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
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-5, 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nei (U.S.Pat. 2003/0090644).
With respect to claims 1 and 9, Nei discloses a laser-processing unit (1) and a corresponding method comprising all features of the instant claim such as: a light source (7) configured to oscillate a laser beam (see paragraph [0035]); an illumination optical unit (2) configured to form a laser beam for processing from an oscillated laser beam the laser beam for processing irradiating a mask (R) mounted on a mask stage (23) and a measuring processor (15-16; 33; 34) configured to record a value corresponding to the cumulative irradiation energy from the laser beam for processing in accordance to an irradiation position (see paragraph [0039; 0044; 0086]). ( In particular, illumination intensity sensor (33) receives the exposure light and detects exposure energy per unit area, while irradiation amount monitor (34) detects the total amount of energy of the exposure light. The resulting detected signals are output to main controller (16) (see paragraph [0050-0053]). Nei further discloses scanning the entire projection field with illumination intensity (33) while reading the coordinates of sensor 33 through laser interferometer 31. Main controller (16) calculates the ratios LW/L1 based on the outputs of integrator sensor (15) and illumination intensity sensor 33 and expressly stores those measured ratios in a format associated with the respective coordinates (see paragraph [0055]. Thus, Nei records measured exposure light values in accordance with irradiation position).
As to claims 2 and 10, Nei discloses a scanner/the mask stage 23 (X-Y-Z stages) configured to scan the mask (R) with the laser beam for processing, the measuring processor increasing the value corresponding to irradiation energy for an overlap region and neighboring region among a plurality of scanning areas (different pattern regions on the mask; see figure 4). Nei discloses that the reticle stage is movable during scanning exposure and that the position of reticle stage is measured by laser interferometer (26) and controlled by main controller (16) (see paragraphs [0045-0048]).
As to claims 3 and 12, Nei teaches scanning the exposure field while storing measured illumination values associated with coordinates across the exposure field. The stored coordinates information inherently partitions the irradiated surface into discrete spatial locations corresponding to individual coordinates elements. Main controller (16) records the measured value corresponding to cumulative irradiation energy for each coordinate location throughout the scanned field. The claimed “grid” merely represents a subdivision of the mask surface (R) into discrete positional elements for recording irradiation values. Nei’s coordinate-based recording expressly satisfies this limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
As to claims 4 and 11, wherein the light source oscillates a pulse laser beam and the measuring processor recording the value corresponding to irradiation energy based on the number of pulses. Nei expressly teaches that the laser source produces pulsed laser light and that cumulative irradiation amount is determined from the number of laser pulses illuminating each point. The controller records the corresponding irradiation value based upon pulse number (see paragraphs [0085-0087].
As to claim 5, wherein the illumination optical unit forms a line-shaped laser beam for processing from the oscillated laser beam. Nei (figure 2) expressly teaches forming a slit-shaped illumination field from the pulse laser beam using the illumination optical system (2) including the variable field stop (10) and associated optical elements. The claimed line-shaped processing beam therefore reads directly on Nei’s slit illumination beam.
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 6-8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nei (US 2003/0090644) in view of Sandstrom et al (U.S.Pat. 6,005,879).
With respect to claim 6, Nei discloses a laser processing apparatus comprising substantially all limitations of the instant claim except for displaying on a screen a numerical value and/or an image of a cumulative value corresponding to cumulative irradiation energy. Sandstrom teaches continuously measuring laser pulse energy, integrating the measured pulse energies to obtain cumulative irradiation energy, storing integrated values, monitoring cumulative exposure, comparing measured values with predetermined limits and generating control information based upon the monitored cumulative irradiation values (see abstract of Sandstrom). In view of such teachings, displaying a numerical values or image representing cumulative irradiation energy would have been an obvious matter of routine interface design to allow an operator to observe the cumulative exposure being measured and controlled by the laser system.
As to claim 7, Sandstrom continuously monitors cumulative energy values obtained from multiple laser pulses and samples representative accumulated values. Thus, selecting a maximum values among stored cumulative irradiation values corresponding to predetermined irradiation positions would have been an obvious data-processing operation for determining the most heavily exposed region of the mask.
As to claim 8, once cumulative exposure is monitored, comparing the monitored value with a threshold and announcing mask lifetime or replacement information is merely an obvious maintenance function routinely employed in industrial laser-processing equipment to prevent mask degradation and ensure reliable operation.
As to claim 13, in view of the teachings of Sandstrom and Nei, sampling a maximum value among cumulative irradiation values corresponding to predetermined irradiation positions represents the same data-processing operation discussed with respect to claim 7 and would have been obvious for determining the region receiving the greatest accumulated laser exposure.
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Masuyuki (U.S.Pat 2002/0054231); Nagassaka et al (U.S.Pat. 6,798,495) and Sato (US 2017/0126976) disclose laser processing devices and have been cited for technical background.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG HENRY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00AM-4:30PM.
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 Minh 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.
HUNG HENRY NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2882
Hvn
7/25/26
/HUNG V NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights