Patent Grant
8730572
1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to a catadioptric projection objective for imaging a pattern arranged in an object surface onto an image surface.
2. Description of the Related Art
Projection objectives of that type are employed on projection exposure systems, in particular wafer scanners or wafer steppers, used for fabricating semiconductor devices and other types of microdevices and serve to project patterns on photomasks or reticles, hereinafter referred to generically as “masks” or “reticles,” onto an object having a photosensitive coating with ultrahigh resolution on a reduced scale.
In order create even finer structures, it is sought to both increase the image-end numerical aperture (NA) of the projection objective to be involved and employ shorter wavelengths, preferably ultraviolet light with wavelengths less than about 260 nm.
However, there are very few materials, in particular, synthetic quartz glass and crystalline fluorides, that are sufficiently transparent in that wavelength region available for fabricating the optical elements required. Since the Abbé numbers of those materials that are available lie rather close to one another, it is difficult to provide purely refractive systems that are sufficiently well color-corrected (corrected for chromatic aberrations).
In lithography, a flat (planar) image is essential to expose planar substrates, such as semiconductor wafers. However, generally the image surface of an optical system is curved, and the degree of curvature is determined by the Petzval sum. The correction of the Petzval sum is becoming more important in view of the increasing demands to project large object fields on planar surfaces with increased resolution.
One approach for obtaining a flat image surface and good color-correction is the use of catadioptric systems, which combine both refracting elements, such as lenses, and reflecting elements, such as mirror, preferably including at least one concave mirror. While the contributions of positive-powered and negative-powered lenses in an optical system to overall power, surface curvature and chromatic aberrations are opposite to each other, a concave mirror has positive power like a positive-powered lens, but the opposite effect on surface curvature without contributing to chromatic aberrations.
Further, the high prices of the materials involved and limited availability of crystalline calcium fluoride in sizes large enough for fabricating large lenses represent problems. Measures that will allow reducing the number and sizes of lenses and simultaneously contribute to maintaining, or even improving, imaging fidelity are thus desired.
Catadioptric projection objectives having at least two concave mirrors have been proposed to provide systems with good color correction and moderate lens mass requirements. The U.S. Pat. No. 6,600,608 B1 discloses a catadioptric projection objective having a first, purely refractive objective part for imaging a pattern arranged in the object plane of the projection objective into a first intermediate image, a second objective part for imaging the first intermediate image into a second intermediate image and a third objective part for imaging the second intermediate image directly, that is without a further intermediate image, onto the image plane. The second objective part is a catadioptric objective part having a first concave mirror with a central bore and a second concave mirror with a central bore, the concave mirrors having the mirror faces facing each other and defining an intermirror space or catadioptric cavity in between. The first intermediate image is formed within the central bore of the concave mirror next to the object plane, whereas the second intermediate image is formed within the central bore of the concave mirror next to the object plane. The objective has axial symmetry and provides good color correction axially and laterally. However, since the reflecting surfaces of the concave mirrors are interrupted at the bores, the pupil of the system is obscured.
The Patent EP 1 069 448 B1 discloses another catadioptric projection objective having two concave mirrors facing each other. The concave mirrors are part of a first catadioptric objective part imaging the object onto an intermediate image positioned adjacent to a concave mirror. This is the only intermediate image, which is imaged to the image plane by a second, purely refractive objective part. The object as well as the image of the catadioptric imaging system are positioned outside the intermirror space defined by the mirrors facing each other. Similar systems having two concave mirrors, a common straight optical axis and one intermediate image formed by a catadioptric imaging system and positioned besides one of the concave mirrors are disclosed in Japanese patent application JP 2002208551 A and US patent application US 2002/00241 A1.
European patent application EP 1 336 887 (corresponding to US 2004/0130806 A1) discloses catadioptric projection objectives having one common straight optical axis and, in that sequence, a first catadioptric objective part for creating a first intermediate image, a second catadioptric objective part for creating a second intermediate image from the first intermediate image, and a refractive third objective part forming the image from the second intermediate image. Each catadioptric system has two concave mirrors facing each other. The intermediate images lie outside the intermirror spaces defined by the concave mirrors. Concave mirrors are positioned optically near to pupil surfaces closer to pupil surfaces than to the intermediate images of the projection objectives.
International Patent application WO 2004/107011 A1 discloses catadioptric projection objectives having one common straight optical axis and two or more intermediate images and suitable for immersion lithography with numerical apertures up to NA=1.2. At least one concave mirror is positioned optically near to a pupil surface closer to that pupil surface than to an intermediate images of the projection objective.
In the article “Nikon Projection Lens Update” by T. Matsuyama, T. Ishiyama and Y. Ohmura, presented by B. W. Smith in: Optical Microlithography XVII, Proc. of SPIE 5377.65 (2004) a design example of a catadioptric projection lens is shown, which is a combination of a conventional dioptric DUV system and a 6-mirror EUV catoptric system inserted between lens groups of the DUV system. A first intermediate image is formed behind the third mirror of the catoptric (purely reflective) group upstream of a convex mirror. The second intermediate image is formed by a purely reflective (catoptric) second objective part. The third objective part is purely refractive featuring negative refractive power at a waist of minimum beam diameter within the third objective part for Petzval sum correction.
Japanese patent application JP 2003114387 A and international patent application WO 01/55767 A disclose catadioptric projection objectives having one common straight optical axis, a first catadioptric objective part for forming an intermediate image and a second catadioptric objective part for imaging the intermediate image onto the image plane of this system. Concave and convex mirrors are used in combination.
The article “Camera view finder using tilted concave mirror erecting elements” by D. DeJager, SPIE. Vol. 237 (1980) p. 292-298 discloses camera view finders comprising two concave mirrors as elements of a 1:1 telescopic erecting relay system. The system is designed to image an object at infinity into a real image, which is erect and can be viewed through an eyepiece. Separate optical axes of refractive system parts upstream and downstream of the catoptric relay system are parallel offset to each other. In order to build a system having concave mirrors facing each other mirrors must be tilted. The authors conclude that physically realizable systems of this type have poor image quality.
International patent applications WO 92/05462 and WO 94/06047 and the article “Innovative Wide-Field Binocular Design” in OSA/SPIE Proceedings (1994) pages 389ff disclose catadioptric optical systems especially for binoculars and other viewing instruments designed as inline system having a single, unfolded optical axis. Some embodiments have a first concave mirror having an object side mirror surface arranged on one side of the optical axis and a second concave mirror having a mirror surface facing the first mirror and arranged on the opposite side of the optical axis such that the surface curvatures of the concave mirrors define and intermirror space. A front refractive group forms a first intermediate image near the first mirror and a second intermediate image is formed outside of the space formed by the two facing mirrors. A narrow field being larger in a horizontal direction than in a vertical direction is arranged offset to the optical axis. The object side refractive group has a collimated input and the image side refractive group has a collimated output and entrance and exit pupils far from telecentric are formed. The pupil shape is semi-circular unlike pupil surfaces in lithographic projection lenses, which have to be circular and centered on the optical axis.
The PCT application WO 01/044682 A1 discloses catadioptric UV imaging systems for wafer inspection having one concave mirror designed as Mangin mirror.
Catadioptric projection objectives consisting of a catadioptric imaging subsystem having one single concave mirror and arranged between an entry side and an exit side refractive imaging subsystem (so-calles R-C-R systems) are disclosed, for example, in U.S. application with Ser. No. 60/573,533 filed on May 17, 2004 by the applicant. Other examples of R-C-R-systems are shown in US 2003/0011755, WO 03/036361 or US 2003/0197946.
US patent application with title “Catadioptric Projection Objective” filed by the applicant on Jan. 14, 2005 (based on U.S. provisional applications 60/536,248 filed on Jan. 14, 2004; U.S., 60/587,504 filed Jul. 14, 2004; 60/617,674 filed Oct. 13, 2004; 60/591,775 filed Jul. 27, 2004; and 60/612,823 filed Sep. 24, 2004) discloses catadioptric projection objectives having very high NA and suitable for immersion lithography at NA>1 with maximum values NA=1.2. The projection objectives comprise: a first objective part for imaging the pattern provided in the object plane into a first intermediate image, a second objective part for imaging the first intermediate imaging into a second intermediate image, and a third objective part for imaging the second intermediate imaging directly onto the image plane. The second objective part includes a first concave mirror having a first continuous mirror surface and a second concave mirror having a second continuous mirror surface, the concave mirror faces facing each other and defining an intermirror space. All concave mirrors are positioned optically remote from pupil surfaces. The system has potential for very high numerical apertures at moderate lens mass consumption. The full disclosure of this document and the priority documents thereof is incorporated into the present application by reference.
It is one object of the invention to provide a catadioptric projection objective suitable for use in the vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) range having potential for very high image side numerical aperture which may be extended to values allowing immersion lithography at numerical apertures NA>1. It is another object to provide catadioptric projection objectives that can be build with relatively small amounts of optical material. It is yet another object to provide compact high-aperture catadioptric projection objectives having moderate size.
As a solution to these and other objects the invention, according to one formulation, provides a catadioptric projection objective for imaging a pattern provided in an object surface of the projection objective onto an image surface of the projection objective comprising:
Generally, the dimensions of projection objectives tend to increase dramatically as the image side numerical aperture NA is increased. Empirically it has been found that the maximum lens diameter Dmax tends to increase stronger than linear with increase of NA according to Dmax˜NAk, where k>1. A value k=2 is an approximation used for the purpose of this application. Further, it has been found that the maximum lens diameter Dmax increases in proportion to the image field size (represented by the image field height Y′). A linear dependency is assumed for the purpose of the application. Based on these considerations a first compactness parameter COMP1 is defined as:
COMP1=Dmax/(Y′·NA2).
It is evident that, for given values of image field height and numerical aperture, the first compaction parameter COMP1 should be as small as possible if a compact design is desired.
Considering the overall material consumption necessary for providing a projection objective, the absolute number of lenses, NL is also relevant. Typically, systems with a smaller number of lenses are preferred to systems with larger numbers of lenses. Therefore, a second compactness parameter COMP2 is defined as follows:
COMP2=COMP1·NL.
Again, small values for COMP2 are indicative of compact optical systems.
Further, projection objectives according to the invention have at least three objective parts for imaging an entry side field plane into an optically conjugate exit side field plane, where the imaging objective parts are concatenated at intermediate images. Typically, the number of lenses and the overall material necessary to build a projection objective will increase the higher the number NOP of imaging objective parts of the optical system is. It is desirable to keep the average number of lenses per objective part, NL/NOP, as small as possible. Therefore, a third compactness parameter COMP3 is defined as follows:
COMP3=COMP1·NL/NOP.
Again, projection objectives with low optical material consumption will be characterized by small values of COMP3.
A value COMP1<10 indicates a very compact design. Even values of COMP1<9.6 are obtained in some embodiments. In some embodiments the low compactness is obtained although the numerical aperture is larger than 1.2 (i.e. NA>1.2). Embodiments with NA=1.3 or NA=1.35 are possible and allow ultra-high resolution immersion lithography.
In some embodiments, low values for the second compactness parameter can be obtained. In some embodiments COMP2<260 and/or COMP2<240 is obtained. Embodiments with COMP2<220 are possible.
Alternatively, or in addition, low values for the third compactness parameter COMP3 are possible. In some embodiments COMP3<80, and lower values of COMP3<70 are also possible.
In preferred embodiments, a first concave mirror having a first continuous mirror surface and at least one second concave mirror having a second continuous mirror surface are arranged in the second objective part; pupil surfaces are formed between the object plane and the first intermediate image, between the first and the second intermediate image and between the second intermediate image and the image plane; and all concave mirrors are arranged optically remote from a pupil surface.
In these embodiments a circular pupil centered around the optical axis is be provided in a centered optical system. Two or more concave mirrors in the system parts contributing to forming the second intermediate image are provided, where the used area of the concave mirrors deviates significantly from an axial symmetric illumination. In preferred embodiments exactly two concave mirrors are provided and are sufficient for obtaining excellent imaging quality and very high numerical aperture. Systems having one common unfolded (straight) optical axis can be provided which facilitate manufacturing, adjustment and integration into photolithographic exposure systems. No planar folding mirrors are necessary. However, one or more planar folding mirrors could be utilized to obtain more compact designs.
All concave mirrors are arranged “optically remote” from pupil surfaces which means that they are arranged outside an optical vicinity of a pupil surface. They may be arranged optically nearer to field surfaces than to pupil surfaces. Preferred positions optically remote from a pupil surface (i.e. outside an optical vicinity of a pupil surface) may be characterized by the ray height ratio H=hC/hM>1, where hC is the height of a chief ray and hM is the height of a marginal ray of the imaging process. The marginal ray height hM is the height of a marginal ray running from an inner field point (closest to the optical axis) to the edge of an aperture stop, whereas the chief ray height hC is the height of a chief ray running from an outermost field point (farthest away from the optical axis) parallel to or at small angle with respect to the optical axis and intersecting the optical axis at a pupil surface position where an aperture stop may be positioned. With other words: all concave mirrors are in positions where the chief ray height exceeds the marginal ray height.
A position “optically remote” from a pupil surface is a position where the cross sectional shape of the light beam deviates significantly from the circular shape found in a pupil surface or in an immediate vicinity thereto. The term “light beam” as used here describes the bundle of all rays running from the object surface to the image surface. Mirror positions optically remote from a pupil surface may be defined as positions where the beam diameters of the light beam in mutually perpendicular directions orthogonal to the propagation direction of the light beam deviate by more than 50% or 100% from each other. In other words, illuminated areas on the concave mirrors may have a shape having a form strongly deviating from a circle and similar to a high aspect ratio rectangle corresponding to a preferred field shape in lithographic projection objectives for wafer scanners. Therefore, small concave mirrors having a compact rectangular or near rectangular shape significantly smaller in one direction than in the other may be used. A high aperture light beam can therefore be guided through the system without vignetting at mirror edges.
Throughout the specification, the term “objective part” designates an imaging subsystem of the projection objective capable of imaging an object in an object surface of that subsystem into an image surface of the subsystem optically conjugated to the object surface of the subsystem. The object imaged by a subsystem (or objective part) may be the object in the object surface of the projection objective, or an intermediate image.
Wherever the terms “upstream” or “downstream” are used in this specification these terms refer to relative positions along the optical path of a light beam running from the object plane to the image plane of the projection objective. Therefore, a position upstream of the second intermediate image is a position optically between the object plane and the second intermediate image.
The term “intermediate image” generally refers to a “paraxial intermediate image” formed by a perfect optical system and located in a surface optically conjugated to the object surface. Therefore, wherever reference is made to a location or position of an intermediate image, the axial location of this surface optically conjugated to the object surface is meant.
According to another aspect of the invention, a catadioptric projection objective for imaging a pattern provided in an object surface of the projection objective onto an image surface of the projection objective comprises:
Although it would be desired from a manufacturing point of view to have lenses with spherical lens surfaces only, it appears that a certain number of aspheric lenses are required to obtain sufficient correction of image aberrations. It has been found that in designs where the third objective part has more aspheric lenses than the first objective part have potential for obtaining a good correction status without increasing the overall number, NAS, of aspheric lenses in the projection objective above a critical limit where the manufacturing of aspheric lenses becomes a critical issue due to the high number of aspheric lenses to be manufactured.
In some embodiments the first objective part has spherical lenses only such that N1AS=0. All-spherical refractive objective parts are particularly easy to manufacture. An all-spherical first objective part may be combined with a third objective part having one or more aspheric lenses, for example 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 lenses. Preferably the condition N3AS≦7 is fulfilled.
Preferably, the first objective part has no more than 4 aspheric lenses, i.e. N1AS≦4.
It has been found that the first objective part can be built in many cases with a small number of lenses, thereby optimizing lens material consumption and a compact size of the first objective part particularly in axial direction. In some embodiments, the first objective part includes no more than 5 lenses such that the number N1L of lenses in the first objective part fulfills the condition N1L≦5. Embodiments with N1L=4 are possible. It appears, however, that N1L=5 may be preferable in many cases.
In some embodiments, the first objective part has positive lenses only, whereby formation of the first intermediate image can be obtained with small maximum lens diameters in the first objective part. In other embodiments, at least one negative lens may be useful, particularly for improving correction within the first objective part. Exactly one negative lens is often preferred for that purpose. The negative lens may have a concave lens surface on the image side and may be placed between the pupil surface of the first objective part and the first intermediate image.
It is known that aspheric surfaces provided on optical elements, such as lenses, mirrors and/or essentially planar faces of plates, prisms or the like can be utilized to improve both the correction status and the overall size and material consumption of optical systems. In some embodiments, the projection objective includes at least one “double asphere” comprising a first aspheric surface and a second aspheric surface immediately adjacent to the first aspheric surface, thereby allowing a transmitted beam to pass two subsequent aspheric surfaces without passing an intermediate spheric or planar surface. Double aspheres have proven to be a very powerful correction means in some embodiments.
A double asphere may take the structure of a biaspherical lens having an aspheric entrance surface and an aspheric exit surface. In some preferred embodiments the double asphere is formed by facing adjacent aspheric surfaces of two subsequent lenses. Thereby, an “air space” bounded by aspheric surfaces on both the entry and exit side can be obtained. The “air space” can be filled with air of another gas having refractive index n≈1. Where aspheric surfaces of a double asphere are distributed on facing lens surfaces of subsequent lenses, the aspheric surfaces can be positioned very close together if desired. An optical distance, measured along the optical axis, between the first and second aspheric surface of the double asphere may therefore be smaller than the thickness (measured along the optical axis) of the thinner one of consecutive lenses forming the double asphere. A complex radial distribution of refractive power can thereby be obtained at a defined position in an axially narrow region along the optical axis.
In some embodiments, the third objective part includes at least one double asphere. Preferably, that double asphere is positioned optically between the second intermediate image and the pupil surface of the third objective part, thereby preferably influencing the ray angles in a region of generally diverging beams. A second double asphere may be provided in that objective part.
Alternatively, or in combination, the first objective part may include at least one double asphere. Where a double asphere is provided within the first objective part, it has been found beneficial when the double asphere in the first objective part is positioned optically close to or at a pupil surface of the first objective part.
As pointed out earlier, avoiding large numbers of aspheric surfaces on lenses may contribute to facilitating manufacturing of the projection objective. Under certain conditions, the correcting action of a single aspheric surface can be approximated by one or more spherical surfaces where large angles of incidence of rays occur on that surface. In some embodiments, the first objective part includes at least one lens having a lens surface where incidence angles of rays transiting that lens surface include incidence angles larger than 60°. Preferably, that surface may be optically close to the pupil surface The angle of incidence (incidence angle) in this case is defined as the angle enclosed by a ray and the surface normal of the lens surface at the point of impingement of that ray on the lens surface. High incidence angle surfaces of that kind may be employed to reduce the number of aspheres.
The previous and other properties can be seen not only in the claims but also in the description and the drawings, wherein individual characteristics may be used either alone or in sub-combinations as an embodiment of the invention and in other areas and may individually represent advantageous and patentable embodiments.
In the following description of preferred embodiments of the invention, the term “optical axis” shall refer to a straight line or sequence of straight-line segments passing through the centers of curvature of the optical elements involved. The optical axis is folded by folding mirrors (deflecting mirrors) or other reflective surfaces. In the case of those examples presented here, the object involved is either a mask (reticle) bearing the pattern of an integrated circuit or some other pattern, for example, a grating pattern. In the examples presented here, the image of the object is projected onto a wafer serving as a substrate that is coated with a layer of photoresist, although other types of substrate, such as components of liquid-crystal displays or substrates for optical gratings, are also feasible.
Where tables are provided to disclose the specification of a design shown in a figure, the table or tables are designated by the same numbers as the respective figures. Corresponding features in the figures are designated with like or identical reference identifications to facilitate understanding. Where lenses are designated, an identification L3-2 denotes the second lens in the third objective part (when viewed in the light propagation direction).
Each mirror surface of a concave mirror defines a “curvature surface” or “surface of curvature” which is a mathematical surface extending beyond the edges of the physical mirror surface and containing the mirror surface. The first and second concave mirrors are parts of rotationally symmetric curvature surfaces having a common axis of rotational symmetry.
The objective 100 is rotational symmetric and has one straight optical axis AX common to all refractive and reflective optical components. There are no folding mirrors. The concave mirrors have small diameters allowing to bring them close together and rather close to the intermediate images lying in between. The concave mirrors are both constructed and illuminated as off-axis sections of axial symmetric surfaces. The light beam passes by the edges of the concave mirrors facing the optical axis without vignetting.
The projection objective 100 is designed as an immersion objective for λ=193 nm having an image side numerical aperture NA=1.2 when used in conjunction with the high index immersion fluid, e.g. pure water, between the exit surface of the objective closest to the image surface IS, and the image surface IS. The refractive first objective part OP1 has spherical lenses only. Both concave mirrors CM1, CM2 are aspherical mirrors. The third objective part OP3 has one aspheric surface (entrance surface of lens L3-9) near the position of the pupil surface P3 of that objective part (where the chief ray CR of the imaging intersects the optical axis AX) and a second aspheric surface on the exit side of the penultimate lens L3-12 immediately upstream of the last, image side plano-convex lens L3-13. The last lens, which will be in contact with an immersion fluid during operation of the projection objective, is also denoted “immersion lens” in this specification. Although the projection objective is not fully corrected for all aberrations, it shows that an imaging is possible with a small number of aspheric lenses (NAS=2) all placed in the third objective part.
The projection objective 200 is designed as an immersion lens for λ=193 nm having an image side numerical aperture NA=1.20 when used in conjunction with a high index immersion fluid, e.g. pure water, between the exit surface of the objective and the image surface. The specification for this design is summarized in Table 2. The leftmost column lists the number of the refractive, reflective, or otherwise designated surface, the second column lists the radius, r, of that surface [mm], the third column lists the distance, d [mm], between that surface and the next surface, a parameter that is referred to as the “thickness” of the optical element, the fourth column lists the material employed for fabricating that optical element, and the fifth column lists the refractive index of the material employed for its fabrication. The sixth column lists the optically utilizable, clear, semi diameter [mm] of the optical component. A radius r=0 in a table designates a planar surface (having infinite radius).
In the case of this particular embodiment, three surfaces (surfaces 9, 10, 18) are aspherical surfaces. Table 2A lists the associated data for those aspherical surfaces, from which the sagitta or rising height p(h) of their surface figures as a function of the height h may be computed employing the following equation:
p(h)=[((1/r)h2)/(1+SQRT(1−(1+K)(1/r)2h2))]+C1·h4+C2·h6+ . . . ,
where the reciprocal value (1/r) of the radius is the curvature of the surface in question at the surface vertex and h is the distance of a point thereon from the optical axis. The sagitta or rising height p(h) thus represents the distance of that point from the vertex of the surface in question, measured along the z-direction, i.e., along the optical axis. The constants K, C1, C2, etc., are listed in Table 2A.
It is remarkable that in this embodiment many aberrations are corrected to a high degree with a small number of lenses (NL=13) and only one aspheric lens (L3-4) in addition to the aspheric concave mirrors CM1, CM2. Particularly, all third-order and fifth-order aberrations are zero. The variation in telecentricity is corrected over the field. Higher-order (seventh-order and higher) distortion is corrected over the field. Pupil aberration on the image side is corrected so that the image side numerical aperture NA=1.2 is constant over the field. Two real rays are corrected on-axis and four aperture rays are corrected at an intermediate field point. Higher-order (seventh-order and higher) astigmatism is corrected at the edge of the field and at an intermediate field point. This correction status is obtained with an objective where the lens diameters of the third objective part (acting as a focusing lens group) are quite small, with 218 mm diameter for the largest lens. The first lens L3-1 of the third objective part has a relatively large geometrical distance to the vertex of the geometrically nearest mirror (first concave mirror CM1), where that axial mirror-lens-distance MLD is 90 mm. This is about 7.5% of the axial distance between object surface OS and image surface IS, this object-image distance also being denoted as “track length”. A large geometrical distance MLD between the image side first concave mirror CM1 and the first lens of the third objective part contributes to small lens diameters in the third objective part.
The last lens L3-9 on the image side (immersion lens) has a short radius (50 mm) of the spherical entrance surface, whereby small incidence angles are obtained at that surface.
The design can be optimized with regard to residual aberrations, where higher order Petzval curvature and higher order sagitta oblique spherical aberration appears to dominate. Adding one lens to the first objective part and/or providing one or more further aspheric surfaces can contribute to reduce the residual aberrations. An example of a further development of the design of
A fourth embodiment of a projection objective 400 is shown in
In preferred designs of the invention, distortion, astigmatism, Petzval curvature and telecentricity variation over the field can all be corrected to very high orders with a similar construction of the first objective part OP1 (serving as a relay system to form the first intermediate image IMI1) and only a few spherical lenses in addition to the aspheric mirrors.
It appears that two aspheric concave mirrors CM1, CM2 are important for obtaining good correction with a small number of aspheric lenses. Two aspheric mirrors generally allow to make a design that is corrected for two chief ray aberrations, like distortion and telecentricity variation, to very high orders. It appears that those two aberrations can be exactly corrected by the two aspheric mirrors if the aspheric deformations of that mirrors are set correctly. It is one remarkable aspect, that, in addition, the astigmatism and Petzval curvature can also be corrected to a high degree with an all-spherical first objective part OP1.
It appears that there are at least three characteristics, which, singly or in combination, can contribute to the positive properties of the design type with regard to aberration corrections. One aspect is that the concave mirrors may preferably be quite unequal in radius, compared to other embodiments where the concave mirrors CM1, CM2 are identical or almost identical. Further, it appears that quite a lot of coma at the intermediate images IMI1 and/or IMI2 facilitates correction with a small number of aspheric lenses. Also, the remarkably large air space (mirror-lens-distance MLD) between the vertex of the image side concave mirror CM1 and the first lens of the third objective part appears to contribute to that beneficial properties.
It appears that the object side and the image side and/or the projection objective, i.e. the first objective part OP1 and the third objective part OP3, can almost be designed independently. In particular, the third objective part (focusing lens group) can be designed for aperture aberrations without much concern for field aberrations, and then a first objective part being relatively simple in construction can be designed to compensate for field aberration, wherein that compensation might be obtained without aspheric lenses or with only a small number of aspheric lens, e.g. only one aspheric lens.
The previous embodiments show that designs are available having a fairly simple first objective part with only four or five lenses, where all lenses may be spherical. Such rather simple relay lens group can give correction for field aberrations to an extremely high order. Aperture aberrations are preferably corrected in the third objective part, which may also have a fairly simple construction with just a few aspherics, the number of aspheric lenses in third objective part preferably being higher than the number of aspheric lenses in the first objective part.
One double asphere DA is provided in the third objective part OP3 optically between a second intermediate image IMI2 and the pupil surface P3 of that objective part in a region of significantly increasing beam diameter. The double asphere is formed by the aspheric exit surface of positive lens L3-6 and the subsequent aspheric entry surface of the following positive meniscus lens L3-7 immediately adjacent thereto. The axial separation of the two aspheric surfaces is smaller than the thickness of the thinner lens L3-7 adjacent to the double asphere such that the aspheres are in close proximity. A complex radial distribution of refractive power is thereby obtained in a specific region of the beam, thereby contributing strongly to image correction.
The projection objective 1000 in
When replacement of an aspheric surface by spherical surfaces is considered, it appears that what most matters is the base spherical curvature. A spherical doublet may therefore be able to replace an aspheric surface—even a very high order aspheric.
The correction status of variants of embodiment 1000 ranges between 4, 5 and 6 milliwaves over the field. This indicates that this correction can be obtained with an all-spherical first objective part OP1 and that the complete design does not need many aspheric lenses (only 5 lens aspherics here) to obtain a good performance.
The specification of the catadioptric projection objective 1100 is given in tables 11, 11A. The embodiment is a good example to show that “double aspheres” having two pretty strong aspheric lens surfaces very close to each other may be a very powerful design component. Here, a double asphere DA formed by lenses L3-4 and L3-5 is found in the region of increasing beam diameter within the third objective part OP3, similar to the embodiments shown in
A further embodiment of a catadioptric immersion objective 1300 with NA=1.3 is shown in
The catadioptric immersion objective 1400 in
There are two double aspheres DA in the third objective part OP3, namely one double asphere formed by facing surfaces of negative lenses L3-1, L3-2 in the region of minimum lens diameter within the third objective part, and a subsequent double aspheric formed by facing surfaces of lenses L3-3 and L3-4 in the region of largest beam diameter increase between the second intermediate image IMI2 and the aperture stop AS, which is positioned between the region of largest beam diameter and the image surface IS. Like the embodiments of
The catadioptric immersion objective 1500 in
The basic design has potential for even higher image side numerical apertures with NA>1.3. The catadioptric immersion objective 1600 in
It may be beneficial to place the second objective part OP2 geometrically closer to the image surface the higher the desired numerical aperture is. For convenience, the second objective part OP2, preferably consisting of two aspheric concave mirrors CM1, CM2 only, is also denoted “mirror group” in the following. In order to demonstrate this feature, a first optical axis length OAL1 is defined between the object surface OS and the vertex of the concave mirror CM2 geometrically closest to the object surface, and a third optical axis length OAL3 is defined between the vertex of the concave mirror (CM1) geometrically closest to the image surface and the image surface (see
Each projection objective described here has a high NA image side end where projection radiation exits the projection objective at an exit surface ES, which is preferably planar in order to allow a uniform distance between the exit surface and a planar substrate surface arranged at the image surface IS. The lens closest to the image surface and forming the exit surface ES, is denoted “last lens” LL here. Preferably, the last lens is a plano-convex positive lens having a curved entry surface ENS, which is spherically curved in most embodiments, and the planar exit surface ES. In order to obtain high NA it has been found useful to design the last lens such that large refractive power provided by the curved entry surface ENS is arranged as close as possible to the image surface.
Further, strong curvatures, i.e. small curvature radii of the entry surface ENS of the last lens LL appear desirable. If TLL is the thickness of the last lens on the optical axis (i.e. the axial distance between the entry surface ENS and the exit surface ES measured along the optical axis), RLL is the object side vertex radius of the last lens (i.e. the radius of the entry surface ENS), and DIALL is the optically free diameter of the entry surface of the last lens, then the parameters LL1=TLL/RLL and LL2=DIALL/RLL should preferably fall within certain limits. Particularly, it has been found useful if the conditions 1.1<LL1<2.2 holds for LL1. Preferably, the upper limit may be even smaller, such as 1.8 or 1.7 or 1.6. As parameter LL1 becomes unity for a hemispherical lens, where the center of curvature or the entry surface coincides with the exit surface, the condition regarding LL1 shows that non-hemispherical last lenses are preferred, where the center of curvature of the curved entry surface lies outside the last lens, particularly beyond the image surface.
Alternatively, or in addition, the condition 2.1<LL2<2.6 should preferably hold for LL2. The upper limit could be smaller, e.g. 2.5 or 2.4 or 2.3. The respective values for LL1 and LL2 are presented in table 18. If at least one of the above condition holds, strong positive power provided by the curved entry surface of the last lens is provided close to the image surface, thereby allowing a large image side numerical aperture NA to be obtained, particularly with NA>1.1 or NA>1.2, such as NA=1.3 or NA=1.35.
With regard to the correction status of the intermediate images IMI1, IMI2 it is found that in some embodiments both intermediate images are essentially focused (i.e. many aberrations are corrected to a high degree), whereas in other embodiments significant aberrations occur, particularly coma (compare
The correction of the sine condition of the entire objective is challenging particularly for objectives having very high image side NA. The correction of sine condition may be facilitated by coma in the intermediate image. If the imaging from the high NA image surface to the low NA object surface (i.e. in reverse direction when compared to the intended use of projection objectives in lithography) is considered, the third objective part (where radiation enters) provides an intermediate image having a certain correction status. Assuming that the spherical aberration of that imaging is corrected, then the intermediate image will be essentially free of coma, if the sine condition of that imaging would be corrected. In contrast, if the sine condition is not corrected, that intermediate image would have a significant amount of coma. If the intermediate image has a considerable amount of coma, correction of the sine condition in the third objective part is facilitated.
Now, imaging of the second intermediate image into the image surface in the intended direction (towards the high NA end) is considered. If the second intermediate image would have a good correction status, particularly without coma, then the entire correction of the sine condition would have to be effected by the third objective part imaging the second intermediate image onto the image surface. If, in contrast, a certain amount of coma is present in the second intermediate image, then the third objective part can be designed in a more relaxed manner since the correction of the sine condition can at least partly be effected by the objective parts optically upstream of the third objective part, i.e. the refractive relay system OP1 forming the first intermediate image, and the catoptric second objective part OP2. Therefore, it appears that designs where the correction of coma is distributed between the first refractive objective part OP1 and the third objective part OP3 may be beneficial when compared to objectives where each of that refractive objective part is independently corrected for coma.
As mentioned earlier, the invention allows to build high NA projection objectives suitable for immersion lithography at NA>1 with compact size.
Table 19 summarizes the values necessary to calculate the compactness parameters COMP1, COMP2, COMP3 and the respective values for these parameters for each of the systems presented with a specification table (the table number (corresponding to the same number of a figure) is given in column 1 of table 19). Further, the respective values for N1AS, N3AS, and ASR are shown.
Table 19 shows that preferred embodiments according to the invention generally observe at least one of the conditions given earlier indicating that compact designs with moderate material consumption are obtained according to the design rules laid out in this specification. Further, the particular values characterizing the aspheric lens number and distribution are shown.
In the following, further characteristic features of projection objectives according to the invention are summarized, where one or more of those features may be present in an embodiment of the invention. Parameters summarized in tables 20 and 21 are used to demonstrate these features.
In some embodiments, the chief ray of the imaging process takes a characteristic course. For demonstration purposes, a chief ray CR running from an outermost field point (furthest away from the optical axis AX) essentially parallel to the optical axis and intersecting the optical axis at three consecutive pupil surface positions P1, P2, P3, each within on of the imaging objective parts OP1, OP2, OP3, is drawn in bold line in
In the region between the two concave mirrors CM1, CM2, the chief ray crosses the optical axis at a high chief ray angle CRA (M), that angle preferably falling in the region between 58° and 75°, particularly between 60° and 72°. (see table 20).
With regard to the magnification provided by the imaging objective parts OP1, OP2, OP3 it appears that it is beneficial if the magnification β3 of the third objective part OP3 imaging the second intermediate image IMI2 at high reduction ratio onto the image surface should preferably fall within a range 0.11≦β3≦0.17. In order to obtain a desired overall reduction ratio (e.g. 1:4 or 1:5) the second objective part OP2 may contribute to the overall reduction by having a magnification ratio β2<1. Preferably, the mirror group forming the second objective part OP2 may be designed to have a moderate reducing effect characterized by 0.85≦β2<1. If the second objective part contributes to some extent to the overall reduction, the third objective part responsible for the major part of reduction can be designed in a more relaxed manner.
It appears that the refractive power (characterized by the focal length f) provided by the first two or three lenses on the entry side of the third objective part OP3 immediately after the second concave mirror CM2 may contribute to good performance by designing this entry group such that the overall refractive power of that entry group is negative. In the embodiments of
On the other hand, it appears that not many negative lenses should be present in the third objective part following the second concave mirror CM2, where that number N3NL of negative lenses is three or less than three in all embodiments (parameter K7a=YES in table 21), and is smaller than three in the embodiments of
Further, it appears to be beneficial if the optically free diameter DIA31 of the first lens L3-1 of the third objective part OP3 is significantly smaller than the diameter DIAAS of the aperture stop. Preferably, the diameter ratio DR=DIA31/DIAAS should be smaller than 0.9. More preferably, an upper value of 0.8, even more preferably an upper value of 0.7 should not be exceeded. Values for the diameter ratio DR are given in table 21.
Further, it has been found that it may be beneficial if more than 50% of all lenses after the second concave mirror (i.e. lenses of the third objective part) have an optically free diameter smaller than the diameter of the second intermediate image IMI2 following the second concave mirror CM2. This condition is fulfilled for all embodiments, as shown by parameter K10 in table 21.
Also, all lenses of the first, refractive objective part OP1 should preferably be smaller than the paraxial size of the first intermediate image. If this condition is fulfilled, parameter K9 in table 20 is fulfilled.
In order to provide strong positive refractive power for obtaining strong beam convergence at the high NA image end it is preferable if at least one of 8 and 9 consecutive lenses upstream of the image surface should have positive refractive power. This is exemplified by parameter K11 in table 21, which is “YES”=Y if the condition is fulfilled and “NO”=N if the condition is not fulfilled.
In this context it is worth to note that it appears beneficial for obtaining high NA, if the position of the aperture stop AS is in the region of convergent beam between the position of largest beam diameter within the third objective part OP3, and the image surface. This property is exemplified by the ratio AS-IS/TT shown in table 20, where AS-IS is the geometrical distance between the position of the aperture stop AS and the image surface IS, and TT is the “track length” of the objective, i.e. the geometrical distance between object surface and image surface. The ratio AS-IS/TT may fall in a range between 0.09 and 0.18 (see table 20).
This feature is particularly pronounced in embodiments of
Further characteristic features are evident from the course of the coma beam. Here, a “coma beam” refers to a beam emerging from an object field point furthest remote from the optical axis and transiting the aperture stop at the edge of the aperture. The coma beam therefore contributes to determining which lens diameters must be used. The angle included by this coma beam and the optical axis is denoted in “coma beam angle CBA” in the following. The angle of that beam after refraction at the last lens of the first objective part (upstream of the first intermediate image IMI1) is denoted CBA1, whereas the angle of the coma beam immediately upstream of the refraction at the first lens of the image side third objective part OP3 is denoted CBA3. The values of these angles are given in table 21. It appears that for both coma beam angles values of less than 5° may be beneficial (table 21).
As noted above, the chief ray intersects the optical axis at pupil surfaces P1, P2, P3 in the concatenated objective parts OP1, OP2, OP3. As the pupil surfaces within the first and third objective parts are accessible for setting an aperture stop, these positions are also denoted aperture positions. The beam diameter at the aperture stop, DIAAS and the beam diameter DIAP1 at the pupil surface P1 in the first objective part, conjugated to the position of the aperture stop, should fall within certain limits. The ratio DIAAS/DIAP1 should be larger than 1. Preferably the condition DIAAS/DIAP1>2 should be satisfied. (see table 21).
It is to be understood that all systems described above may be complete systems for forming a real image (e.g. on a wafer) from a real object. However, the systems may be used as partial systems of larger systems. For example, the “object” for a system mentioned above may be an image formed by an imaging system (relay system) upstream of the object plane. Likewise, the image formed by a system mentioned above may be used as the object for a system (relay system) downstream of the image plane.
The above description of the preferred embodiments has been given by way of example. From the disclosure given, those skilled in the art will not only understand the present invention and its attendant advantages, but will also find apparent various changes and modifications to the structures and methods disclosed. It is sought, therefore, to cover all changes and modifications as fall within the spirit and scope of the invention, as defined by the appended claims, and equivalents thereof.
The contents of all the claims is made part of this description by reference.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/653,366, filed Jan. 16, 2007 now U.S. Pat. No. 8,208,198, which is a continuation-in-part of International Application PCT/EP2005/007431, filed Jul. 8, 2005, which claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Applications 60/587,504, filed Jul. 14, 2004, 60/591,775, filed Jul. 27, 2004, 60/612,823, filed Sep. 24, 2004, 60/617,674, filed Oct. 13, 2004, 60/654,950, filed Feb. 23, 2005, and is further a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/035,103, filed Jan. 14, 2005, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,385,756. U.S. application Ser. No. 11/035,103 claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Applications 60/536,248 filed Jan. 14, 2004, 60/587,504, 60/591,775, 60/612,823, and 60/617,674. The disclosures of each of these related applications are hereby incorporated by reference into the present continuation application.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2380887 | Warmisham | Jul 1945 | A |
| 3244073 | Bouwers et al. | Apr 1966 | A |
| 3762801 | Baker | Oct 1973 | A |
| 4103990 | Yamada | Aug 1978 | A |
| 4171871 | Dill et al. | Oct 1979 | A |
| 4232969 | Wilczynski | Nov 1980 | A |
| 4241390 | Markle et al. | Dec 1980 | A |
| 4293186 | Offner | Oct 1981 | A |
| 4346164 | Tabarelli et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
| 4391494 | Hershel | Jul 1983 | A |
| 4398809 | Canzek | Aug 1983 | A |
| 4443068 | Itoh | Apr 1984 | A |
| 4469414 | Shafer | Sep 1984 | A |
| 4482219 | Canzek | Nov 1984 | A |
| 4595295 | Wilczynski | Jun 1986 | A |
| 4666259 | Iizuka | May 1987 | A |
| 4685777 | Hirose | Aug 1987 | A |
| 4701035 | Hirose | Oct 1987 | A |
| 4711535 | Shafer | Dec 1987 | A |
| 4757354 | Sato et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
| 4779966 | Friedman | Oct 1988 | A |
| 4812028 | Matsumoto | Mar 1989 | A |
| 4834515 | Mercado | May 1989 | A |
| 4861148 | Sato et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4871237 | Anzai et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
| 4883345 | Anzai et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
| 4891663 | Hirose | Jan 1990 | A |
| 4951078 | Okada | Aug 1990 | A |
| 4953960 | Williamson | Sep 1990 | A |
| 5004331 | Haseltine et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5031976 | Shafer | Jul 1991 | A |
| 5031977 | Gibson | Jul 1991 | A |
| 5052763 | Singh et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5063586 | Jewell et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
| 5071240 | Ichihara et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5078502 | Cook | Jan 1992 | A |
| 5089913 | Singh et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
| 5105075 | Ohta et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5114238 | Sigler | May 1992 | A |
| 5153898 | Suzuki et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5159172 | Goodman et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5170207 | Tezuka et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5212588 | Viswanathan et al. | May 1993 | A |
| 5212593 | Williamson | May 1993 | A |
| 5220590 | Bruning et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5241423 | Chiu et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5260832 | Togino et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5289312 | Hashimoto et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
| 5315629 | Jewell et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5323263 | Schoenmakers | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5353322 | Bruning et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5401934 | Ainsworth et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
| 5410434 | Shafer | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5477304 | Nishi | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5488229 | Elliott et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5515207 | Foo | May 1996 | A |
| 5537260 | Williamson et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5575207 | Shimizu | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5592329 | Ishiyama et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5608526 | Piwonka-Corle et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5623365 | Kuba | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5636066 | Takahashi | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5650877 | Phillips, Jr. et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5652679 | Freeman | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5684636 | Chow et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5686728 | Shafer | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5691802 | Takahashi | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5694241 | Ishiyama et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5717518 | Shafer et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5729376 | Hall et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5734496 | Beach | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5742436 | Furter | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5757469 | Allen | May 1998 | A |
| 5781278 | Matsuzawa et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5793473 | Koyama et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5802335 | Sturlesi et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5805357 | Omura et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5805365 | Sweatt | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5808805 | Takahashi | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5808814 | Kudo | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5815310 | Williamson | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5825043 | Suwa | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5831770 | Matsuzawa et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5831776 | Sasaya et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5835275 | Takahashi et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5835285 | Matsuzawa et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5856884 | Mercado | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5861997 | Takahashi | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5903400 | Endo | May 1999 | A |
| 5917879 | Mashima | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5930049 | Suenaga et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5940222 | Sinclair et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5943172 | Sasaya et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5956182 | Takahashi | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5956192 | Williamson | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5969803 | Mercado | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5990926 | Mercado | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5999310 | Shafer et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6008884 | Yamagushi et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6008885 | Takashi et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6014252 | Shafer | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6014455 | Sumiyoshi et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6033079 | Hudyma | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6084724 | Wiegand et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6088171 | Kudo | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6097537 | Takahashi et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6104544 | Matsuzawa et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6142641 | Cohen et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6157497 | Kumazawa | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6157498 | Takahashi | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6169627 | Schuster | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6169637 | Tsunashima | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6172825 | Takahashi | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6185049 | Terada et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6188513 | Hudyma et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6195213 | Omura et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6198576 | Matsuyama | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6199991 | Braat | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6213610 | Takahashi et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6229595 | McKinley et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6244717 | Dinger | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6255661 | Braat et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6259508 | Shigematsu | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6259510 | Suzuki | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6262845 | Sweatt | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6285737 | Sweatt et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6349005 | Schuster | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6353470 | Dinger | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6361176 | Mashima | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6381077 | Jeong et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6392822 | Takahashi | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6396067 | Braat | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6411426 | Meehan et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6424471 | Ulrich et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6426506 | Hudyma | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6451507 | Suengaga et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6473243 | Omura | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6496306 | Shafer et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6512641 | Omura | Jan 2003 | B2 |
| 6522484 | Schuster | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6538821 | Takahashi | Mar 2003 | B2 |
| 6556648 | Bal et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6590715 | Shafer et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6590718 | Fuerter et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6600550 | Shigematsu | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6600608 | Shafer et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6606144 | Omura | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6621557 | Takahashi | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6631036 | Schuster | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6636350 | Shafer et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6639734 | Omura | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6646718 | Schuster et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6665126 | Shafer et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6707616 | Takahashi et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6728036 | Kleemann et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6731374 | Sewell | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6750948 | Omura | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6757051 | Takahashi et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6765729 | Perrin | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6784977 | Von Bünau et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6788471 | Wagner et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6791761 | Shafer et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6801364 | Schuster | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6806942 | Schuster et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6813098 | Mercado | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6821794 | Laursen et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6822727 | Shima | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6829099 | Kato et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6842277 | Watson | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6842298 | Shafer et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6863403 | Mercado | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6873476 | Shafer et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6879383 | Mercado | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6891596 | Rostalski et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6891683 | Schuster | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6894834 | Mann et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6903803 | Omura | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6906866 | Hudyma et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6909492 | Omura | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6912042 | Shafer | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6954316 | Schuster | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6995833 | Kato et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 6995886 | Hendriks et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 6995918 | Terasawa | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 6995930 | Shafer et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7006304 | Epple et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7030965 | Takahashi | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7046459 | Shafer et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7075726 | Terasawa et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7079314 | Suenaga et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7085075 | Mann et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7092168 | Terasawa et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7112772 | Wagner et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7136220 | Ulrich et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7187503 | Rostalski et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7190527 | Rostalski et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7190530 | Mann et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7203007 | Schuster | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7203010 | Epple et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7209292 | Epple et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7218445 | Shafer et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7218453 | Shafer | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7224520 | Mitchell | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7237915 | Hudyma et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7239450 | Kamenov et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7239453 | Terasawa et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7256932 | Epple et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7283206 | Takahashi | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7294814 | Wagner et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7301707 | Shafer et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7309870 | Omura | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7312463 | Omura | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7317583 | Oskotsky et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7348575 | Omura | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7359036 | Dodoc | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7362508 | Omura et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7385756 | Shafer et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7385764 | Shafer et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7426082 | Shafer et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7428105 | Shafer et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7463422 | Kamenow | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| RE40743 | Fuerter et al. | Jun 2009 | E |
| 7697198 | Shafer et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 8208199 | Shafer et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 20020019946 | Iwamura | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020024741 | Terasawa et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020044260 | Takahashi et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020163629 | Switkes et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020176063 | Omura | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020186359 | Meisburger et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030011755 | Omura et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030011894 | Schuster | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030011896 | Shiraishi | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030030916 | Suenaga | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030058494 | Roberts et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030063268 | Kneer et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030174408 | Rostalski et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030197922 | Hudyma | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030197945 | Kurata | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030197946 | Omura | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030206282 | Omura | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030234912 | Omura | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20030234992 | Shafer | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040009415 | Shigematsu et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040012866 | Mann et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040075894 | Shafer et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040125353 | Takahashi | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040130805 | Mercado | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040130806 | Takahashi | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040160677 | Epple et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040165257 | Shafer et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040189956 | Kanayama et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040233405 | Kato et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040240047 | Shafer et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040263955 | Ulrich et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050036213 | Mann et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050117224 | Shafer et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050179994 | Webb | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050185269 | Epple et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050190435 | Shafer et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050225737 | Weissenrieder et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050248856 | Omura et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20060012885 | Beder et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060028715 | Kato et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060056064 | Shafer et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060066962 | Totzeck et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060077366 | Shafer | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060082904 | Kato et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060082905 | Shafer et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060088320 | Katashiba et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060092395 | Mercado | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060098298 | Kato et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060109559 | Hudyma et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060119750 | Epple et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060121364 | Omura | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060126048 | Sumiyoshi | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060132931 | Epple et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060158615 | Williamson | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060171040 | Mann et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060198018 | Shafer et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060198029 | Schuster | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060221456 | Shafer et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060238732 | Mercado | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060244938 | Schuster | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060256447 | Dodoc | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060268253 | Dodoc | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20070013882 | Dodoc et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070019170 | Rostalski et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070024960 | Omura | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070037079 | Omura | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070037080 | Omura | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070091451 | Schuster | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070109659 | Rostalski et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070165198 | Kneer et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070171547 | Shafer et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070195423 | Kamenov et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070236674 | Shafer et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070252094 | Ulrich et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070258152 | Rostalski et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070268594 | Dodoc et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070297047 | Yuuki et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070297072 | Omura | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080002265 | Epple | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080007822 | Dodoc | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080037111 | Shafer et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080037112 | Ulrich et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080055740 | Wagner et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080080067 | Omura | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080117400 | Rostalski et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080118849 | Chandhok et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080151364 | Shafer et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080151365 | Shafer et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080186567 | Shafer et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080212170 | Shafer et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080285121 | Shafer et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080297889 | Shafer et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090021712 | Kumazawa et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090080068 | Ozawa | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20110002032 | Omura | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20120092760 | Omura | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1452015 | Oct 2003 | CN |
| 1064734 | Sep 1959 | DE |
| 1 447 207 | Dec 1968 | DE |
| 196 36 586 | Jul 1997 | DE |
| 197 26 058 | Jan 1998 | DE |
| 197 43 236 | Apr 1998 | DE |
| 198 22 510 | Nov 1999 | DE |
| 198 55108 | May 2000 | DE |
| 199 42 281 | Nov 2000 | DE |
| 103 04 599 | Nov 2003 | DE |
| 103 32 112 | Jan 2005 | DE |
| 10 2006 021 161 | Nov 2006 | DE |
| 102005056721 | Nov 2006 | DE |
| 10 2006 028 242 | Jan 2007 | DE |
| 10 2005 033 564 | Feb 2007 | DE |
| 10 2006 028 222 | Dec 2007 | DE |
| 98043 | Jan 1984 | EP |
| 200011 | Nov 1986 | EP |
| 203251 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 203397 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 203408 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 204029 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 204086 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 205006 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 205021 | Dec 1986 | EP |
| 0267766 | May 1988 | EP |
| 269868 | Jul 1992 | EP |
| 0 523 303 | Jan 1993 | EP |
| 0 332 201 | Jun 1994 | EP |
| 0 604 093 | Jun 1994 | EP |
| 0 712 019 | May 1996 | EP |
| 0 717 299 | Jun 1996 | EP |
| 0 732 605 | Sep 1996 | EP |
| 0 736 789 | Oct 1996 | EP |
| 0 779 528 | Jun 1997 | EP |
| 0 816 892 | Jan 1998 | EP |
| 0 828 172 | Mar 1998 | EP |
| 0 869 383 | Oct 1998 | EP |
| 0951054 | Oct 1999 | EP |
| 0962830 | Dec 1999 | EP |
| 0 989 434 | Mar 2000 | EP |
| 1 037 267 | Sep 2000 | EP |
| 1 061 396 | Dec 2000 | EP |
| 1059550 | Dec 2000 | EP |
| 1 067 448 | Jan 2001 | EP |
| 1 069 448 | Jan 2001 | EP |
| 1098215 | May 2001 | EP |
| 1 141 781 | Oct 2001 | EP |
| 1 191 378 | Mar 2002 | EP |
| 1 227 354 | Jul 2002 | EP |
| 1 235 091 | Aug 2002 | EP |
| 1 235 092 | Aug 2002 | EP |
| 1 237 043 | Sep 2002 | EP |
| 1 245 984 | Oct 2002 | EP |
| 1 279 984 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 1318425 | Jun 2003 | EP |
| 1336887 | Aug 2003 | EP |
| 1 434 093 | Jun 2004 | EP |
| 1 450 196 | Aug 2004 | EP |
| 1 450 209 | Aug 2004 | EP |
| 1 480 065 | Nov 2004 | EP |
| 1 720 069 | Nov 2006 | EP |
| 1 751 601 | Feb 2007 | EP |
| 1 927 891 | Jun 2008 | EP |
| 1 936 421 | Jun 2008 | EP |
| 2 189 848 | May 2010 | EP |
| 2 428 491 | Jan 2007 | GB |
| 5-175098 | Jul 1993 | JP |
| 6-188169 | Jul 1994 | JP |
| 8-166542 | Jun 1995 | JP |
| 8-330220 | Dec 1996 | JP |
| 9-148241 | Jun 1997 | JP |
| 9-246179 | Sep 1997 | JP |
| 10-39208 | Feb 1998 | JP |
| 10-163099 | Jun 1998 | JP |
| 10-214783 | Aug 1998 | JP |
| 10-284408 | Oct 1998 | JP |
| 10-303114 | Nov 1998 | JP |
| 10-325922 | Dec 1998 | JP |
| 2000-058436 | Feb 2000 | JP |
| 2000-505958 | May 2000 | JP |
| 2001-166210 | Jun 2001 | JP |
| 2001-228401 | Aug 2001 | JP |
| 3246615 | Nov 2001 | JP |
| 2002-072080 | Mar 2002 | JP |
| 2002-116382 | Apr 2002 | JP |
| 2002-208551 | Jul 2002 | JP |
| 2002-277742 | Sep 2002 | JP |
| 2002-372668 | Dec 2002 | JP |
| 2003-015040 | Jan 2003 | JP |
| 2003-114387 | Apr 2003 | JP |
| 2003-233001 | Aug 2003 | JP |
| 2003-233009 | Aug 2003 | JP |
| 2003-241099 | Aug 2003 | JP |
| 2003-307680 | Oct 2003 | JP |
| 2003-532138 | Oct 2003 | JP |
| 2004-004415 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2004-023020 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2004-029458 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2004-029625 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2004-170869 | Jun 2004 | JP |
| 2004-205698 | Jul 2004 | JP |
| 2004-219501 | Aug 2004 | JP |
| 2004-235666 | Aug 2004 | JP |
| 2004-252119 | Sep 2004 | JP |
| 2004-252362 | Sep 2004 | JP |
| 2004-259844 | Sep 2004 | JP |
| 2004-317534 | Nov 2004 | JP |
| 2004-333761 | Nov 2004 | JP |
| 2004-335746 | Nov 2004 | JP |
| 2004-354555 | Dec 2004 | JP |
| 2005-003982 | Jan 2005 | JP |
| 2005-107362 | Apr 2005 | JP |
| 2005-114881 | Apr 2005 | JP |
| 2005-195713 | Jul 2005 | JP |
| 2005-257740 | Sep 2005 | JP |
| 2006-019563 | Jan 2006 | JP |
| 2006-086141 | Mar 2006 | JP |
| 2006-184709 | Jul 2006 | JP |
| 2006-267383 | Oct 2006 | JP |
| 2007-027438 | Feb 2007 | JP |
| 2007-079015 | Mar 2007 | JP |
| 2007-206319 | Aug 2007 | JP |
| 2007-305821 | Nov 2007 | JP |
| 2009-025737 | Feb 2009 | JP |
| 2009-145724 | Jul 2009 | JP |
| 124665 | Nov 1959 | SU |
| 529080 | Apr 2003 | TW |
| 559674 | Nov 2003 | TW |
| WO 9205462 | Apr 1992 | WO |
| WO 9406047 | Mar 1994 | WO |
| WO 9828665 | Jul 1998 | WO |
| WO 9926097 | May 1999 | WO |
| WO 9942905 | Aug 1999 | WO |
| WO 9957596 | Nov 1999 | WO |
| WO 0104682 | Jan 2001 | WO |
| WO 0151979 | Jul 2001 | WO |
| WO 0155767 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| WO 0159502 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| WO 0165296 | Sep 2001 | WO |
| WO 0235273 | May 2002 | WO |
| WO 02082159 | Oct 2002 | WO |
| WO 02103431 | Dec 2002 | WO |
| WO 03003636 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| WO 03036361 | May 2003 | WO |
| WO 03052462 | Jun 2003 | WO |
| WO 03052482 | Jun 2003 | WO |
| WO 03075096 | Sep 2003 | WO |
| WO 03088330 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004010200 | Jan 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004019128 | Mar 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004053534 | Jun 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004084281 | Sep 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004092801 | Oct 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004097911 | Nov 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004107011 | Dec 2004 | WO |
| WO 2005001543 | Jan 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005001544 | Jan 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005015316 | Feb 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005040890 | May 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005050321 | Jun 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005054956 | Jun 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005059654 | Jun 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005059055 | Jul 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005069055 | Jul 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005096098 | Oct 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005098504 | Oct 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005098505 | Oct 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005098506 | Oct 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005111689 | Nov 2005 | WO |
| WO 2006005547 | Jan 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006013734 | Feb 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006043457 | Apr 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006051689 | May 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006064728 | Jun 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006069795 | Jul 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006080212 | Aug 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006121008 | Nov 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006121009 | Nov 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006131242 | Dec 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006131258 | Dec 2006 | WO |
| WO 2007020004 | Feb 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007025643 | Mar 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007031544 | Mar 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007071565 | Jun 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007071569 | Jun 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007086220 | Aug 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007091463 | Aug 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007094198 | Aug 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007114024 | Oct 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007119292 | Oct 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007131161 | Nov 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007140663 | Dec 2007 | WO |
| WO 2008006265 | Jan 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008019803 | Feb 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008064845 | Jun 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008087827 | Jul 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008130044 | Oct 2008 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Declaration—Bd.R. 203(b)1, filed Aug. 30, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Standing Order, filed Aug. 30, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Notice of Real Party in Interest, dated Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Notice of Related Proceedings, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Designation of Lead and Backup Lead Counsel, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Notice of Real Party-In-Interest, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Notice of Related Proceedings, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Clean Copy of Claims, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Request for File Copies, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Submission of Appointment of Additional Attorney, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Designation of Lead and Backup Attorneys, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Request for File Copies, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Clean Copy of Claims, filed Sep. 13, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Order—Bd.R. 109(b)—Authorizing Copies of Office Records, filed Sep. 15, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Annotated Copy of Claims, filed Sep. 27, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Annotated Copy of Claims, filed Sep. 27, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Motions List, filed Oct. 19, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Motions List, filed Oct. 19, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Order—Motion Times—Bd.R. 104(c), filed Oct. 27, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Substantive Motion 1, filed Nov. 7, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer List of Exhibits, filed Nov. 7, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Order—Miscellaneous—Bd.R. 104(a), filed Nov. 10, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Order—Miscellaneous—Bd.R. 104(a), filed Nov. 18, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Opposition 1, filed Nov. 30, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura First Exhibit List, filed Nov. 30, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Order—Miscellaneous—Bd.R. 104(a), filed Dec. 5, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Joint Stipulation to Extend Time Periods 1 Through 4, filed Dec. 8. 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Joint Stipulation to Extend Time Period 1, filed Dec. 23, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Order—Miscellaneous —Bd.R. 104(a), filed Jan. 4, 2012. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Substantive Motion 3, filed Jan. 10, 2012. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Substantive Motion 4, filed Jan. 10, 2012. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Updated List of Exhibits, filed Jan. 10, 2012. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Substantive Motion 2, filed Jan. 10, 2012. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Notice of Filing of Shafer Priority Statement, filed Jan. 10, 2012. |
| Ulrich. “The Development of Dioptric Projection Lenses for DUV Lithography.” International Optical Design Conference, Proc. of SPIE 4832 (2002). |
| Levinson. “Chapter 5: Wafer Steppers.” Principles of Lithography. Bellingham, WA: SPIE, 2001. 150-185. |
| Malacara and Moore, “Chapter 4: Prisms and Refractive Optical Components.” Handbook of Optical Engineering. NY: Marcel Dekker, 2001. 142-43. |
| SPIE 28th Annual International Symposium and Education Program on Microlithography, 5040: Optical Microlithography XVI, Feb. 23-28, 2003, Santa Clara, CA USA. 263-264. |
| Federal Circuit opinion in Interference No. 105,678, Decided: Apr. 8, 2011. |
| Supplemental European Search Report for Application No. EP 04 73 1484, mailed Jun. 14, 2010. |
| European Search Report for Application No. EP 09 01 5829, dated Apr. 30, 2010. |
| Owa et al., “Immersion lithography; its potential performance and issues,” Optical Microlithography XVI, Proceedings of SPIE vol. 5040, Feb. 25-28, 2003. |
| M.H. Freeman, “Innovative Wide-Field Binocular Design”, OSA Proceedings of the International Optical Design Conference (OSA) 1994, vol. 22, pp. 389-393. |
| Kang et al., “Optical lithography at a 126nm wavelength,” Emerging Lithographic Technologies V, Proceedings of SPIE vol. 4343, Feb. 27-Mar. 1, 2001. |
| Ulrich et al., “The Development of Dioptric Projection Lenses for DUV Lithography,” J. Microlithogr. Microfabrication, Microsyst., vol. 3, 87 (2004). |
| J.J. Shaffer et al., “Effect of thermanl cycling on dimensional stability of Zerodur and ULE,” Rapid Communication, Applied Optics, vol. 23, No. 17, Sep. 1, 1984. |
| J. Morgan, Introduction to Geometrical and Physical Optics, McGraw-Hill, 1953. p. 2. |
| Donald Dejager, “Camera Viewfinder Using Tilted Concave Mirror Erecting Elements”, SPIE vol. 237, 1980 International Lens Design Conference (OSA) pp. 292-298. |
| Sworn Translation of International Patent Application No. PCT/JP2004/006417, filed May 6, 2004. |
| Certified copy of Japanese Application No. 2003-364596, filed Oct. 24, 2003. |
| Sworn Translation of Japanese Application No. 2003-364596, filed Oct. 24, 2003. |
| Warren Smith, “Modern Optical Engineering,” 123-25 (McGraw Hill 1966). |
| File history for U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288, filed Nov. 4, 2005. (submitted in 4 separate documents due to size). |
| Declaration of Richard C. Juergens dated Jun. 1, 2009. |
| Provisional U.S. Appl. No. 60/654,950 to David Shafer, filed on Feb. 23, 2005. |
| Office communication mailed on Jan. 6, 2009, in Shafer's Involved Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/653,366. |
| Filing Receipt mailed Feb. 12, 2007, in Shafer's Involved Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/653,366. |
| Information Disclosure Statement filed on Oct. 20, 2006, in Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934. |
| Combined Declaration and Power of Attorney submitted on Oct. 20, 2006, in Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934. |
| Combined Declaration and Power of Attorney submitted on Feb. 7, 2006, in Omura's Parent Application. |
| Notice of allowance mailed on Aug. 14, 2007, in Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934. |
| Issue Fee Payment mailed on Nov. 2, 2007, in Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934. |
| Claims marked to show differences between: (1) Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934, filed on Oct. 20, 2006 and (2) Shafer's Published PCT Application, WO 2006/005547 to Shafer et al., published on Jan. 19, 2006. |
| Requirement for Restriction/Election mailed on Apr. 4, 2007, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Reply to Election of Species Requirement filed on Apr. 27, 2007, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Office Communication mailed on Jul. 5, 2007, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Supplemental Reply to Election of Species Requirement filed on Oct. 3, 2007, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Non-Final Rejection mailed on Dec. 12, 2007, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Amendment filed on Apr. 9, 2008, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Final Rejection mailed on Jul. 14, 2008, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Notice of Appeal filed on Jan. 14, 2009, in Omura's Sister Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160. |
| Omura et al., Catadioptric lens development for DUV and VUV projection optics, Optical Microlithography XVI, Proc. SPIE vol. 5040, pp. 781-788 (2003). |
| Omura, Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160, dated Oct. 27, 2009. |
| Optical Prescription Data cited in Declaration of Richard C. Juergens dated Jun. 1, 2009. |
| Threshold issue, 68 Fed. Reg. 66,648; 66,664; and 66,689 (Nov. 26, 2003). |
| Threshold issue, 69 Fed, Reg. 49,960; 49,969; 49,991; and 50,019 (Aug. 12, 2004) (to be codified at 37 C.F.R. § 41.201). |
| Harry J. Levinson, “Principles of Lithography,” SPIE, 2001, pp. 150-167. |
| Warren J. Smith, “Modern Optical Engineering: The Design of Optical Systems,” 3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2000, pp. 487-492. |
| James R. Sheats et al., “Microlithography: Science and Technology,” Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York, 1998, pp. 261-2711. |
| P. Rai-Choudhury, “Handbook of Microlithography, Micromachining, and Microfabrication: Volume 1: Microlithogtaphy,” SPIE, 1997, pp. 82-126. |
| U.S Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2008-1466, Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Affymetrix, Inc., copy of the Appeal from the US District Court for Northern California District of California in Case No. 06-CV-05958, Judge James Ware, dated Jun. 4, 2009 (26 pages). |
| Translation of PCT/JP01/09266, filed Oct. 23, 2003, publication No. WO 2002/35273, published May 2, 2002. |
| Warren Smith, “Modern Optical Engineering,” 3rd edition, Chapter 13, pp. 439-502 (2000). |
| Tomoyuki Matsuyama et al., “Microlithographic Lens for DUV Scanner,” SPIE vol. 4832, Dec. 2003, Conference Jun. 3-7, 2002, pp. 170-174. |
| Tomoyuki Matsuyama et al., “High NA and Low Residual Aberration Projection Lens for DUV Scanner,” PSIE, vol. 4691 (2002, pp. 687-695. |
| Tomoyuki Matsuyama et al., “Nikon Projection Lens Update”, in Optical Microlithography XVII, Proc. of SPIE, vol. 5377.65 (2004). |
| Ulrich, W. et al., “Trends in Optical Design of Projection Lenses for UV-and EUV-Lithography,” Proc. of SPIE, vol. 4146 (2000). |
| Glatzel, E., “New Lenses for Microlithography,” SPIE vol. 237 (1980), pp. 310-320. |
| M. Switkes et al., “Resolution Enhancement of 157-nm Lithography by Liquid Immersion,” Proc. SPIE vol. 4691, Optical Microlithography XV, pp. 459-465, Jul. 2002. |
| Jacobs et al., “Expansion hysteresis upon thermal cycling of Zerodur,” Applied Optics, 23(17), Sep. 1, 1984. |
| Lindig et al., Applied Optics, 24(2), Oct. 15, 1985. |
| Deposition of Mitchell C. Ruda, Ph.D., Jul. 23, 2009. |
| Deposition of Richard C. Juergens, Jul. 17, 2009. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report, filed Mar. 23, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report on the Federal Curcuit Appel of Interference No. 105,678 , filed Jan. 26, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report on the Federal Circuit Appeal of Interference No. 105,678, filed Nov. 18, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report on the Federal Circuit Appeal of Interference No. 105678, filed Nov. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report on the Federal Circuit Appeal of Interference No. 105678, filed Oct. 6, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Brief of Appellant Omura, filed Sep. 8, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report on the Federal Circuit Appeal of Interference No. 105,678, filed Sep. 8, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Status Report on the Federal Circuit Appeal of Interference 105678, filed Aug. 25, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Order BD.R. 104(c), filed Aug. 11, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Annotated Copy of Claim, filed Jul. 27, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Annotated Copy of Claim, filed Jul. 27, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura First Exhibit List, filed Jul. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Response to Order to Show Cause, filed Jul. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Order BD.R. 109(b)Authorizing Copies of Office Records, filed Jul. 14, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Request for File Copies, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Clean Copy of Claim, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Notice of Real Party in Interest, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Notice of Related Proceedings, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Submission of Appointment of Additional Attorney, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Designation of Lead and Backup Lead Counsel, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Request for File Copies, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Clean Copy of Claims, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Notice of Relatred Proceedings, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Notice of Real Party in Interest, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Designation of Lead and Backup Attorneys, filed Jul. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Order to Show Cause BD.R. 104(a), filed Jun. 29, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Stanidng Order, filed Jun. 29, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Declaration BD.R. 203(b), filed Jun. 29, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit #1001, Interference No. 105,678, Paper No. 74 (Feb. 5, 2010)—Decision—Request for Rehearing—Bd.R. 127(d) , dated Jul. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit #1002, Interference No. 105,678, Paper No. 1 (Jan. 30, 2009)—Declaration Bd.R. 203(b) , dated Jul. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit #1003, Interference No. 105,678, Paper No. 47 (Aug. 26, 2009)—Omura Response 1, filed Jul. 20, 2010, dated Jul. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,753, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit #1004, U.S. Patent No. 7,309,870, issued Dec. 18, 2007, dated Jul. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Index of Shafer's Exhibits for the Record, filed Feb. 11, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer's Submission of the Record, filed Feb. 11, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Notice of Time Period 8 Filings, filed Feb. 11, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Order Miscellaneous BD.R. 104(a), filed Jan. 21, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Notice re Oral Argument, filed Jan. 3, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Request for Oral Hearing, filed Jan. 3, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Updated List of Exhibits, filed Jan. 3, 2011. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Order Miscellaneous BD.R. 104(a), filed Dec. 15, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, E-Mail Communication, filed Dec. 13, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Third Exhibit List, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Reply 5, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Reply 4, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Reply 3, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Reply 2, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Reply 1, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Reply 3, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Reply 2, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Reply 1, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Updated List of Exhibits, filed Dec. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Notice of Action Issued in Omura Continuation, filed Nov. 16, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Updated List of Exhibits, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Opposition 3, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Opposition 2, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Opposition 5, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Opposition 4, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Opposition 3, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Opposition 2, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Opposition 1, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Opposition 1, filed Nov. 5, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Notice of Change of Real Party-In-Interest, filed Nov. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Notice of Change of Counsel Contact Information, filed Nov. 3, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Notice of Stipulation to Extend Time Period 3, filed Oct. 8, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Updated List of Exhibits, filed Sep. 17, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Responsive Motion 3, filed Sep. 17, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Second Exhibit List, filed re Sep. 17, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Responsive Motion 5, filed Sep. 17, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Responsive Motion 4, filed Sep. 17, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Responsive Motion 3, filed Sep. 17, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Notice of Stipulation to Extend Time Period 2, filed Sep. 10, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Order-Miscellaneous-BD.R. 104(C), filed Sep. 2, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Notice of Filing of Shafer Priority Statement, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer List of Exhibits as of August 20, 2010, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Substantive Motion 2, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Substantive Motion 1, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura First Exhibit List, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Notice of Filing Priority Statement, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Motion 2, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Motion 1, filed Aug. 20, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Joint Stipulation to Extend Time Periods 1 to 4, filed Aug. 6, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Report of Parties Re Settlement Jul. 28, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Order Motion Times BD.R. 104(c) , filed Jun. 25, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Supplemental Notice of Related Proceedings, filed Jun. 25, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Motions List, filed Jun. 18, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Motions List, filed Jun. 18, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Annotated Copy of Claims, filed May 26, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Annotated Copy of Claims, filed May 26, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Order BD.R. 109(c)Authorizing Copies of Office Records, filed May 14, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer File Copy Request, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Clean Copy of Claims, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Notice of Related Proceedings, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Notice of Real Party in Interest, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Submission of Appointment of Additional Attorney, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Designation of Lead Attorney, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Request for File Copies, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Clean Copy of Claims, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Notice of Related Proceedings, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Notice of Real Party in Interest, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Designation of Lead and Backup Attorney, filed May 12, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Standing Order, filed Apr. 28, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Declaration BD.R. 203(b), filed Apr. 28, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2001, Declaration of Richard C. Juergens dated. Aug. 19, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2003, U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,394 to Shafer et al., filed on Mar. 23, 2009 (“Shafer's Involved Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2004, U.S. Appl. No. 11/653,366 to Shafer et al., filed on Jan. 16, 2007 (“Shafer's Parent Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2005, WO 2006/005547 to Shafer et al., published on Jan. 19, 2006 (“Shafer's Published PCT Application”); publication of PCT/EP2005/007431, filed Jul. 8, 2005 (“Shafer's PCT Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2006, Provisional U.S. Appl. No. 60/654,950 to Shafer, filed on Feb. 23, 2005 (“Shafer's '950 Provisional”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2007, U.S. Appl. No. 11/035,103 to Shafer et al., filed Jan. 14, 2005 (“Shafer's '103 Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2008, Provisional U.S. Appl. No. 60/617,674 to Shafer et al., filed Oct. 13, 2004 (“Shafer's '674 Provisional”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2009, Filing Receipt mailed Apr. 20, 2009, in Shafer's Involved Application, U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,394. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2010, Preliminary Amendment filed Mar. 23, 2009, in Shafer's Involved Application, U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,394. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2011, Office communication mailed on Apr. 23, 2010, in Shafer's Involved Application, U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,394. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2012, Filing Receipt mailed on Feb. 12, 2007, in Shafer's Parent Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/653,366. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2013, Notice to File Missing Parts mailed on Mar. 15, 2005, in Shafer's '103 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/035,103. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2014, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934 to Omura, filed Oct. 20, 2006 (“Omura's '934 Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2015, U.S. Patent No. 7,385,756 to Shafer et al., issued on Jun. 10, 2008. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2016, Information Disclosure Statement filed on Oct. 20, 2006, in Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2017, U.S. Patent No. 7,309,870 to Yasuhiro Omura (“Omura's Involved Patent”), issued on Dec. 18, 2007, from Omura's '934 Application, U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2018, U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288 to Yasuhiro Omura, filed on Nov. 4, 2005 (“Omura's Parent Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2019, WO 2004/107011 to Yasuhiro Omura, published on Sep. 12, 2004; publication of PCT/JP2004/006417, filed May 6, 2004 (“Omura's PCT Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2020, English Translation of JP2003-128154 to Omura, filed Ma 6, 2003. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2021, English Translation of JP2003-350647 to Omura, filed Oct. 9, 2003. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2022, English Translation of JP2003-364596 to Omura, filed Oct. 24, 2003. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2023, Microlithography: Science and Technology, ed. James R. Sheats and Bruce W. Smith, Marcel Dekker, Inc., pp. 261-270 (1998). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2024, U.S. 2003/0234912 to Yasuhiro Omura, published on Dec. 25, 2003 (“Omura's '912 Publication”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2025, Omura et al., Catadioptric lens development for DUV and VUV projection optics, Optical Microlithography XVI, Proc. SPIE, vol. 5040, pp. 781-788 (2003) (“Omura's SPIE Paper”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2026, U.S. Appl. No. 60/591,775 to Beder et al., filed Jul. 26 or 27, 2004 (“the '775 Provisional”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2028, U.S. Appl. No. 12/561,019 to Shafer et al., filed September 16, 2009. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2029, U.S. Appl. No. 12/816,863 to Shafer et al., filed Jun. 16, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2030, Non-final Office Action mailed Nov. 5, 2010, in U.S. Appl. No. 12/884,332 to Yasuhiro Omura. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2031, Notice of Proposed Rules on Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2003, in 68 Fed. Reg. (No. 228) at 66648 et seq. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2032, Final Rules on Thursday, Aug. 12, 2004, in 69 Fed. Reg. (No. 155) at 49960 et seq. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2033, Official Filing receipt mailed on Sep. 27, 2004, in the '775 Provisional, U.S. Appl. No. 60/591,775. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2049, ZEMAX—Optical Design Program—User's Guide, Version 10.0, published in Apr. 2001. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2050, U.S. Patent No. 7,688,517 to Omura et al., issued on Mar. 30, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2051, U.S. Patent No. 7,688,422 to Ikezawa et al., issued Mar. 30, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2052, PCT Patent Publication No. WO 2004/019128, published on Mar. 4, 2004 (“Nikon's PCT Application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2053, Great Britain Patent Application GB 0311470.9, filed May 19, 2003 (“the Williamson application”). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2054, Combined Declaration and Power of Attorney dated Nov. 29, 2005, filed in U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2055, E-mail dated Nov. 4, 2010, from Jonathan Bockman to Marc Wefers regarding stipulation. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Shafer Exhibit #2056, E-mail dated Aug. 27, 2010, from Christopher Bowley to Jonathan Bockman and Barry Bretschneider regarding service of Shafer Priority Statement. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1005—Reply to Action of Jan. 13, 2010, in U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,394 to Shafer et al. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1006—Aurelian Dodoc, “Toward the Global Optimum in Lithographic Lens Design,” in International Optical Design Conference, OSA Technical Digest (CD) (Optical Society of America, 2010), paper IWD3. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1007—U.S. Appl. No. 12/884,332 “Projection Optical Systems, Apparatus, and Exposure Method,” to Omura, filed Sep. 17, 2010 (Omura's Continuation Application). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1010—Action dated Jan. 13, 2010, in U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,394 to Shafer et al. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1013—U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288, filed Nov. 4, 2005. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1014—File history for U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288, filed Nov. 4, 2005. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1015—International Patent Application No. PCT/JP2004/006417, filed May 6, 2004. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1016—Sworn translation of International Patent Application No. PCT/JP2004/006417, filed May 6, 2004. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1017—Certified Copy of Japanese Patent Application No. 2003-364596, filed Oct. 24, 2003. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1018—Sworn translation of Japanese Patent Application No. 2003-364596, filed Oct. 24, 2003. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1019—U.S. Appl. No. 11/653,366, filed Jan. 16, 2007. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,749, Shafer v. Omura, Omura Exhibit #1024—File history for U.S. Patent No. 7,309,870, issued Dec. 18, 2007. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,678, Notice of Appeal filed Apr. 5, 2010; 20 pages. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,678, Brief of Appellant Omura filed Aug. 30, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,678, Corrected Appellees Brief dated Oct. 25, 2010. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,678, Reply Brief of Appellant Omura filed Nov. 29, 2010; 36 pages. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit 1004, filed Nov. 30, 2011—Restatement of the Law, Second, Judgments, § 27(1982). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit 1011, filed Jan. 10, 2012—MPEP 802.01. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit 1012, filed Jan. 10, 2012—U.S. Appl. No. 13/081,394 to Shafer et al. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit 1013, filed Jan. 10, 2012—U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,760 to Omura. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Omura Exhibit 1016, filed Jan. 10, 2012—Board Rule 202(a). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer Ex. 2017, filed Nov. 7, 2011—Decision—Request for Rehearing—Bd.R. 127(d). |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer, Ex. 2036, filed May 29, 2012—Inventor declaration filed in U.S. Appl. No. 11/583,934 to Yasuhiro Omura. |
| BPAI Interference No. 105,834, Omura v. Shafer, Shafer, Ex. 2039, filed May 29, 2012—CODE V sequences for the embodiments shown in Fig. 7 of Shafer's Involved Application, Figs. 4 and 7 in the '248 Provisional, and Figs.5, 7, 9, 10, and 14-16 in the Omura Parent Application. |
| English Language Translation of Japanese Reference JP 09-312254, published Dec. 2, 1997. |
| M. Switkes et al., “Immersion Lithography at 157 nm”, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B, vol. 19, No. 6, pp. 2353-2356 (Nov./Dec. 2001). |
| Request for Invalidation by the Petitioner: Carl Zeiss GmbH, issued by the Chinese Patent Office for Chinese Patent No. ZL 200710306116.8 dated Sep. 29, 2013 (44 pages). |
| Request for Invalidation by the Petitioner: Carl Zeiss GmbH, issued by the Chinese Patent Office for Chinese Patent No. ZL 2008100859109 dated Sep. 29, 2013 (48 pages). |
| Request for Invalidation by the Petitioner: Carl Zeiss GmbH, issued by the Chinese Patent Office for Chinese Patent No. ZL 200480012069.0 dated Sep. 29, 2013 (50 pages). |
| Expert Declaration of Prof. Sun Liqun for Chinese Patent No. ZL 200480012069.0 dated Oct. 29, 2013 (46 pages). |
| Expert Declaration of Prof. Sun Liqun for Chinese Patent No. ZL 200710306116.8 dated Oct. 29, 2013 (35 pages). |
| Expert Declaration of Prof. Sun Liqun for Chinese Patent No. ZL 2008100859109 dated Oct. 29, 2013 (45 pages). |
| Petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR2013-00362) of Claims 1-3, 8-12, 16-20, 23-26, and 29-33 of United States Patent No. 7,348,575 Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319, 37 C.F.R. § 42, filed Jun. 17, 2013. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1001 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, U.S. Patent No. 7,348,575 (“the Omura Patent”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1002 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, U.S. Patent No. 7,309,870 (“the Omura '870 Patent”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1003 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 49, Interference No. 105, 678 (“the '678 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1004 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 157, Interference No. 105, 749 (“the '749 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1005 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 41, Interference No. 105, 753 (“the '753 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1006 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 291, Interference No. 105, 834 (“the '834 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1007 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, PCT Patent Publication WO 02/035273 (“Takahashi PCT”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1008 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, US Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0024741 A1 (“Terasawa”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1009 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, US Patent No. 5,825,043 (“Suwa”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1010 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, M. Switkes and M. Rothschild, “Resolution Enhancement of 157 nm Lithography by Liquid Immersion,” Proc. SPIE vol. 4691, pp. 460-465 (2002) (“Switkes”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1011 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Willi Ulrich et al., “The Development of Dioptric Projection Lenses for DUV Lithography,” Proc. SPIE vol. 4832, pp. 158-169 (2002) (“Ulrich”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1012 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, PCT Patent Publication WO 99/49504 (“Fukami JP”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1013 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Satori Asai et al., “Resolution Limit for Optical Lithography Using Polarized Light Illumination,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. vol. 32, pp. 5863-5866 (1993) (“Asai”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1014 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, European Patent Application Publication No. EP 1 336 887 Al (“Takahashi”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1015 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Certified English translation of PCT Patent Publication WO 99/49504 (“Fukami”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1016 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Expert Declaration of Richard C. Juergens. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1017 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Wikipedia, “Optical Power,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical—power (downloaded May 20, 2013). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1018 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013,Willi Ulrich et al., “Trends in Optical Design of Projection Lenses for UV- and EUV-Lithography,” Proc. SPIE vol. 4146, pp. 13-24 (2000) (“Ulrich 2000”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1019 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Eugene Hecht, Optics (4th ed.), Addison Wesley (2002), pp. 171-173. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1020 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Wikipedia, “Optical Axis,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiiki/Optical—axis (downloaded May 20, 2013). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1021 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013,File History Excerpts from U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288 (“the Omura Application”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1022 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, File History Excerpts from U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160 (“the Omura Continuation Application”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1023 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Decision, Paper No. 40, Interference No. 105,753 (the “753 Decision”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1024 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Wikipedia, “Refractive Index,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive—index (downloaded May 20, 2013). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1025 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, U.S. Patent No. 4,346,164 (“Tabarelli”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1026 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Omura Reply 1, Paper No. 200, Interference No. 105,834. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1027 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, European Patent Application Publication No. EP 1 069 448 B1 (“Suenaga”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1028 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Curriculum Vitae of Richard C. Juergens. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1029 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00362), filed Jun. 17, 2013, CODE V sequence data. |
| Petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR2013-00363) of Claims 55-67 of United States Patent No. 7,348,575 Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319, 37 C.F.R. § 42, filed Jun. 17, 2013. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1101 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, U.S. Patent No. 7,348,575 (“the Omura Patent”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1102 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, U.S. Patent No. 7,309,870 (“the Omura '870 Patent”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1103 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 49, Interference No. 105, 678 (“the '678 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1104 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 157, Interference No. 105, 749 (“the '749 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1105 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 41, Interference No. 105, 753 (“the '753 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1106 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Judgment, Paper No. 291, Interference No. 105, 834 (“the '834 Judgment”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1107 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Certified English Translation of Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication No. JP 2003-128154. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1108 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Certified English Translation of Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication JP 2003-350647. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1109 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Certified English Translation of Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication JP 2003-364596. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1110 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, US Patent Application Publication No. US 2005/0036213 (“Mann”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1111 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, JP Patent Application Publication No. JP 2003-114387. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1112 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Certified English Translation of JP Patent Application Publication No. JP 2003-114387 (“Omura '387”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1113 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, PCT Patent Publication WO 02/035273 (“Takahashi PCT”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1114 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, European Patent Application Publication No. EP 1 336 887 A1 (“Takahashi”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1115 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Satori Asai et al., “Resolution Limit for Optical Lithography Using Polarized Light Illumination,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. vol. 32, pp. 5863-5866 (1993) (“Asai”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1116 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Expert Declaration of Richard C. Juergens. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1117 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Wikipedia, “Optical Power,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical—power (downloaded May 20, 2013). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1118 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Willi Ulrich et al., “The Development of Dioptric Projection Lenses for DUV Lithography,” Proc. SPIE vol. 4832, pp. 158-169 (2002) (“Ulrich”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1119 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Eugene Hecht, Optics (4th ed.), Addison Wesley (2002), pp. 171-173. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1120 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Wikipedia, “Optical Axis,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical—axis (downloaded May 20, 2013). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1121 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, New World Dictionary of the American Language, Second College Edition, p. 1552, Simon and Schuster (1980). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1122 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, File History Excerpts from U.S. Appl. No. 11/266,288 (“Omura Application”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1123 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, filed Jun. 17, 2013, US Patent No. 5,825,043 (“Suwa”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1124 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Wikipedia, “Refractive Index,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive—index (downloaded May 20, 2013). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1125 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, U.S. Patent No. 4,346,164 (“Tabarelli”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1126 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013 File History Excerpts from U.S. Appl. No. 11/513,160 (“Omura Continuation Application”). |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1127 from IPR of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, J.R. Sheats and B.W. Smith, Microlithography: Science and Technology, Marcel Dekker, Inc. (1998), Chapter 1, pp. 1-43. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1128 from J.R. Sheats of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013 Omura Reply 1, Paper No. 200, Interference No. 105,834. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1129 from J.R. Sheats of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, Curriculum Vitae of Richard C. Juergens. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1130 from J.R. Sheats of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013CODE V Sequence Data. |
| Zeiss Exhibit 1131 from J.R. Sheats of US 7,348,575 (IPR2013-00363), filed Jun. 17, 2013, CODE V Sub-routines. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20120250147 A1 | Oct 2012 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60587504 | Jul 2004 | US | |
| 60591775 | Jul 2004 | US | |
| 60612823 | Sep 2004 | US | |
| 60617674 | Oct 2004 | US | |
| 60654950 | Feb 2005 | US | |
| 60536248 | Jan 2004 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 11653366 | Jan 2007 | US |
| Child | 13470956 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | PCT/EP2005/007431 | Jul 2005 | US |
| Child | 11653366 | US | |
| Parent | 11035103 | Jan 2005 | US |
| Child | PCT/EP2005/007431 | US |
