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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of informalities indicated in an attached, marked-up copy of the specification showing tracking of changes.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 8-9 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 3, the only sentence therein will be read as “The optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the beam shaper [[
In Claim 8, the only sentence therein will be read as “The optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the detector receives light that emerges [[in different directions from the coupling-out area and/or that has different wavelengths.”
In Claim 9, the only sentence therein will be read as “The optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the detector comprises at least two partial detectors that are each designed to receive a light that emerges [[in different directions from the coupling-out area, or wherein the at least two partial detectors are arranged adjacent to one another.”
In Claim 14, the only sentence therein will be read as “A machine-readable storage medium on which [[the computer program according to claim 13 is stored.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu (US 2015/0211960 A1).
Regarding independent Claim 1, Shimizu discloses an optical testing device comprising:
a light source adapted to emit a light beam (Figure 1; [0061] “light is input from a light source (not illustrated) such as an external light-emitting element”);
a beam shaper (Figures 1 and 2: element 34 is a tapered waveguide core; [0046]) with a diffractive optical element (Figures 1 and 2: element 35 is a diffraction grating; [0046]) to shape the light beam (Figures 1 and 2; [0049] “diffraction grating 35 changes, by diffraction, a direction of an optical axis of light that is input from the outside through an input/output surface 35 a or light that is output to the outside through the input/output surface 35 a”) and direct the light beam onto a coupling-in area of an optical workpiece (Figures 1 and 2; [0050] “in a case where the diffraction gratings 35 and the diffraction gratings 26A and 26B have a light focusing function, the beam diameter of diffraction light can be adjusted, and thereby the coupling tolerance can be increased”, wherein “diffraction gratings 26A and 26B” are coupling-in/out areas of optical waveguide 22) to couple the shaped light (Figures 1 and 2; [0058] “diffraction gratings 26A and 26B provided at both ends of the optical waveguide 22 of the measured wafer 20 are moved to positions that face the respective diffraction gratings 35 of the optical probes 30”) into the optical workpiece to be inspected (Figures 1 and 2; [0033] “an optical waveguide (an optical circuit) 22 of the measured wafer 20 is inspected”); and
a workpiece holder to hold the optical workpiece (Figure 1; [0041] “measured wafer 20 is placed on a support surface 100 a of a stage 100”), but does not specifically teach:
a detector to evaluate light emerging from the coupling-out area of the optical workpiece to inspect an optical property of the workpiece.
However, Shimizu, in a different embodiment – see Figure 3 – teaches a detector (Figure 3: element 50 is a light receiving element; [0072]) to evaluate light emerging from the coupling-out area of the optical workpiece (Figure 3; [0074] “light is received by the light receiving element 50 at the other end (an output end) of the optical waveguide 22. In the light receiving element 50, the received light is converted to an electric signal corresponding to, for example the intensity of the light, and the electric signal is received by an electric prober 70 and is output to the evaluation section”) to inspect an optical property of the workpiece ([0001] “to inspect optical characteristics of an optical circuit formed on a wafer”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Shimizu with teachings of Figure 3, for a detector to evaluate light emerging from the coupling-out area of the optical workpiece to inspect an optical property of the workpiece, because “This makes it unnecessary to perform processes such as adjustment of an inclination angle of the optical probe, thereby making it possible to efficiently and surely inspect optical circuits that are formed in high density on a silicon wafer.” (Shimizu, [0016])
Regarding Claim 2, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the beam shaper (Figures 1 and 2: element 34 is a tapered waveguide core; [0046]) changes the diffractive optical element and/or shapes the light beam (Figures 1 and 2; [0049] “diffraction grating 35 changes, by diffraction, a direction of an optical axis of light that is input from the outside through an input/output surface 35 a or light that is output to the outside through the input/output surface 35 a”) using a further diffractive optical element (Figures 1 and 2: element 26A is a diffraction grating; [0037]).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the beam shaper (Figures 1 and 2: element 34 is a tapered waveguide core; [0046]) projects a light pattern (implicit for a diffraction grating to project a pattern of bright spots), onto the coupling-in area (Figures 1 and 2; [0050] “in a case where the diffraction gratings 35 and the diffraction gratings 26A and 26B have a light focusing function, the beam diameter of diffraction light can be adjusted, and thereby the coupling tolerance can be increased”, wherein “diffraction gratings 26A and 26B” are coupling-in/out areas of optical waveguide 22) via the diffractive optical element (Figures 1 and 2: element 35 is a diffraction grating; [0046]).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the light source (Figure 1; [0061] “light is input from a light source (not illustrated) such as an external light-emitting element”) and the beam shaper (Figures 1 and 2: element 34 is a tapered waveguide core; [0046]) is adapted to be adjusted in at least one axis (Figure 1; [0043] “optical probe 30 is brought into contact with the surface 20 a of the measured wafer 20”) or to be displaced and/or rotated about at least one axis (moot).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, wherein the workpiece holder (Figure 1; [0041] “a support surface 100 a of a stage 100”) is adjusted in at least one axis (Figure 1; [0042] “stage 100 is movable in two directions (the X direction and the Y direction) that are perpendicular to each other within a plane parallel with the surface 20 a of the measured wafer 20 by a stage moving mechanism (moving mechanism) 110”) and/or displaced and/or rotated about at least one axis (moot).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, and the workpiece holder (see claim 1 rejection), but does not specifically teach that the workpiece holder is designed to hold a plate- or flat-shaped optically transmissive and/or reflective workpiece or a waveguide, comprising a coupling-in area and a coupling-out area.
However, Shimizu, in a different embodiment – see Figure 11 – teaches that the workpiece holder is designed to hold a plate- or flat-shaped optically transmissive workpiece or a waveguide (Figure 11; [0098] “one or more reference optical waveguides 60A, 60B, . . . that have a line length different from an optical waveguide 22 are provided on each chip C (one of the chips is illustrated in FIG. 11) formed on a measured wafer 20 together with the optical waveguide 22 which is the original target of inspection”, wherein circularly-shaped “measured wafer 20” is interpreted as a flat-shaped optically transmissive workpiece), comprising a coupling-in area (Figure 11: plurality of diffraction gratings 26A are located at coupling-in areas) and a coupling-out area (Figure 11: plurality of diffraction gratings 26B are located at coupling-out areas).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Shimizu with teachings of Figure 11, wherein the workpiece holder is designed to hold a plate-or flat-shaped optically transmissive workpiece or a waveguide, comprising a coupling-in area and a coupling-out area, because optical evaluation of multiple waveguides can be carried out simultaneously.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Shimizu discloses a method to operate the optical testing device according to claim 1, the method comprising:
outputting a light beam by the light source (Figure 1; [0061] “light is input from a light source (not illustrated) such as an external light-emitting element”) towards the diffractive optical element (Figures 1 and 2: element 35 is a diffraction grating; [0046]) of the beam shaper (Figures 1 and 2: element 34 is a tapered waveguide core; [0046]), but does not specifically teach:
evaluating a light beam emitted from the coupling-out area to inspect an optical property of the workpiece.
However, Shimizu, in a different embodiment – see Figure 3 – teaches evaluating a light beam emitted from the coupling-out area (Figure 3; [0074] “light is received by the light receiving element 50 at the other end (an output end) of the optical waveguide 22. In the light receiving element 50, the received light is converted to an electric signal corresponding to, for example the intensity of the light, and the electric signal is received by an electric prober 70 and is output to the evaluation section”) to inspect an optical property of the workpiece ([0001] “to inspect optical characteristics of an optical circuit formed on a wafer”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Shimizu with teachings of Figure 3, for evaluating a light beam emitted from the coupling-out area to inspect an optical property of the workpiece, because “This makes it unnecessary to perform processes such as adjustment of an inclination angle of the optical probe, thereby making it possible to efficiently and surely inspect optical circuits that are formed in high density on a silicon wafer.” (Shimizu, [0016])
Claim(s) 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu (US 2015/0211960 A1) in view of Fu et al. (US 2022/0163382 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, and the detector (see claim 1 rejection), but does not specifically teach that the detector is adapted to be adjusted in at least one axis and/or displaced and/or rotated about at least one axis.
However, Fu, in the same field of optical device metrology, teaches that the detector (Figure 5A; [0054] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220”) is adapted to be adjusted (Figure 5A; [0060] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220 can move”) in at least one axis ([0060] “the entire camera is movable, for example along a track”) and/or displaced and/or rotated about at least one axis ([0060] “cameras with pan and tilt functionality”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Shimizu with teachings of Fu, wherein the detector is adapted to be adjusted in at least one axis and/or displaced and/or rotated about at least one axis, because “Taking measurements from more than one location on the top surface 51, bottom surface 53, and/or edges 52 can help achieve more useful results if there is significant variation in the light transmitted from different locations on the top surface 51, bottom surface 53, or edges 52 of the optical device 50.” (Fu, [0060])
Regarding Claim 8, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, and the detector (see claim 1 rejection), but does not specifically teach that the detector receives light that emerges in different directions from the coupling-out area and/or that has different wavelengths.
However, Fu, in the same field of optical device metrology, teaches that the detector (Figure 5A; [0054] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220”) receives light that emerges in different directions (Figure 5A; [0054] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220 can make the same measurements of the corresponding transmitted light TL1, TL2”) from the coupling-out area (Figure 5A; [0055] “location 51A on the top surface 51”; [0055] “location 52A on the right edge 52R”) and/or that has different wavelengths ([0057] “the light sources can be operable to provide more than one type of light (e.g., blue light and red light) or multiple light sources can be used that can each provide a different type of light”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Shimizu with teachings of Fu, wherein the detector receives light that emerges in different directions from the coupling-out area and/or that has different wavelengths, because a plurality of light quantities at different wavelengths can be measured simultaneously.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, and the detector (see claim 1 rejection), but does not specifically teach that the detector comprises at least two partial detectors that are each designed to receive a light that emerges in different directions from the coupling-out area, or wherein the at least two partial detectors are arranged adjacent to one another.
However, Fu, in the same field of optical device metrology, teaches that the detector comprises at least two partial detectors (Figure 5A; [0054] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220” are interpreted as two partial detectors) that are each designed to receive a light that emerges in different directions (Figure 5A; [0054] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220 can make the same measurements of the corresponding transmitted light TL1, TL2”) from the coupling-out area (Figure 5A; [0055] “location 51A on the top surface 51”; [0055] “location 52A on the right edge 52R”), or wherein the at least two partial detectors are arranged adjacent to one another (moot).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Shimizu with teachings of Fu, wherein the detector comprises at least two partial detectors that are each designed to receive a light that emerges in different directions from the coupling-out area, because a plurality of light quantities in different directions can be measured simultaneously.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Shimizu discloses the optical testing device according to claim 1, and the detector (see claim 1 rejection), but does not specifically teach that the detector or at least one component of the detector is adapted to be moved at least partially within a range of motion.
However, Fu, in the same field of optical device metrology, teaches that the detector (Figure 5A; [0054] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220”) or at least one component of the detector is adapted to be moved (Figure 5A; [0060] “the first camera 210 and the second camera 220 can move”) at least partially within a range of motion ([0060] “the entire camera is movable, for example along a track”; [0060] “cameras with pan and tilt functionality”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Shimizu with teachings of Fu, wherein the detector or at least one component of the detector is adapted to be moved at least partially within a range of motion, because “Taking measurements from more than one location on the top surface 51, bottom surface 53, and/or edges 52 can help achieve more useful results if there is significant variation in the light transmitted from different locations on the top surface 51, bottom surface 53, or edges 52 of the optical device 50.” (Fu, [0060])
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu (US 2015/0211960 A1) in view of Sun et al. (US 2022/0163423 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Shimizu discloses the steps of the method according to claim 11, but does not specifically teach a controller adapted to control and/or execute the steps of the method according to claim 11.
However, Sun, in the same field of optical measurement systems, teaches a controller (Figure 2: element 220 is a controller; [0025] “controller 220 is operable to facilitate operation of the measurement system 200”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Shimizu with the teachings of Sun, for a controller adapted to control and/or execute the steps of the method according to claim 11, because a controller aligns light sources, sensors, and cameras, dictates precise movements of stages, captures high-speed signals from detectors, filters noise out of raw data, and triggers emergency stops during system faults.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Shimizu discloses the steps of the method according to claim 11, but does not specifically teach a computer program comprising program code adapted to control and/or execute the steps of the method according to claim 11 when the computer program is executed on a controller.
However, Sun, in the same field of optical measurement systems, teaches a computer program comprising program code adapted to control and/or execute steps when the computer program is executed on a controller (Figure 2; [0049] “a central processing unit (CPU) configured to process computer-executable instructions stored in memory. The computer-executable instructions may include algorithms”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Shimizu with the teachings of Sun, for a computer program comprising program code adapted to control and/or execute the steps of the method according to claim 11 when the computer program is executed on a controller, because using a computer program to automate optical metrology provides critical advantages over manual inspection – it guarantees high precision, extreme speed, and consistent repeatability.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Shimizu discloses the computer program according to claim 13, but does not specifically teach a machine-readable storage medium on which the computer program according to claim 13 is stored.
However, Sun, in the same field of optical measurement systems, teaches a machine-readable storage medium on which the computer program according to claim 13 is stored ([0049] “computer-executable instructions stored in memory”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Shimizu with the teachings of Sun, for a machine-readable storage medium on which the computer program according to claim 13 is stored, to automate hardware control, process massive amounts of raw optical data, and execute complex mathematical algorithms required to perform calculations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-2020/0191551-A1 discloses a device for measuring the parameters of phase elements and dispersion of optical fibers, characterized in that it contains: a light source, serially connected to fiber optic coupler, one of whose arms constitutes a part of the reference arm, and whose second arm constitutes a part of the measurement arm of the device, and a motorized linear stage is mounted on the arm of the device. One of the arms of the device is connected to at least one detector, and at least one collimator is placed in at least of the arms of the device, at least before the phase element. A method of measuring the parameters of the phase element and the dispersion of optical fibers is conducted in two stages, wherein the first stage assumes the calibration of the device and the second stage is the proper measurement.
US-2018/0269967-A1 discloses an integrating sphere-equipped optical measurement device and optical connector polarity and type identification and loss measurement. The optical measurement device receives one or more optical signals that respectively emanate from one or more optical fibers of a plurality of optical fibers of an optical fiber cable. The optical measurement device determines one or more respective positions where the one or more optical signals impinged on a sensor. The optical measurement device determines based on the one or more positions, one or more receiving positions of the one or more optical signals, respectively. The optical measurement device determines polarity of the optical fiber cable based on both the one or more receiving positions and one or more or transmitting positions of the one or more optical signals, respectively.
US-2017/0030802-A1 discloses an apparatus including: a first main waveguide, configured to input and output a first optical signal; a first to-be-tested waveguide, configured to couple the first optical signal to generate a second optical signal, and transfer the second optical signal, an optical signal that is reflected by a second fiber Bragg grating, and an optical signal that is reflected by a first fiber Bragg grating. The apparatus also includes the first fiber Bragg grating, configured to totally reflect the optical signal that is reflected by the second fiber Bragg grating; the second fiber Bragg grating, configured to partially transmit and partially reflect the second optical signal and the optical signal that is reflected by the first fiber Bragg grating; and a first photoelectric detector, configured to receive an optical signal that is transmitted by the second fiber Bragg grating of the corresponding first to-be-tested waveguide.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Akbar H Rizvi whose telephone number is (571) 272-5085. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:30 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, Tarifur R Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/AKBAR H. RIZVI/
Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights