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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made that the instant application claims priority from DE102024204023.1, filed on -4/29/2024
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the unlabeled shapes in the flowchart shown in Figure 29 should be provided with descriptive text labels. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 15, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, lines 12-13, “the reconstructed mask transfer function” should be changed to --a reconstructed mask transfer function-- to improve antecedence.
Claim 2, line 15, “the reconstruction” should be changed to --the reconstructing-- to improve antecedence.
Claim 15, line 2, “the mask transfer function” should be changed to --the complex mask transfer function-- to improve antecedence.
Claim 18, lines 12-13, “the reconstructed mask transfer function” should be changed to --a reconstructed mask transfer function-- to improve antecedence.
Claim 18, line 15, “the reconstruction” should be changed to -- the reconstructing-- to improve antecedence.
Appropriate correction is required to place claims in better form.
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 1, 3, and 6 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 claim 1 is directed to a method without reciting any steps involved in the process. Dependent claims 3 and 6 also fail to recite any steps involved in the process. Independent claim 1 recites “a method for simulating illumination and imaging properties of an optical production system when an object is illuminated and imaged, wherein the simulation is implemented by an optical measurement system of a metrology system, - wherein the optical measurement system comprises an illumination optics unit for illuminating the object with a pupil stop that is arranged in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit, - wherein the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system includes a variation of a production illumination setting, to be simulated, such variation depending on an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system.” The limitation “wherein the optical measurement system comprises an illumination optics unit for illuminating the object with a pupil stop that is arranged in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit” recites the structure of the optical measurement system and the limitation “wherein the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system includes a variation of a production illumination setting, to be simulated, such variation depending on an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system” does not recite an act or step under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language as drafted. “As explained by the Supreme Court, a "process" is "a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or a series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced to a different state or thing." Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70, 175 USPQ 673, 676 (1972) (italics added) (quoting Cochrane v. Deener, 94 U.S. 780, 788, 24 L. Ed. 139, 141 (1876)).” See MPEP 2106.03. Dependent claim 3 recites “wherein the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or in that the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction” and claim 6 recites “wherein at least one of the following correction terms is included when the mask transfer function is reconstructed: - a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value and an associated field height, created by simulating an image by use of the imaging optics unit of the optical production system with the inclusion of reconstructed spectra of the object, and/or - a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value, created by simulating an image by use of the measurement imaging optics unit with the inclusion of the reconstructed spectra” also fail to set forth any steps or acts to define a process. Claims 1, 3, and 6, although directed to “a method,” fail to define actions under the broadest reasonable interpretations of the language of the claims. Claims 1, 3, and 6 therefore fail to claim a statutory category and are not patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitations “wherein the optical measurement system comprises an illumination optics unit for illuminating the object with a pupil stop that is arranged in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit, - wherein the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system includes a variation of a production illumination setting, to be simulated, such variation depending on an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system” in lines 4-11 of the method claim are vague and indefinite. It is unclear if the “wherein” clauses recited in the method claim are intended to set forth steps involved in the process. The limitation “wherein the optical measurement system comprises an illumination optics unit for illuminating the object with a pupil stop that is arranged in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit” recites the structure of the optical measurement system, and although the limitation “wherein the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system includes a variation of a production illumination setting, to be simulated, such variation depending on an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system” limits the simulation, the limitation does not appear to recite an act or a step under the broadest reasonable interpretation. The language as drafted does not require the performance of the simulation or a part of the simulation step as part of the recited method. For the purposes of examination, the “wherein” clause regarding the simulation is being interpreted as meaning the method comprising simulating the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system by varying a production illumination setting, the varying including the production illumination setting in an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system. Thus, claim 1 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “wherein the reconstruction includes, as part of the simulation, the fact that the optical production system to be simulated comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated, with the latter varying in the object displacement direction” in lines 15-18 is vague and indefinite. The language “the fact that” renders the reconstructing limitation unclear as to what is required by the limitation and what is “factual” about the reconstructing step. It is unclear if the claim language requires the optical production system to be simulated necessarily comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated varying in the object displacement direction. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning wherein the reconstruction includes the optical production system to be simulated comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated varies in the object displacement direction. Thus, claim 2 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “wherein the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or in that the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction” is vague and indefinite. The language “the fact that” renders the metes and bounds of simulation indefinite because it is unclear what is “factual” about the production illumination setting varying. It is unclear if the language as drafted positively requires the simulation to include the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning wherein the simulation includes the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction. Thus, claim 3 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “the mask transfer function” in line 2 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, but claim 2 in line 10 introduces “a complex mask transfer function. Claim 4 in line 16 also introduces “a complex mask transfer function.” It is therefore unclear if claim 6 is intended to properly introduce “a mask transfer function,” or if claim 6 is meant to depend from either claim 2 or claim 4 and recite “the complex mask transfer function.” For the purposes of examination, claim 6 is being interpreted as depending from claim 2.
The limitation “the imaging optics unit” in line 4 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning an imaging optics unit.
Additionally, the limitation “the measurement imaging optics unit” in line 8 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning a measurement imaging optics unit. Thus, claim 6 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “the recording of the measurement aerial image utilizes a pupil stop whose shape is optimized with the aid of the following method steps” in lines 1-3 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the recording of the measurement aerial image” in the claim, but claim 2, lines 7-9 introduces “recording measurement aerial images.” Claim 4, in lines 13-15, recites “recording measurement aerial images.” It is unclear if claim 7 is meant to depend from claim 2 or claim 4 or if claim 7 is meant to properly introduce a step of recording a measurement aerial image. For the purposes of examination, claim 7 interpreted as depending from claim 2. Thus, claim 7 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “wherein the stop boundary is optimized separately for a plurality of displacement positions in the object displacement direction, with the result that this gives rise to a plurality of pupil stops which can each be used for simulating the properties of the optical production system in the corresponding field region” is vague and indefinite. The language “which can each be used” renders the scope of the claim as drafted indefinite because it is unclear if the limitation requires the plurality of pupil stops to each be used for simulating the properties of the optical production system in the corresponding field region or if it is merely optional that the plurality of pupil stops each be used for simulating the properties of the optical production system in the corresponding field region. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning wherein the stop boundary is optimized separately for a plurality of displacement positions in the object displacement direction, with the result that this gives rise to a plurality of pupil stops used for simulating the properties of the optical production system in the corresponding field region. Thus, claim 8 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 18, the limitation “the method including the following steps” in lines 3-4 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the recording of the measurement aerial image” in the claim, and claim 18 is directed to a metrology system. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning the system including is configured to perform the recited capabilities.
Additionally, the limitation “wherein the reconstruction includes, as part of the simulation, the fact that the optical production system to be simulated comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated, with the latter varying in the object displacement direction” in lines 15-18 is vague and indefinite. The language “the fact that” renders the reconstructing limitation unclear as to what is required by the limitation and what is “factual” about the reconstruction. It is unclear if the claim language requires the optical production system to be simulated necessarily comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated varying in the object displacement direction. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning wherein the reconstruction includes the optical production system to be simulated comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated varies in the object displacement direction. Thus, claim 18 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “wherein the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or in that the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction” is vague and indefinite. The language “the fact that” renders the metes and bounds of simulation indefinite because it is unclear what is “factual” about the production illumination setting varying. It is unclear if the language as drafted positively requires the simulation to include the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning wherein the simulation includes the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction. Thus, claim 19 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “the mask transfer function” in line 2 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, but claim 18 in line 10 introduces “a complex mask transfer function. It is therefore unclear if claim 20 is intended to properly introduce “a mask transfer function,” or if claim 6 is meant to depend from claim 18 and recite “the complex mask transfer function.” For the purposes of examination, claim 20 is being interpreted as depending from claim 18.
Additionally, the limitation “the measurement imaging optics unit” in line 7 is vague and indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning a measurement imaging optics unit. Thus, claim 6 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 9-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Gwosch et al. (WO 2023/135131, Gwosch hereinafter; US PGPub 2024/0361704 used as English translation).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Gwosch discloses method for simulating illumination and imaging properties of an optical production system when an object is illuminated and imaged, wherein the simulation is implemented by an optical measurement system of a metrology system (Figs. 1-22, abstract, optical measuring system illuminates an object and images the object into an image plane, and simulation is performed to determine lighting and imaging properties),
- wherein the optical measurement system comprises an illumination optics unit for illuminating the object with a pupil stop that is arranged in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit (Figs. 1-9, paras. [0042]-[0043], [0045]-[0049], the metrology system 2 includes pupil stop 10 arranged in the pupil plane 11 of illumination optical unit 9. The illumination optical unit 9 illuminates a test structure 5),
- wherein the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system includes a variation of a production illumination setting, to be simulated (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0082]-[0084], [0110]-[0111], [0115]-[0129], [0131]-[0132], [0148], abstract, the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties includes a plurality of positions of the pupil stop or a plurality of pupil stops to obtain measurement positions), such variation depending on an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0044], [0082]-[0084], [0110]-[0129], [0131]-[0132], [0148], the simulation includes a plurality of positions of the pupil stop along the xy plane).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein the optical measurement system comprises an imaging optics unit for imaging the object into an image plane and wherein the object is displaceable perpendicular to an object plane (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0085]-[0090], [0098], projection optical unit 20 projects the image of the object onto the image plane 29, and the object holder 17 with test structure 5 is displaced by displacement drive 18 in the z-axis direction), the method including the following steps:
- providing at least one pupil stop for specifying at least one measurement illumination setting created by use of the pupil stop (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0042], [0047]-[0049], [0100]-[0103], [0111], [0117]-[0124], pupil stop 10 is arranged in the pupil plane 11 of illumination optical unit 9 for measurement),
- recording measurement aerial images in the image plane for various displacement positions of the object perpendicular to the object plane with the at least one measurement illumination setting (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0096]-[0099], [0116]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], detection device 27 records aerial images with the pupil stop 10 arranged at measurement position illumination settings and the test structure 5 positioned at defocus values in the z-axis direction),
- reconstructing a complex mask transfer function from the recorded measurement aerial images (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0131]-[0137], a complex mask transfer function is reconstructed from the aerial images), and
- determining a 3-D aerial image of the optical production system from the reconstructed mask transfer function and a specified illumination setting of the optical production system as the result of the simulation method (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0044], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], a three-dimensional aerial image is calculated from the reconstructed mask transfer function M and the illumination setting target),
- wherein the reconstruction includes, as part of the simulation, the fact that the optical production system to be simulated comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated, with the latter varying in the object displacement direction (Figs. 1-15, 22, paras. [0082]-[0084], [0099]-[0104], [0110]-[0111], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], the illumination setting in the illumination pupil is simulated in different xy-plane displacement directions).
Regarding claim 3, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or in that the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0047]-[0051], [0092], [0099]-[0104], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], the illumination settings have varying intensity for individual illumination spots and illumination angle distributions in the xy-plane).
Regarding claim 6, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein at least one of the following correction terms is included when the mask transfer function is reconstructed (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0131]-[0137], a complex mask transfer function is reconstructed from the aerial images):
- a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value and an associated field height, created by simulating an image by use of the imaging optics unit of the optical production system with the inclusion of reconstructed spectra of the object, and/or
- a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value, created by simulating an image by use of the measurement imaging optics unit with the inclusion of the reconstructed spectra (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0139], [0145]-[0154], a calculated aerial image for any defocus target is formed with the reconstructed spectra).
Regarding claim 9, Gwosch discloses a metrology system for carrying out a method for simulating illumination and imaging properties of an optical production system when an object is illuminated and imaged, wherein the simulation is implemented by an optical measurement system of a metrology system (Figs. 1-22, abstract, optical measuring system illuminates an object and images the object into an image plane, and simulation is performed to determine lighting and imaging properties),
- wherein the optical measurement system comprises an illumination optics unit serving to illuminate the object and having a pupil stop in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit, and an imaging optics unit for imaging the object into the image plane (Figs. 1-9, paras. [0047]-[0049], [0087]-[0090], [0093], [0095]-[0099], [0118], pupil stop 10 is arranged in the pupil plane 11 of illumination optical unit 9, and illumination optical unit 9 illuminates test structure 5. The metrology system 2 includes projection optical unit 20 to image the test structure 5 onto the image plane 29),
- wherein the simulation of the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system includes a variation of a production illumination setting, to be simulated (Figs. 1-14, abstract, paras. [0082]-[0084], [0110]-[0111], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0132], [0148], the simulation of illumination and imaging properties includes a plurality of positions of the pupil stop or a plurality of pupil stops to obtain measurement positions), such variation depending on an object displacement direction of the object along which the object is displaced during production operation of the optical production system (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0044], [0082]-[0084], [0110]-[0129], [0131]-[0132], [0148], the simulation includes a plurality of positions of the pupil stop along the xy plane).
Regarding claim 10, Gwosch discloses wherein the optical measurement system comprises a displacement drive for displacing the pupil stop in at least one displacement direction in the pupil plane (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0082]-[0084], displacement drive unit 16 displaces the pupil stop in the xy-plane),
- wherein the optical measurement system comprises an object holder which is displaceable perpendicular to an object plane by actuator (Fig. 1, paras. [0085]-[0086], the object displacement drive 18 displaces the object holder 17 in the z-axis direction).
Regarding claim 11, Gwosch discloses wherein the optical measurement system comprises a displacement drive for displacing, in at least one displacement direction in a pupil plane of the imaging optics unit, an imaging pupil stop arranged in the region of a pupil of the imaging optics unit (Fig. 1, paras. [0090]-[0091], [0119]-[0121], [0125]-[0129], [0152], the projection optical unit 20 includes a displacement drive 25 for displacing the imaging pupil stop 23 in the xy-plane).
Regarding claim 12, Gwosch discloses comprising a selection apparatus for selecting at least one pupil stop from a plurality of pupil stops, wherein the selection apparatus comprises a stop storage unit with a plurality of pupil stops, each with different stop boundary shapes and/or stop boundary orientations for specifying correspondingly different measurement illumination settings (Figs. 1-14, para. [0021], [0084], [0101]-[0102], [0115], [0155]-[0156], a selection apparatus includes a stop storage unit housing a plurality of pupil stops with different shapes and orientations for producing different illumination settings).
Regarding claim 13, Gwosch discloses wherein the optical measurement system comprises a displacement drive for displacing, in at least one displacement direction in a pupil plane of the imaging optics unit, an imaging pupil stop arranged in the region of a pupil of the imaging optics unit (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0082], [0090]-[0091], [0119]-[0121], [0125]-[0129], [0152], the projection optical unit 20 includes a displacement drive 25 for displacing the imaging pupil stop 23 in the xy-plane).
Regarding claim 14, Gwosch discloses comprising a selection apparatus for selecting at least one pupil stop from a plurality of pupil stops, wherein the selection apparatus comprises a stop storage unit with a plurality of pupil stops, each with different stop boundary shapes and/or stop boundary orientations for specifying correspondingly different measurement illumination settings (Figs. 1-14, para. [0021], [0084], [0101]-[0102], [0115], [0155]-[0156], a selection apparatus includes a stop storage unit housing a plurality of pupil stops with different shapes and orientations for producing different illumination settings).
Regarding claim 18, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein the optical measurement system comprises an imaging optics unit for imaging the object into an image plane and wherein the object is displaceable perpendicular to an object plane (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0085]-[0090], [0098], projection optical unit 20 projects the image of the object onto the image plane 29, and the object holder 17 with test structure 5 is displaced by displacement drive 18 in the z-axis direction), the method including the following steps:
- providing at least one pupil stop for specifying at least one measurement illumination setting created by use of the pupil stop (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0042], [0047]-[0049], [0100]-[0103], [0111], [0117]-[0124], pupil stop 10 is arranged in the pupil plane 11 of illumination optical unit 9 for measurement),
- recording measurement aerial images in the image plane for various displacement positions of the object perpendicular to the object plane with the at least one measurement illumination setting (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0096]-[0099], [0116]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], detection device 27 records aerial images with the pupil stop 10 arranged at measurement position illumination settings and the test structure 5 positioned at defocus values in the z-axis direction),
- reconstructing a complex mask transfer function from the recorded measurement aerial images (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0131]-[0137], a complex mask transfer function is reconstructed from the aerial images), and
- determining a 3-D aerial image of the optical production system from the reconstructed mask transfer function and a specified illumination setting of the optical production system as the result of the simulation method (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0044], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], a three-dimensional aerial image is calculated from the reconstructed mask transfer function M and the illumination setting target),
- wherein the reconstruction includes, as part of the simulation, the fact that the optical production system to be simulated comprises the production illumination setting to be simulated, with the latter varying in the object displacement direction (Figs. 1-15, 22, paras. [0082]-[0084], [0099]-[0104], [0110]-[0111], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], the illumination setting in the illumination pupil is simulated in different xy-plane displacement directions).
Regarding claim 19, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination intensity in the object displacement direction and/or in that the simulation includes the fact that the production illumination setting varies in terms of its illumination angle distribution in the object displacement direction (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0047]-[0051], [0092], [0099]-[0104], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], the illumination settings have varying intensity for individual illumination spots and illumination angle distributions in the xy-plane).
Regarding claim 20, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein at least one of the following correction terms is included when the mask transfer function is reconstructed (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0131]-[0137], a complex mask transfer function is reconstructed from the aerial images):
- a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value and an associated field height, created by simulating an image by use of the imaging optics unit of the optical production system with the inclusion of reconstructed spectra of the object, and/or
- a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value, created by simulating an image by use of the measurement imaging optics unit with the inclusion of the reconstructed spectra (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0139], [0145]-[0154], a calculated aerial image for any defocus target is formed with the reconstructed spectra).
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 4, 5, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gwosch in view of Ando (US PGPub 2009/0002665).
Regarding claim 4, Gwosch discloses a method for simulating illumination and imaging properties of an optical production system when an object is illuminated and imaged, wherein the simulation is implemented by use of an optical measurement system of a metrology system (Figs. 1-22, abstract, optical measuring system illuminates an object and images the object into an image plane, and simulation is performed to determine lighting and imaging properties),
- wherein the optical measurement system comprises
-- an illumination optics unit for illuminating the object with a pupil stop that is arranged in the region of an illumination pupil in a pupil plane of the illumination optics unit (Figs. 1-9, paras. [0047]-[0049], [0087]-[0090], [0093], [0095]-[0099], [0118], pupil stop 10 is arranged in the pupil plane 11 of illumination optical unit 9, and illumination optical unit 9 illuminates test structure 5) and
-- an imaging optics unit for imaging the object into an image plane (Figs. 1-9, paras. [0047]-[0049], [0087]-[0090], [0093], [0095]-[0099], [0118], the metrology system 2 includes projection optical unit 20 to image the test structure 5 onto the image plane 29),
- wherein the object is displaceable perpendicular to an object plane (Fig. 1, paras. [0085]-[0086], the object displacement drive 18 displaces the object holder 17 with test structure 5 in the z-axis direction), including the following steps:
- providing at least one pupil stop for specifying at least one measurement illumination setting created by use of the pupil stop (Figs. 1-9, paras. [0047]-[0049], [0087]-[0090], [0093], [0095]-[0099], [0118], pupil stop 10 is arranged in the pupil plane 11),
- recording measurement aerial images in the image plane for various displacement positions of the object perpendicular to the object plane with the at least one measurement illumination setting (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0096]-[0099], [0116]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], detection device 27 records aerial images with the pupil stop 10 arranged at measurement position illumination settings and the test structure 5 positioned at defocus values in the z-axis direction),
- reconstructing a complex mask transfer function from the recorded measurement aerial images (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0131]-[0137], a complex mask transfer function is reconstructed from the aerial images),
- determining a 3-D aerial image of the optical production system from the reconstructed mask transfer function and a specified illumination setting of the optical production system as the result of the simulation method (Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0044], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], a three-dimensional aerial image is calculated from the reconstructed mask transfer function M and the illumination setting target),
wherein the measurement illumination setting used when recording the measurement aerial images has a measurement pupil filling degree and a production illumination setting to be simulated of the optical production system to be simulated (Figs. 1-9, paras. [0042]-[0044], [0047]-[0049], [0087]-[0090], [0093], [0095]-[0103], [0118], [0116]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], the illumination settings have a pupil filling degree, and the production illumination setting is simulated to simulate the optical production system). Gwosch does not appear to explicitly describe the measurement pupil filling degree is greater than a production pupil filling degree of a production illumination setting to be simulated of the optical production system to be simulated.
Ando discloses wherein the measurement illumination setting used when recording the measurement aerial images has a measurement pupil filling degree greater than a production pupil filling degree of a production illumination setting (Figs. 1, 6-9, paras. [0036], [0038]-[0042], [0051], [0060]-[0061], [0067]-[0068], the stop plate STP changes the illumination condition, and stops a, c, and e are used for measurement and have greater pupil filling than the stops b, d, f, and g used for exposure illumination conditions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the measurement illumination setting used when recording the measurement aerial images has a measurement pupil filling degree greater than a production pupil filling degree of a production illumination setting as taught by Ando with the production illumination setting to be simulated of the optical production system to be simulated in the method for simulating illumination and imaging properties as taught by Gwosch since including wherein the measurement illumination setting used when recording the measurement aerial images has a measurement pupil filling degree greater than a production pupil filling degree of a production illumination setting to be simulated of the optical production system to be simulated is commonly used to arrange the necessary illumination condition to improve measurement accuracy (Ando, paras. [0011], [0051]).
Regarding claim 5, although Gwosch as modified by Ando discloses the general conditions of wherein an illuminated pupil area of the measurement illumination setting is greater than an illuminated pupil area of the production illumination setting to be simulated (Gwosch, Figs. 1-9, paras. [0042]-[0044], [0047]-[0049], [0087]-[0090], [0093], [0095]-[0103], [0118], [0116]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], the illumination settings have a pupil filling degree, and the production illumination setting is simulated, and as modified by Ando, Figs. 1, 6-9, paras. [0038]-[0042], [0051], [0060]-[0061], the stop plate STP changes the illumination condition, and stops a, c, and e are used for measurement and have greater pupil filling than the stops b, d, f, and g used for exposure illumination conditions), Gwosch as modified by Ando does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the measurement illumination setting is at least 1.25 times the production illumination setting. However, absent evidence of criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the measurement illumination setting and the production illumination setting in the method as taught by Gwosch as modified by Ando to have obtained wherein an illuminated pupil area of the measurement illumination setting is at least 1.25 times an illuminated pupil area of the production illumination setting to be simulated since optimizing wherein an illuminated pupil area of the measurement illumination setting is at least 1.25 times an illuminated pupil area of the production illumination setting to be simulated would have only required routine skill to determine an optimum illumination area to allow improved measurement accuracy (Ando, para. [0051]). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05, subsection II.
Regarding claim 15, Gwosch as modified by Ando discloses wherein at least one of the following correction terms is included when the mask transfer function is reconstructed (Gwosch, Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0131]-[0137], a complex mask transfer function is reconstructed from the aerial images): a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value and an associated field height, created by simulating an image by use of the imaging optics unit of the optical production system with the inclusion of reconstructed spectra of the object, or
a calculated aerial image for the associated defocus value, generated by simulating an image by use of the measurement imaging optics unit with the inclusion of the reconstructed spectra (Gwosch, Figs. 1-14, 22, paras. [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0139], [0145]-[0154], a calculated aerial image for any defocus target is formed with the reconstructed spectra).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gwosch as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Winkler (WO2023/104687).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, Gwosch discloses wherein the recording of the measurement aerial images utilizes a pupil stop whose stop shape is optimized (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0021], [0101]-[0110], [0115]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], [0155]-[0156], the pupil stop is selected) with the aid of the following method step: - specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0101]-[0103], a target stop shape is specified), but Gwosch does not appear to explicitly describe - modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape, - checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition, - ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with, - repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step, and - fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion.
Winkler discloses wherein the recording of the measurement aerial images utilizes a pupil stop whose stop shape is optimized with the aid of the following method steps (Figs. 1-9, abstract, the pupil stop shape is optimized):
- specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 22, lines 17-28, page 23, lines 1-6, page 26, lines 10-12, a starting stop shape is specified,
- modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 26, lines 14-17, the starting stop shape is modified),
- checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 26, lines 19-29, a checking step checks that the fabrication boundary of the modification stop shape satisfies boundary conditions, and the modification and checking steps are repeated until the modification stop shape is in compliance),
- ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 26, lines 19-29, page 27, lines 1-7, a determining step determines match quality between illumination and imaging properties of the production system and the measurement system upon compliance of the modification stop shape with boundary conditions),
- repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 28, lines 20-27, page 29, lines 1-20, the modifying, checking, and determining steps are repeated until the match quality attains the optimization criterion in the optimization query step), and
- fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 29, lines 5-28, page 20, lines 1-11, a fabricating step fabricates the optimized stop is fabricated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation, modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape, checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition, ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with, repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step, and fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion as taught by Winkler in optimizing the pupil stop shape in the method as taught by Gwosch since including specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation, modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape, checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition, ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with, repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step, and fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion is commonly used to provide pupil stop shape optimization for a metrology system to precisely simulate the illumination and imaging properties of a production system despite differences between the metrology and production systems (Winkler, page 2, lines 10-25, page 3, lines 1-28, page 4, lines 1-8).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, Gwosch as modified by Winkler discloses wherein the stop boundary is optimized separately for a plurality of displacement positions in the object displacement direction, with the result that this gives rise to a plurality of pupil stops which can each be used for simulating the properties of the optical production system in the corresponding field region (Gwosch, Figs. 1-15, 22, paras. [0082]-[0084], [0099]-[0104], [0110]-[0111], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], the illumination setting in the illumination pupil is simulated in different xy-plane displacement directions, and as modified by Winkler, Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 8, lines 1-10, the pupil stop shape is optimized for different pupil stops).
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gwosch as modified by Ando as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Winkler (WO2023/104687).
Regarding claim 16, Gwosch as modified by Ando discloses wherein the recording of the measurement aerial images utilizes a pupil stop whose stop shape is optimized (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0021], [0101]-[0110], [0115]-[0118], [0131]-[0137], [0155]-[0156], the pupil stop is selected) with the aid of the following method step: - specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation (Figs. 1-14, paras. [0101]-[0103], a target stop shape is specified), but Gwosch as modified by Ando does not appear to explicitly describe - modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape, - checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition, - ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with, - repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step, and - fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion.
Winkler discloses wherein the recording of the measurement aerial images utilizes a pupil stop whose stop shape is optimized with the aid of the following method steps (Figs. 1-9, abstract, the pupil stop shape is optimized):
- specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 22, lines 17-28, page 23, lines 1-6, page 26, lines 10-12, a starting stop shape is specified,
- modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 26, lines 14-17, the starting stop shape is modified),
- checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 26, lines 19-29, a checking step checks that the fabrication boundary of the modification stop shape satisfies boundary conditions, and the modification and checking steps are repeated until the modification stop shape is in compliance),
- ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 26, lines 19-29, page 27, lines 1-7, a determining step determines match quality between illumination and imaging properties of the production system and the measurement system upon compliance of the modification stop shape with boundary conditions),
- repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 28, lines 20-27, page 29, lines 1-20, the modifying, checking, and determining steps are repeated until the match quality attains the optimization criterion in the optimization query step), and
- fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion (Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 29, lines 5-28, page 20, lines 1-11, a fabricating step fabricates the optimized stop is fabricated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation, modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape, checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition, ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with, repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step, and fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion as taught by Winkler in optimizing the pupil stop shape in the method as taught by Gwosch as modified by Ando since including specifying a starting stop shape of the pupil stop as an initial design candidate for the simulation, modifying the starting stop shape to give rise to a modification stop shape which is different from the most recently specified stop shape, checking at least one fabrication boundary condition with regard to fabrication of the modification stop shape and repeating the “modifying” and “checking” steps until the checking reveals compliance with the fabrication boundary condition, ascertaining a match quality between the illumination and imaging properties of the optical production system and the illumination and imaging properties of the optical measurement system as soon as the fabrication boundary conditions are complied with, repeating the “modifying”, “checking” and “ascertaining” steps until the match quality attains a specified optimization criterion, which is checked by way of a query step, and fabricating a target stop shape resulting from the attaining of the optimization criterion as an optimized pupil stop shape after attaining the optimization criterion is commonly used to provide pupil stop shape optimization for a metrology system to precisely simulate the illumination and imaging properties of a production system despite differences between the metrology and production systems (Winkler, page 2, lines 10-25, page 3, lines 1-28, page 4, lines 1-8).
Regarding claim 17, Gwosch as modified by Ando in view of Winkler discloses wherein the stop boundary is optimized separately for a plurality of displacement positions in the object displacement direction, with the result that this gives rise to a plurality of pupil stops which can each be used for simulating the properties of the optical production system in the corresponding field region (Gwosch, Figs. 1-15, 22, paras. [0082]-[0084], [0099]-[0104], [0110]-[0111], [0117]-[0129], [0131]-[0137], [0145]-[0154], the illumination setting in the illumination pupil is simulated in different xy-plane displacement directions, and as modified by Winkler, Figs. 1-9, abstract, page 8, lines 1-10, the pupil stop shape is optimized for different pupil stops).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA A. RIDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7538. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30AM-5PM.
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, Minh-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.
/CHRISTINA A RIDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights