The present disclosure is related to lithography, and more particularly to the design and manufacture of a surface which may be a reticle, a wafer, or any other surface, using variable shaped beam (VSB) charged particle beam lithography.
In the production or manufacturing of semiconductor devices, such as integrated circuits, optical lithography may be used to fabricate the semiconductor devices. Optical lithography is a printing process in which a lithographic mask manufactured from a reticle is used to transfer patterns to a substrate such as a semiconductor or silicon wafer to create the integrated circuit. Other substrates could include flat panel displays or even other reticles. Also, extreme ultraviolet (EUV) or X-ray lithography are considered types of optical lithography. The reticle or multiple reticles may contain a circuit pattern corresponding to an individual layer of the integrated circuit, and this pattern can be imaged onto a certain area on the substrate that has been coated with a layer of radiation-sensitive material known as photoresist or resist. Once the patterned layer is transferred the layer may undergo various other processes such as etching, ion-implantation (doping), metallization, oxidation, and polishing. These processes are employed to finish an individual layer in the substrate. If several layers are required, then the whole process or variations thereof will be repeated for each new layer. Eventually, a combination of multiples of devices or integrated circuits will be present on the substrate. These integrated circuits may then be separated from one another by dicing or sawing and then may be mounted into individual packages. In the more general case, the patterns on the substrate may be used to define artifacts such as display pixels or magnetic recording heads.
In the production or manufacturing of semiconductor devices, such as integrated circuits, maskless direct write may also be used to fabricate the semiconductor devices. Maskless direct write or charged particle beam lithography is a printing process in which patterns are transferred to a substrate such as a semiconductor or silicon wafer to create the integrated circuit. Other substrates could include flat panel displays, imprint masks for nano-imprinting, or even reticles. Desired patterns of a layer are written directly on the surface, which in this case is also the substrate. Once the patterned layer is transferred the layer may undergo various other processes such as etching, ion-implantation (doping), metallization, oxidation, and polishing. These processes are employed to finish an individual layer in the substrate. If several layers are required, then the whole process or variations thereof will be repeated for each new layer. Some of the layers may be written using optical lithography while others may be written using maskless direct write to fabricate the same substrate. Eventually, a combination of multiples of devices or integrated circuits will be present on the substrate. These integrated circuits are then separated from one another by dicing or sawing and then mounted into individual packages. In the more general case, the patterns on the surface may be used to define artifacts such as display pixels or magnetic recording heads.
As indicated, in optical lithography the lithographic mask or reticle comprises geometric patterns corresponding to the circuit components to be integrated onto a substrate. The patterns used to manufacture the reticle may be generated utilizing computer-aided design (CAD) software or programs. In designing the patterns the CAD program may follow a set of predetermined design rules in order to create the reticle. These rules are set by processing, design, and end-use limitations. An example of an end-use limitation is defining the geometry of a transistor in a way in which it cannot sufficiently operate at the required supply voltage. In particular, design rules can define the space tolerance between circuit devices or interconnect lines. The design rules are, for example, used to ensure that the circuit devices or lines do not interact with one another in an undesirable manner. For example, the design rules are used so that lines do not get too close to each other in a way that may cause a short circuit. The design rule limitations reflect, among other things, the smallest dimensions that can be reliably fabricated. When referring to these small dimensions, one usually introduces the concept of a critical dimension. These are, for instance, defined as the smallest width of a line or the smallest space between two lines, those dimensions requiring exquisite control.
One goal in integrated circuit fabrication by optical lithography is to reproduce the original circuit design on the substrate by use of the reticle. Integrated circuit fabricators are always attempting to use the semiconductor wafer real estate as efficiently as possible. Engineers keep shrinking the size of the circuits to allow the integrated circuits to contain more circuit elements and to use less power. As the size of an integrated circuit critical dimension is reduced and its circuit density increases, the critical dimensions of its corresponding mask pattern approaches the resolution limit of the optical exposure tool used in optical lithography. As the critical dimensions of the circuit pattern become smaller and approach the resolution value of the exposure tool, the accurate transcription between the mask pattern and the actual circuit pattern developed on the resist layer becomes difficult. To further the use of optical lithography to transfer patterns having features that are smaller than the light wavelength used in the optical lithography process, a process known as optical proximity correction (OPC) has been developed. OPC alters the original mask pattern to compensate for distortions caused by effects such as optical diffraction and the optical interaction of features with proximate features. OPC includes all resolution enhancement technologies performed with a reticle.
OPC adds sub-resolution lithographic features to mask patterns to reduce differences between the original mask pattern, that is, the design, and the final transferred circuit pattern on the substrate. The sub-resolution lithographic features interact with the original mask pattern and with each other and compensate for proximity effects to improve the final transferred circuit pattern. One feature that is used to improve the transfer of the pattern is a sub-resolution assist feature (SRAF). Another feature that is added to improve pattern transference is referred to as “serifs”. Serifs are small features that can be positioned on a corner of a pattern to sharpen the corner in the final transferred image. As the limits of optical lithography are being extended far into the sub-wavelength regime, the OPC features must be made more and more complex in order to compensate for even more subtle interactions and effects. However, as imaging systems are pushed closer to their limits, the ability to produce reticles with sufficiently fine OPC features becomes critical. Although adding serifs or other OPC features to a mask pattern is advantageous, it also substantially increases the total features count in the mask pattern. For example, adding a serif to each of the corners of a square using conventional techniques adds eight more rectangles to a mask or reticle pattern. Adding OPC features is a very laborious task, requires costly computation time, and results in more expensive reticles. Not only are OPC patterns complex, but since optical proximity effects are long range compared to minimum line and space dimensions, the correct OPC patterns in a given location depend significantly on what other geometry is in the neighborhood. Thus, for instance, a line end will have different size serifs depending on what is near it on the reticle. This is even though the objective might be to produce exactly the same shape on the wafer. These slight but critical variations are important and have prevented others from being able to form reticle patterns. It is conventional to discuss the OPC-decorated patterns to be written on a reticle in terms of main features, that is features that reflect the design before OPC decoration, and OPC features, where OPC features might include serifs, jogs, and SRAF. To quantify what is meant by slight variations, a typical slight variation in OPC decoration from neighborhood to neighborhood might be 5% to 80% of a main feature size. Note that for clarity, variations in the design of the OPC are what is being referenced. Manufacturing variations, such as line-edge roughness and corner rounding, will also be present in the actual surface patterns. When these OPC variations produce substantially the same patterns on the wafer, what is meant is that the geometry on the wafer is targeted to be the same within a specified error, which depends on the details of the function that that geometry is designed to perform, e.g., a transistor or a wire. Nevertheless, typical specifications are in the 2%-50% of a main feature range. There are numerous manufacturing factors that also cause variations, but the OPC component of that overall error is often in the range listed.
There are a number of technologies used for forming patterns on a reticle, including using optical lithography or charged particle beam lithography. The most commonly used system is the variable shaped beam (VSB), which is a type of charged particle beam writer system, where a precise electron beam is shaped and steered onto a resist-coated surface of the reticle. These shapes are simple shapes, usually limited to rectangles of certain minimum and maximum sizes and with sides which are parallel to the axes of a Cartesian coordinate plane, and triangles with their three internal angles being 45 degrees, 45 degrees, and 90 degrees of certain minimum and maximum sizes. At pre-determined locations, doses of electrons are shot into the resist with these simple shapes. The total writing time for this type of system increases with the number of shots. The doses or shots of electrons are conventionally designed to avoid overlap wherever possible, so as to greatly simplify calculation of how the resist on the reticle will register the pattern. As OPC features become more complex, however, the division or fracturing of patterns into a set of non-overlapping simple shapes can result in many billions of simple shapes, resulting in very long reticle write times.
It would be advantageous to reduce the time and expense it takes to prepare and manufacture a reticle that is used for manufacturing a substrate. More generally, it would be advantageous to reduce the time and expense it takes to prepare and manufacture any surface. For example, it is possible that a surface can have thousands of patterns that have only slight differences among them. It is desirable to be able to generate all of these slightly different patterns with a minimal number of VSB shots.
A method for optical proximity correction (OPC) is disclosed, in which a set of VSB shots is determined, where the set of shots can approximately form a target reticle pattern that is an OPC-compensated version of an input pattern. The set of shots is simulated to create a simulated reticle pattern. A substrate image is calculated, based on using the simulated reticle pattern in an optical lithographic process to form the substrate image. A system for OPC is also disclosed.
The improvements and advantages of the present disclosure can be accomplished by allowing overlapping VSB shots and other-than-normal dosages, and by allowing the union of the shots to deviate from the target pattern, allowing patterns to be created from a reduced number of shots compared to the more conventional non-overlapping, normal dosage VSB shots. Thus, a method and a system are provided for manufacturing a surface that addresses the prior problem such as lengthy write time and consequent high cost associated with preparing a surface.
Referring now to the drawings, wherein like numbers refer to like items,
As indicated above, since semiconductor and other nano-technology manufacturers are reaching the limits of optical lithography, it is difficult to transfer an ideal pattern onto a substrate. For example,
In an effort to compensate for the difference between the patterns 40 and 44, optical proximity correction is used. Optical proximity correction alters the design pattern so as to alter the reticle to compensate for distortions created by optical diffraction, optical interactions with neighboring shapes, and resist process effects.
Referring to
VSB shots which overlap will inherently cause dosage variations between the overlapping and non-overlapping areas. For example,
There are certain circumstances in which VSB shots may be conventionally overlapped. For example, if when the pattern is prepared for exposure, a pattern shape is determined to extend beyond the boundary of one field of the
Multi-pass writing is another conventional technique in which VSB shots are intentionally overlapped. With this technique the entire pattern is exposed once, then the entire pattern is exposed a second time. More than two passes may also be used. Multi-pass writing may be used to reduce non-ideal writing effects such as resist heating, resist charging and field-to-field misalignment.
The aforementioned techniques for overlapping VSB shots, including ghost shots, multi-pass writing, and auxiliary shots, have two common characteristics:
The various flows described in this disclosure may be implemented using general-purpose computers with appropriate computer software. Due to the large amount of calculations required, multiple computers or processor cores may also be used in parallel. In one embodiment, the computations may be subdivided into a plurality of 2-dimensional geometric regions for one or more computation-intensive steps in the flow, to support parallel processing. In another embodiment, a special-purpose hardware device, either used singly or in multiples, may be used to perform the computations of one or more steps with greater speed than using general-purpose computers or processor cores. The optimization and simulation processes described in this disclosure may include iterative processes of revising and recalculating possible solutions.
The shot count reduction of the current disclosure compared with conventional techniques may be particularly significant for curvilinear patterns. For example,
One complexity of using overlapping shots is calculating resist response for each part of the pattern. When an area of the resist receives doses from multiple shots, the doses from each of the shots must be combined to determine the total dose. For example,
It is significantly more challenging to predict a resulting pattern on the surface when areas on the resist receive significantly more or less than a normal dose. Particle beam exposure simulation may be used to determine the resulting pattern. This process simulates the exposure of the resist-coated surface by the charged particle beam system, accounting for the physical characteristics of the charged particle beam system and the electro-optical and chemical characteristics of the resist and the surface underlying the resist. Particle beam exposure simulation may be used to model various non-ideal effects of the charged particle beam exposure process, including forward scattering, backward scattering, resist diffusion, Coulomb effect, etching, fogging, loading and resist charging. Most of these effects are shorter-range effects, meaning that each VSB shot will affect only other nearby parts of the pattern. Back scattering, fogging and loading, however, are longer-range effects, and cannot be accurately simulated when only small parts of a pattern are considered. Resist charging, although a short-range effect, must be calculated after the final shot exposure sequence is known.
For example,
With reference now to
Once the mask is enhanced, an equivalent mask design, such as a set of VSB shots, is generated in a step 310. There are two motivations for tests that can be used to determine whether the equivalent mask design is really equivalent to the mask design. One motivation is to pass mask inspection. Another motivation is to confirm that the chip or integrated circuit will function properly once it has been fabricated. The closeness to which a pattern matching operation declares a match may be determined by a set of equivalence criteria. An equivalence criteria may be driven at least partially by litho-equivalence. Litho-equivalence may be determined by a set of predetermined geometric rules, a set of mathematical equations that declare a match, a partial match, or a no match, or by running a lithography simulation of the mask design and a lithography simulation of the equivalent mask design and by comparing the two results using a set of predetermined geometric rules, or by a set of mathematical equations that declare a match, a partial match, or no match. The MDP step 308 may use a pre-determined set of glyphs, or parameterized glyphs to optimize for shot count or write time while insuring that a resulting equivalent mask design 310 is acceptable to the equivalence criteria. In another embodiment, OPC and MDP may be combined in a correct-by-construction method, in which case there may not be the mask design 306 generated separately from the equivalent mask design 310.
Once the equivalent mask design is determined to be correct, a surface is prepared in a charged particle beam writer system, such as an electron beam writer system. This step is identified as a step 314 mask writer. The electron beam writer system projects a beam of electrons through apertures in a stencil mask onto a surface to form patterns on the surface. The surface is completed in a step 316, mask image. The completed surface may then be used in an optical lithography machine, which is shown in a step 318 to transfer the patterns found on the surface to a substrate such as a silicon wafer to manufacture an integrated circuit. Finally, in a step 320, a substrate such as a semiconductor wafer is produced. The glyph generation step 326 provides information to a set of glyphs or parameterized glyphs in step 328. As has been previously described, the glyph generation step 326 may use particle beam simulation. Also, as has been discussed, the glyphs or parameterized glyphs step 328 provides information to either the OPC step 304 or the MDP step 308.
Referring again to
Referring now to
Referring now to
An example of a parameterized glyph description for the glyph 1010 may be as follows:
An example of a parameterized glyph description for the glyph 1012 may be as follows:
These example descriptions are based on parameters that yield a logical test that determines which values of parameters meet a certain criteria such as “where ((x=10) or (x=15) or (x=20) or (x=25))” or “where ((x=10) or ((x>10) and (x<25)) or (x=25)).” There are many other ways to describe a parameterized glyph. Another example that demonstrates a constructive method is as follows:
While the specification has been described in detail with respect to specific embodiments, it will be appreciated that those skilled in the art, upon attaining an understanding of the foregoing, may readily conceive of alterations to, variations of, and equivalents to these embodiments. These and other modifications and variations to the present system and method for manufacturing a surface or integrated circuit using variable shaped beam lithography may be practiced by those of ordinary skill in the art, without departing from the spirit and scope of the present subject matter, which is more particularly set forth in the appended claims. Furthermore, those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the foregoing description is by way of example only, and is not intended to be limiting. Thus, it is intended that the present subject matter covers such modifications and variations as come within the scope of the appended claims and their equivalents.
This application is 1) a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/970,465 filed on Aug. 19, 2013, entitled “Method And System For Design Of A Reticle To Be Manufactured Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,828,628; 2) which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/650,618 filed on Oct. 12, 2012, entitled “Method And System For Design Of A Reticle To Be Manufactured Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,512,919; 3) which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/316,564 filed on Dec. 12, 2011 entitled “Method And System For Design Of A Reticle To Be Manufactured Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,304,148, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference for all purposes. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/316,564: 4) is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/087,334 filed on Apr. 14, 2011 entitled “Method and System For Design of a Reticle To Be Manufactured Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,202,672; 5) which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/987,994 filed on Jan. 10, 2011 entitled “Method For Manufacturing a Surface and Integrated Circuit Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,017,289; 6) which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/473,265 filed on May 27, 2009 entitled “Method and System for Design of a Reticle to Be Manufactured Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,901,850; and 7a) which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/202,366 filed Sep. 1, 2008, entitled “Method and System For Design of a Reticle to Be Manufactured Using Character Projection Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,759,027 and 7b) which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/172,659, filed on Apr. 24, 2009 and entitled “Method for Manufacturing a Surface and Integrated Circuit Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography”; all of which are hereby incorporated by reference for all purposes. This application also: 8) is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/473,241 filed on May 27, 2009, entitled “Method for Manufacturing a Surface and Integrated Circuit Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,754,401; 9) is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/473,248 filed on May 27, 2009, entitled “Method for Optical Proximity Correction of a Reticle to Be Manufactured Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,981,575; and 10) is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/087,336 filed on Apr. 14, 2011 entitled “Method For Manufacturing a Surface and Integrated Circuit Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography”; all of which are hereby incorporated by reference for all purposes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4634871 | Knauer | Jan 1987 | A |
4698509 | Wells et al. | Oct 1987 | A |
4712013 | Nishimura | Dec 1987 | A |
4818885 | Davis et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
5082762 | Takahashi | Jan 1992 | A |
5103101 | Berglund et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5173582 | Sakamoto et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5334282 | Nakayama et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5723237 | Kobayashi et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5804339 | Kim | Sep 1998 | A |
5825039 | Hartley | Oct 1998 | A |
5856677 | Okino | Jan 1999 | A |
5885747 | Yamasaki et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5885748 | Ohnuma | Mar 1999 | A |
6049085 | Ema | Apr 2000 | A |
6087046 | Nakasuji | Jul 2000 | A |
6218671 | Gordon et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6262427 | Gordon | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6291119 | Choi et al. | Sep 2001 | B2 |
6372391 | Wolfe et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6433348 | Abboud et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6544700 | Ogino | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6557162 | Pierrat | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6610989 | Takahashi | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6627366 | Yang | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6677089 | Ogino et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6803589 | Nakasugi | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6891175 | Hiura | May 2005 | B2 |
6982135 | Chang et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7150949 | Askebjer et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7269819 | Hoshino | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7420164 | Nakasuji et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7449700 | Inanami | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7536664 | Cohn et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7592611 | Kasahara et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7703069 | Liu et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7716627 | Ungar et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7754401 | Fujimura et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7824828 | Fujimura et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7901850 | Fujimura et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7981575 | Fujimura et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8017289 | Fujimura et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8039176 | Fujimura et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8062813 | Zable et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8137871 | Zable et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8202672 | Fujimura et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8202673 | Fujimura et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8304148 | Fujimura et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8354207 | Fujimura et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8473875 | Fujimura et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8501374 | Fujimura et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8828628 | Fujimura | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8900778 | Fujimura et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
20020005494 | Kamijo et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020020824 | Itoh | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020036273 | Okino | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020125444 | Kojima | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020129328 | Komatsuda | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030043358 | Suganuma et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030082461 | Carpi | May 2003 | A1 |
20030087191 | Lavallee et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030159125 | Wang et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030203287 | Miyagawa | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040011966 | Sasaki et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040099636 | Scipioni | May 2004 | A1 |
20040131977 | Martyniuk et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040229133 | Socha et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050053850 | Askebjer et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050211921 | Wieland et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050221204 | Kimura | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050263715 | Nakasuji et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060085773 | Zhang | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060218520 | Pierrat et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070114453 | Emi et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070114463 | Nakasugi et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070187624 | Suzuki et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070196768 | Ogino | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070280526 | Malik et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080050676 | Hoshino | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080054196 | Hiroshima | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080116397 | Yoshida et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080116398 | Hara et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080116399 | Fujimura | May 2008 | A1 |
20080118852 | Mitsuhashi | May 2008 | A1 |
20080128637 | Yoshida | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080203324 | Fujimura et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090200495 | Platzgummer | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090325085 | Yoshida et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100055585 | Fujimura et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100058279 | Fujimura et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100058282 | Fujimura et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100148087 | Doering et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100183963 | Zable et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100251202 | Pierrat | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100264335 | Hoyle et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100315611 | Kato | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100325595 | Song et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110033788 | Kato | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110053056 | Fujimura et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110053093 | Hagiwara et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110116067 | Ye et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110145769 | Wei | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110159435 | Zable et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110177458 | Kotani et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20120149133 | Parrish et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120151428 | Tanaka et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120217421 | Fujimura et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120329289 | Fujimura et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130070222 | Fujimura | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130283218 | Fujimura et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1193810 | Sep 1998 | CN |
1429368 | Jun 2004 | EP |
2302659 | Mar 2011 | EP |
2367908 | Apr 2002 | GB |
S5425675 | Feb 1979 | JP |
S54025675 | Feb 1979 | JP |
S608844 | Jan 1985 | JP |
61105839 | May 1986 | JP |
63007631 | Jan 1988 | JP |
H02280315 | Nov 1990 | JP |
03205815 | Sep 1991 | JP |
H03205815 | Sep 1991 | JP |
04058518 | Feb 1992 | JP |
04096065 | Mar 1992 | JP |
1992155337 | May 1992 | JP |
04196516 | Jul 1992 | JP |
4196516 | Jul 1992 | JP |
H04196516 | Jul 1992 | JP |
H04307723 | Oct 1992 | JP |
05036595 | Feb 1993 | JP |
H0536595 | Feb 1993 | JP |
H05036595 | Feb 1993 | JP |
05114549 | May 1993 | JP |
05198483 | Aug 1993 | JP |
05267132 | Oct 1993 | JP |
05267133 | Oct 1993 | JP |
H05267133 | Oct 1993 | JP |
H05335221 | Dec 1993 | JP |
H0620931 | Jan 1994 | JP |
H06020931 | Jan 1994 | JP |
06124883 | May 1994 | JP |
06252036 | Sep 1994 | JP |
08055771 | Feb 1996 | JP |
H0855771 | Feb 1996 | JP |
08064522 | Mar 1996 | JP |
H08195339 | Jul 1996 | JP |
8222504 | Aug 1996 | JP |
H08222504 | Aug 1996 | JP |
H09266153 | Oct 1997 | JP |
10294255 | Nov 1998 | JP |
H11111594 | Apr 1999 | JP |
11233401 | Aug 1999 | JP |
2000012426 | Jan 2000 | JP |
2000066366 | Mar 2000 | JP |
2000091191 | Mar 2000 | JP |
2000123768 | Apr 2000 | JP |
2000138165 | May 2000 | JP |
2000269123 | Sep 2000 | JP |
2001013671 | Jan 2001 | JP |
2001093809 | Apr 2001 | JP |
2001203157 | Jul 2001 | JP |
2001230203 | Aug 2001 | JP |
2001305720 | Nov 2001 | JP |
2001313253 | Nov 2001 | JP |
2002008966 | Jan 2002 | JP |
2002075830 | Mar 2002 | JP |
2002110508 | Apr 2002 | JP |
2002202590 | Jul 2002 | JP |
2002217092 | Aug 2002 | JP |
2002351055 | Dec 2002 | JP |
2003195511 | Jul 2003 | JP |
2003315976 | Nov 2003 | JP |
2003338460 | Nov 2003 | JP |
2003347192 | Dec 2003 | JP |
2004088071 | Mar 2004 | JP |
2004134447 | Apr 2004 | JP |
2004134574 | Apr 2004 | JP |
2004170410 | Jun 2004 | JP |
2004273526 | Sep 2004 | JP |
2004304031 | Oct 2004 | JP |
2004356440 | Dec 2004 | JP |
2005079111 | Mar 2005 | JP |
2006032814 | Feb 2006 | JP |
2006059348 | Mar 2006 | JP |
2006100336 | Apr 2006 | JP |
2006100409 | Apr 2006 | JP |
2006108447 | Apr 2006 | JP |
2006222230 | Aug 2006 | JP |
2006294794 | Oct 2006 | JP |
2007041090 | Feb 2007 | JP |
2007103923 | Apr 2007 | JP |
2007242710 | Sep 2007 | JP |
2007249167 | Sep 2007 | JP |
2007305880 | Nov 2007 | JP |
2008053565 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2008066441 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2008096486 | Apr 2008 | JP |
2009147254 | Jul 2009 | JP |
2010062562 | Mar 2010 | JP |
2011040716 | Feb 2011 | JP |
1020080001438 | Jan 2008 | KR |
495834 | Jul 2002 | TW |
I222100 | Oct 2004 | TW |
I233149 | May 2005 | TW |
200523524 | Jul 2005 | TW |
200604763 | Feb 2006 | TW |
200700932 | Jan 2007 | TW |
200832080 | Aug 2008 | TW |
200834366 | Aug 2008 | TW |
200900880 | Jan 2009 | TW |
03036386 | May 2003 | WO |
2004077156 | Sep 2004 | WO |
2008064155 | May 2008 | WO |
2010025060 | Mar 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Oct. 10, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/801,554. |
Office Action dated Aug. 5, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525091. |
Office Action dated Oct. 15, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,476. |
Office Action dated Oct. 20, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,471. |
Office Action dated Oct. 24, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,584. |
Office Action dated Oct. 6, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/331,008. |
Official Letter and Search Report dated Aug. 21, 2014 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. 098128359. |
Official letter and search report dated Aug. 6, 2014 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. 099127553. |
Official Letter and Search Report dated Sep. 25, 2014 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. 099134186. |
Official Letter and Search report dated Sep. 25, 2014 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. 98128360. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Jan. 21, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/257,874. |
Office Action dated Dec. 16, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/948,725. |
Office Action dated Nov. 11, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-526931. |
Official Letter and Search Report dated Oct. 24, 2014 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. 099134187. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Feb. 9, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,270. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Jan. 23, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,476. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Jan. 26, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,584. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Mar. 27, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/948,725. |
Office Action dated Feb. 6, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,475. |
Office Action dated Jan. 20, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-535223. |
Office Action dated Jan. 6, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-183857. |
Office Action dated Mar. 27, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/454,140. |
Office Action dated Mar. 3, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525090. |
Bloecker, M. et al., “Metrics to Assess Fracture Quality for Variable Shaped Beam Lithography”, Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 6349 (Oct. 2006), pp. 63490Z-1-63490Z-10, SPIE, P.O. Box 10, Bellingham, WA. 98227, U.S.A. |
Chinese Office Action dated Jan. 14, 2013 for Chinese Application No. 200980134188.6. |
Chinese Office Action dated Sep. 11, 2013 for Chinese Application No. 200980134188.6. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion dated Mar. 10, 2011 for PCT Application No. PCT/US2009/053327. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion dated Mar. 10, 2011 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2009/053328. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion dated Mar. 10, 2011 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2009/054239. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion filed on Mar. 10, 2011 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US20091054229. |
International Search Report and the Written Opinion dated Apr. 22, 2010 for PCT Application No. PCT/US2009/053328. |
International Search Report and the Written Opinion dated Mar. 2, 2010 for PCT Application No. PCT/US2009/053327. |
Japanese Office Action dated Aug. 20, 2013 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525073. |
Japanese Office Action dated Oct. 1, 2013 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525090. |
Japanese Office Action dated Oct. 8, 2013 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525091. |
Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) dated Oct. 11, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/923,368. |
Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) due filed on Jan. 20, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/473,265. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Aug. 1, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/108,135. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Aug. 15, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/959,530. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Aug. 23, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/723,181. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Dec. 26, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,472. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees Dues dated Apr. 5, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/473,248. |
Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 23, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/723,181. |
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 12, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/750,709. |
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 21, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/540,328. |
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 29, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/540,322. |
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 30, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/540,321. |
Office Action dated Aug. 20, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/202,365. |
Office Action dated Apr. 13, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/300,601. |
Office Action dated Apr. 15, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525072. |
Office Action dated Apr. 3, 2014 for Chinese patent application No. 200980134188.6. |
Office Action dated Apr. 8, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525091. |
Office Action dated Feb. 14, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/631,941. |
Office Action dated Feb. 27, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/236,610. |
Office Action dated Jul. 15, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,270. |
Office Action dated Jul. 23, 2013 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2009-200191. |
Office Action dated Jul. 23, 2013 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525072. |
Office Action dated Jul. 8, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2009-200191. |
Office Action dated Jun. 3, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-526931. |
Office Action dated Jun. 10, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525090. |
Office Action dated Jun. 10, 2014 for JP Patent Application No. 2011-525073. |
Office Action dated Jun. 3, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-535220. |
Office Action dated Jun. 6, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/329,315. |
Office Action dated Mar. 11, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/959,530. |
Office Action dated Mar. 13, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,476. |
Office Action dated Mar. 22, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/710,426. |
Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/540,328. |
Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/750,709. |
Office Action dated May 9, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/106,584. |
Office Action dated May 1, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,471. |
Office Action dated May 13, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-183857. |
Office Action dated May 16, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/948,725. |
Office Action dated May 27, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-535223. |
Office Action dated May 5, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,475. |
Office action dated Nov. 24, 2009 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/269,777, mailed Nov. 24, 2009. |
Office Action dated Oct. 25, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,263. |
Office Action dated Oct. 29, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,270. |
Office Action dated Sep. 1, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/087,336. |
Office Action dated Sep. 1, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/087,337. |
Office Action dated Sep. 10, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/329,314. |
Office Action dated Sep. 24, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/329,315. |
Office action filed on Mar. 17, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/540,322. |
Office Action filed on Mar. 18, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/540,321. |
Office Action filed on Mar. 2, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/987,994. |
Pierrat and Bork, “Impact of Model-Based Fracturing on E-beam Proximity Effect Correction Methodology”, Sep. 29, 2010, Proc. of SPIE, vol. 7823, pp. 782313-1-782313-11, Photomask Technology 2010. |
Search Report dated Apr. 9, 2014 for Taiwanese Application No. 98128358. |
Yamada and Yabe, “Variable cell projection as an advance in electron-beam cell projection system”, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B, vol. 22, No. 6, Nov./Dec. 2004, pp. 2917-2922. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Jun. 23, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/578,060. |
Office Action dated Jun. 15, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/578,410. |
Office Action dated Jun. 19, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,471. |
Office Action dated Jun. 25, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/552,360. |
Office Action dated May 12, 2015 for Korean Patent Application No. 10-2014-7036547. |
Official Letter and Search Report dated Apr. 10, 2015 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. 98128034. |
Official Letter and Search Report dated Apr. 13, 2015 for Taiwanese Patent Application No. TW 100136720. |
Official letter and search report dated Apr. 29, 2015 for Taiwanese Application No. 99127100. |
Extended European Search Report dated Jul. 20, 2015 for European Patent Application No. 12833285.5. |
Extended European Search Report dated Jul. 23, 2015 for European Patent Application No. 12804558.0. |
Hagiwara et al., Model-Based Mask Data Preparation (MB-MDP) for ArF and EUV Mask Process Correction, Photomask and Next-Generation Lithography Mask Technology XVIII, SPIE, vol. 8081, No. 1, Apr. 2011, pp. 1-8. |
Office Action dated Aug. 18, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2014-248818. |
Office Action dated Aug. 20, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,475. |
Office Action dated Jul. 27, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/331,008. |
Office Action dated Oct. 6, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-556643. |
Office Action dated Sep. 11, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/739,989. |
Office Action dated Sep. 11, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/177,688. |
Office Action dated Sep. 15, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2014-245829. |
Office Action dated Sep. 21, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/177,679. |
Office Action dated Sep. 29, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/715,136. |
Pierrat et al, Mask Data Correction Methodology in the Context of Model-Based Fracturing and Advanced Mask Models, Optical Microlithography XXIV, SPIE, vol. 7973, No. 1, Mar. 2011, pp. 1-11. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150020037 A1 | Jan 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61172659 | Apr 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13970465 | Aug 2013 | US |
Child | 14479520 | US | |
Parent | 13650618 | Oct 2012 | US |
Child | 13970465 | US | |
Parent | 13316564 | Dec 2011 | US |
Child | 13650618 | US | |
Parent | 13087334 | Apr 2011 | US |
Child | 13316564 | US | |
Parent | 12987994 | Jan 2011 | US |
Child | 13087334 | US | |
Parent | 12473265 | May 2009 | US |
Child | 12987994 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12202366 | Sep 2008 | US |
Child | 12473265 | US |