out of focus so that they do not produce an image, which may cause defects during the lithography process (Para 25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the particle trapping recesses as claimed in order to avoid patterning defect and improve quality of image transfer.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Kamono as applied above, further in view of Wang.
As per Claim 15, Lin in view of Kamono teaches the method of claim 11.
Lin in view of Kamono does not explicitly teach wherein the vent hole has a stepped inner surface extending from the first port to the second port.
Wang teaches at least one vent 26 of the pellicle frame may further include a first vent section 30 and a second vent section 32. The first vent section will often be defined by having a cross-sectional area that is greater than the second vent section, and the first vent section will often be located closer to the exterior surface 22 of the pellicle frame 12. Furthermore, the first vent section 30 is typically at least three times longer than the second vent section 32, and at least part of the vent 26 may extend through the pellicle frame 12 in a straight line. It is noted that the vent may be comprised of any number of sections, rather than just one or two (See fig. 3, Para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the arrangement of the vent hole as claimed in order to produce a desired gas purge pressure.
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The reference to Yoo [US 20080266534 A1] listed in the attached form PTO-892 teach other prior art apparatus/method of a pellicle membrane coupled to the pellicle frame, and create gas flow or flux through the space inside the framed pellicle that may anticipate or obviate the claims of the applicant's invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MESFIN ASFAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 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, Toan Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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.
/MESFIN T ASFAW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights