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 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 or photomask manufactured from a reticle is used to transfer patterns to a substrate such as a semiconductor or silicon wafer to create the integrated circuit (I.C.). Other substrates could include flat panel displays, holographic masks or even other reticles. While conventional optical lithography uses a light source having a wavelength of 193 nm, extreme ultraviolet (EUV) or X-ray lithography are also considered types of optical lithography in this application. 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, holograms, or magnetic recording heads. Conventional optical lithography writing machines typically reduce the photomask pattern by a factor of four during the optical lithographic process. Therefore, patterns formed on the reticle or mask must be four times larger than the size of the desired pattern on the substrate or wafer.
In the production or manufacturing of semiconductor devices, such as integrated circuits, non-optical methods may be used to transfer a pattern on a lithographic mask to a substrate such as a silicon wafer. Nanoimprint lithography (NIL) is an example of a non-optical lithography process. In nanoimprint lithography, a lithographic mask pattern is transferred to a surface through contact of the lithography mask with the surface.
Two common types of charged particle beam lithography are variable shaped beam (VSB) and character projection (CP). These are both sub-categories of shaped beam charged particle beam lithography, in which a precise electron beam is shaped and steered so as to expose a resist-coated surface, such as the surface of a wafer or the surface of a reticle. In VSB, 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 (i.e. of “manhattan” orientation), and 45 degree right triangles (i.e. triangles with their three internal angles being 45 degrees, 45 degrees, and 90 degrees) of certain minimum and maximum sizes. At predetermined 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. In character projection (CP), there is a stencil in the system that has in it a variety of apertures or characters which may be complex shapes such as rectilinear, arbitrary-angled linear, circular, nearly circular, annular, nearly annular, oval, nearly oval, partially circular, partially nearly circular, partially annular, partially nearly annular, partially nearly oval, or arbitrary curvilinear shapes, and which may be a connected set of complex shapes or a group of disjointed sets of a connected set of complex shapes. An electron beam can be shot through a character on the stencil to efficiently produce more complex patterns on the reticle. In theory, such a system can be faster than a VSB system because it can shoot more complex shapes with each time-consuming shot. Thus, an E-shaped pattern shot with a VSB system takes four shots, but the same E-shaped pattern can be shot with one shot with a character projection system. Note that VSB systems can be thought of as a special (simple) case of character projection, where the characters are just simple characters, usually rectangles or 45-45-90 degree triangles. It is also possible to partially expose a character. This can be done by, for instance, blocking part of the particle beam. For example, the E-shaped pattern described above can be partially exposed as an F-shaped pattern or an I-shaped pattern, where different parts of the beam are cut off by an aperture. This is the same mechanism as how various sized rectangles can be shot using VSB. In this disclosure, partial projection is used to mean both character projection and VSB projection.
As indicated, in 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 pre-determined 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 dimension of the circuit pattern or physical design approaches the resolution limit of the optical exposure tool used in conventional optical lithography. As the critical dimensions of the circuit pattern become smaller and approach the resolution value of the exposure tool, the accurate transcription of the physical design to 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 physical design 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 may add sub-resolution lithographic features to mask patterns to reduce differences between the original physical design pattern, that is, the design, and the final transferred circuit pattern on the substrate. The sub-resolution lithographic features interact with the original patterns in the physical design 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 an interior or exterior corner of a pattern to sharpen the corner in the final transferred image. It is often the case that the precision demanded of the surface manufacturing process for SRAFs is less than the precision demanded for patterns that are intended to print on the substrate, often referred to as main features. Serifs are a part of a main feature. 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. 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 feature 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 designed 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 designed 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 designed 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. OPC shapes such as sub-resolution assist features are subject to various design rules, such as a rule based on the size of the smallest feature that can be transferred to the wafer using optical lithography. Other design rules may come from the mask manufacturing process or, if a character projection charged particle beam writing system is used to form the pattern on a reticle, from the stencil manufacturing process. It should also be noted that the accuracy requirement of the SRAF features on the mask may be lower than the accuracy requirements for the designed features on the mask. As process nodes continue to shrink, the size of the smallest SRAFs on a photomask also shrinks. For example, at the 20 nm logic process node, 40 nm to 60 nm SRAFs are needed on the mask for the highest precision layers.
In EUV lithography, OPC features are generally not required. Therefore, the complexity of the pattern to be manufactured on the reticle is less than with conventional 193 nm wavelength optical lithography, and shot count reduction is correspondingly less important. In EUV, however, mask accuracy requirements are very high because the patterns on the mask, which are typically 4× the size of the patterns on the wafer, are sufficiently small that they are challenging to form precisely using charged particle beam technology such as electron beam.
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), where, as described above, doses of electrons with simple shapes such as manhattan rectangles and 45-degree right triangles expose a resist-coated reticle surface. In conventional mask writing, 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. Similarly, the set of shots is designed so as to completely cover the pattern area that is to be formed on the reticle. U.S. Pat. No. 7,754,401, owned by the assignee of the present patent application and incorporated by reference for all purposes, discloses a method of mask writing in which intentional shot overlap for writing patterns is used. When overlapping shots are used, charged particle beam simulation can be used to determine the pattern that the resist on the reticle will register. Use of overlapping shots may allow patterns to be written with reduced shot count. U.S. Pat. No. 7,754,401 also discloses use of dose modulation, where the assigned dosages of shots vary with respect to the dosages of other shots. The term model-based fracturing is used to describe the process of determining shots using the techniques of U.S. Pat. No. 7,754,401.
Reticle writing for the most advanced technology nodes typically involves multiple passes of charged particle beam writing, a process called multi-pass exposure, whereby the given shape on the reticle is written and overwritten. Typically, two to four passes are used to write a reticle to average out precision errors in the charged particle beam writer, allowing the creation of more accurate photomasks. Also typically, the list of shots, including the dosages, is the same for every pass. In one variation of multi-pass exposure, the lists of shots may vary among exposure passes, but the union of the shots in any exposure pass covers the same area. Multi-pass writing can reduce over-heating of the resist coating the surface. Multi-pass writing also averages out random errors of the charged particle beam writer. Multi-pass writing using different shot lists for different exposure passes can also reduce the effects of certain systemic errors in the writing process.
Some integrated circuits have physical architectures which include a series of parallel diagonal patterns. The width of these patterns, and the width of the space between adjacent patterns, called the line-space pitch, may be an important element in determining the size and/or performance of the final integrated circuit. For other integrated circuits, where a set of multiple reticles is used to form a single layer of the integrated circuit, one or more reticles in the set may include a series of parallel diagonal patterns, even if the complete pattern exposed on the substrate or wafer using the set of multiple reticles does not contain parallel diagonal patterns. Whether the diagonal patterns exist on both a reticle and the substrate, or just on one or more reticles but not on the substrate, these diagonal patterns are conventionally formed on reticles with series of same-sized constant-pitch non-overlapping VSB shots.
A method and system for fracturing or mask data preparation or proximity effect correction is disclosed in which a series of charged particle beam shots is determined, where the series of shots is capable of forming a continuous non-manhattan track on a surface, such that the non-manhattan track has a line width roughness (LWR) which nearly equals a target LWR. A method and system for fracturing or mask data preparation or proximity effect correction is also disclosed in which at least two series of shots are determined, where each series of shots is capable of forming a continuous non-manhattan track on a surface, and where the space between tracks has space width roughness (SWR) which nearly equals a target SWR.
The improvements and advantages of the present disclosure can be accomplished by forming continuous track-type patterns generating and using charged particle beam shots, including variable shaped beam (VSB) and circular character projection (CP) shots, and by using simulation-based techniques to determine shot placement, so as to control line width roughness (LWR) and space width roughness (SWR).
Referring now to the drawings, wherein like numbers refer to like items,
The minimum size pattern that can be projected with reasonable accuracy onto a surface 12 is limited by a variety of short-range physical effects associated with the electron beam writer system 10 and with the surface 12, which normally comprises a resist coating on the substrate 32. These effects include forward scattering, Coulomb effect, and resist diffusion. Beam blur, also called βf, is a term used to include all of these short-range effects. The most modern electron beam writer systems can achieve an effective beam blur radius or βf in the range of 20 nm to 30 nm. Forward scattering may constitute one quarter to one half of the total beam blur. Modern electron beam writer systems contain numerous mechanisms to reduce each of the constituent pieces of beam blur to a minimum. Since some components of beam blur are a function of the calibration level of a particle beam writer, the βf of two particle beam writers of the same design may differ. The diffusion characteristics of resists may also vary. Variation of βf based on shot size or shot dose can be simulated and systemically accounted for. But there are other effects that cannot or are not accounted for, and they appear as random variation.
The shot dosage of a charged particle beam writer such as an electron beam writer system is a function of the intensity of the beam source 14 and the exposure time for each shot. Typically the beam intensity remains fixed, and the exposure time is varied to obtain variable shot dosages. The exposure time may be varied to compensate for various long-range effects such as back scatter and fogging in a process called proximity effect correction (PEC). Electron beam writer systems usually allow setting an overall dosage, called a base dosage, which affects all shots in an exposure pass. Some electron beam writer systems perform dosage compensation calculations within the electron beam writer system itself, and do not allow the dosage of each shot to be assigned individually as part of the input shot list, the input shots therefore having unassigned shot dosages. In such electron beam writer systems all shots have the base dosage, before PEC. Other electron beam writer systems do allow dosage assignment on a shot-by-shot basis. In electron beam writer systems that allow shot-by-shot dosage assignment, the number of available dosage levels may be 64 to 4096 or more, or there may be a relatively few available dosage levels, such as 3 to 8 levels. Some embodiments of the current invention are targeted for use with charged particle beam writing systems which allow assignment of one of a relatively few dosage levels.
Conventionally, shots are designed so as to completely cover an input pattern with rectangular shots, while avoiding shot overlap wherever possible. Also, all shots are designed to have a normal dosage, which is a dosage at which a relatively large rectangular shot, in the absence of long-range effects, will produce a pattern on the surface which is the same size as is the shot size. Some electron beam writer systems enforce this methodology by not allowing shots to overlap within an exposure pass.
The diagonal pattern of
Use of overlapping shots complicates the calculation of the pattern that will be produced on a resist-coated reticle. Charged particle beam simulation may be used to calculate the reticle pattern. Charged particle beam simulation may involve simulation of various effects, including forward scattering, backward scattering, resist diffusion, Coulomb effect, etching, fogging, loading and resist charging.
When overlapping VSB shots are used, LWR may be varied by adjusting overlap between adjacent shots. Such adjustment may allow formation of a track with an LWR which nearly equals a target LWR. In practice, a tolerance of 0.1 nm to 4 nm may be considered nearly equal. The most suitable LWR may be pre-determined, or may be determined through optical lithography simulation of the pattern that will be produced on a substrate such as a wafer using a photomask generated from a reticle. A change of shot overlap will change both LER and LWR. Change of shot dimensions, in both the x-direction and the y-direction, as well as shot overlap may be used to achieve a desired LER and LWR combination, while producing a minimum or near-minimum shot count. In this disclosure, near-minimum and minimum are used interchangeably, since calculating a true-minimum shot count may not be computationally expedient.
When two tracks are designed to be adjacent to each other—that is, separated by a space but with no other tracks between them—a minimum spacing must be maintained. This waviness is called space width roughness, or SWR.
Some embodiments of the current invention may use complex character projection (CP) characters to form tracks. In particular, circular CP characters can be used. Charged particle beam simulation may be used to calculate LWR and SWR, using the same techniques set forth in the above examples.
The calculations described or referred to in this invention may be accomplished in various ways. Generally, calculations may be accomplished by in-process, pre-process or post-process methods. In-process calculation involves performing a calculation at the time when its results are needed. Pre-process calculation involves pre-calculating and then storing results for later retrieval during a subsequent processing step, and may improve processing performance, particularly for calculations that may be repeated many times. Calculations may also be deferred from a processing step and then done in a later post-processing step. An example of pre-process calculation is pre-calculating a pattern formed by two overlapping shots in the vicinity of the shot overlap. Another example of pre-process calculation is a shot group, which is a pre-calculation of dosage pattern information for one or more shots associated with a given input pattern or set of input pattern characteristics. The shot group and the associated input pattern may be saved in a library of pre-calculated shot groups, so that the set of shots comprising the shot group can be quickly generated for additional instances of the input pattern, without pattern re-calculation. In some embodiments, the pre-calculation may comprise simulation of the dosage pattern that the shot group will produce on a resist-coated surface. In other embodiments, the shot group may be determined without simulation, such as by using correct-by-construction techniques. In some embodiments, the pre-calculated shot groups may be stored in the shot group library in the form of a list of shots. In other embodiments, the pre-calculated shot groups may be stored in the form of computer code that can generate shots for a specific type or types of input patterns. In yet other embodiments, a plurality of pre-calculated shot groups may be stored in the form of a table, where entries in the table correspond to various input patterns or input pattern characteristics such as pattern width, and where each table entry provides either a list of shots in the shot group, or information for how to generate the appropriate set of shots. Additionally, different shot groups may be stored in different forms in the shot group library. In some embodiments, the dosage pattern which a given shot group can produce may also be stored in the shot group library. In one embodiment, the dosage pattern may be stored as a two-dimensional (X and Y) dosage map called a glyph.
Mask process correction (MPC) 758 may optionally be performed on the mask design 756. MPC modifies the pattern to be written to the mask so as to compensate for non-linear effects, such as effects associated with patterns smaller than about 100 nm in conventional optical lithographic masks. MPC may also be used to compensate for non-linear effects affecting EUV masks. If MPC 758 is performed, its output becomes the input for mask data preparation (MDP) step 760. In a step 760, a mask data preparation operation which may include a fracturing operation, a shot placement operation, a dose assignment operation, or a shot sequence optimization may take place. MDP may use as input the mask design 756 or the results of MPC 758. In some embodiments of the present invention, MPC may be performed as part of a fracturing or other MDP operation. Other corrections may also be performed as part of fracturing or other MDP operation, the possible corrections including: forward scattering, resist diffusion, Coulomb effect, etching, backward scattering, fogging, loading, resist charging, and EUV midrange scattering. The result of MDP step 760 is a shot list 762, either for one or for multiple exposure passes in mask writing step 768. Either the OPC step 754 or the MDP step 760, or a separate program 786 can include pre-calculating one or more shot groups that may be used for a given input pattern, and storing this information in a shot group library 788. Combining OPC and any or all of the various operations of mask data preparation in one step is contemplated in this disclosure. Mask data preparation step 760 may comprise generating VSB shots for patterns in the mask design 756 which are non-manhattan tracks, where the tracks may be diagonal or curvilinear, and of constant or variable width. Mask data preparation step 760 may also comprise a pattern matching operation to match pre-calculated shot groups to create a mask that matches closely to the mask design.
In step 764 proximity effect correction (PEC) refinement may be performed on shot list 762 to create a final shot list 766 with adjusted dosages. The final shot list 766 is used to generate a surface in a mask writing step 768, which uses a charged particle beam writer such as an electron beam writer system. In some embodiments, PEC refinement 764 may be performed by the charged particle beam writer. Mask writing step 768 may use a stencil containing both VSB apertures and a plurality of complex characters, or may use a stencil comprising only VSB apertures. Mask writing step 768 may comprise a single exposure pass or multiple exposure passes. The electron beam writer system projects a beam of electrons through the stencil onto a surface to form a mask image comprising patterns on the surface as shown in a step 770. The completed surface may then be used in an optical lithography machine, which is shown in a step 772. Finally, in a step 774, a substrate such as a silicon wafer is produced. A shot group pre-calculation step 786 provides information to the shot group library 788. Also, the shot group pre-calculation step 786 may use as input the physical design 752 or the mask design 756, and may pre-calculate one or more shot groups, which are stored in a shot group library 788.
The fracturing, mask data preparation, proximity effect correction and shot group creation flows described in this disclosure may be implemented using general-purpose computers with appropriate computer software as computation devices. 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. In one embodiment, the special-purpose hardware device may be a graphics processing unit (GPU). In another embodiment, the optimization and simulation processes described in this disclosure may include iterative processes of revising and recalculating possible solutions, so as to minimize either the total number of shots, or the total charged particle beam writing time, or some other parameter. In yet another embodiment, an initial set of shots may be determined in a correct-by-construction method, so that no shot modifications are required.
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 methods for fracturing, mask data preparation, proximity effect correction and optical proximity correction 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. Steps can be added to, taken from or modified from the steps in this specification without deviating from the scope of the invention. In general, any flowcharts presented are only intended to indicate one possible sequence of basic operations to achieve a function, and many variations are possible. 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 a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/429,357, entitled “Method and System for Forming Non-Manhattan Patterns Using Variable Shaped Beam Lithography”, filed Mar. 24, 2012 and published as U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0278770; which claims priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/479,372, filed Apr. 26, 2011, entitled “Method And System For Forming A Pattern Using Overlapping Shots With 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 |
4818885 | Davis et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
5173582 | Sakamoto et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5334282 | Nakayama et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5723237 | Kobayashi et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5825039 | Hartley | Oct 1998 | A |
5856677 | Okino | Jan 1999 | A |
5885748 | Ohnuma | Mar 1999 | 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 |
6557162 | Pierrat | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6610989 | Takahashi | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6627366 | Yang | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6891175 | Hiura | May 2005 | B2 |
7150949 | Askebjer et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7269819 | Hoshino | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7449700 | Inanami | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7536664 | Cohn et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7592611 | Kasahara et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7754401 | Fujimura et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7759027 | Fujimura et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7842936 | Kruit et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
8017286 | Fujimura et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8039176 | Fujimura et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8137871 | Zable et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8473875 | Fujimura et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8501374 | Fujimura et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
20020005494 | Kamijo et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020020824 | Itoh | Feb 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 |
20050053850 | Askebjer et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050221204 | Kimura | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060085773 | Zhang | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060218520 | Pierrat et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070114463 | Nakasugi et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070196768 | Ogino | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070280526 | Malik et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080054196 | Hiroshima | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080116398 | Hara et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20090200495 | Platzgummer | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090307649 | Pramanik et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090325085 | Yoshida et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100030545 | Uno et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100055586 | 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 |
20100264335 | Hoyle et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100315611 | Kato | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100325595 | Song et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110033788 | Kato | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110037988 | Brill | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110053056 | Fujimura et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110089344 | Fujimura et al. | Apr 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 |
20120094219 | Fujimura et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120096412 | Fujimura et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120149133 | Parrish et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120151428 | Tanaka et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120217421 | Fujimura et al. | Aug 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 |
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 |
04196516 | Jul 1992 | JP |
4196516 | Jul 1992 | JP |
H04196516 | Jul 1992 | JP |
05036595 | Feb 1993 | JP |
H0536595 | Feb 1993 | JP |
H05036595 | Feb 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 |
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 |
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 |
2002075830 | Mar 2002 | JP |
2002110508 | Apr 2002 | JP |
2002202590 | Jul 2002 | JP |
2002217092 | Aug 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 |
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 |
2006108447 | Apr 2006 | JP |
2006222230 | Aug 2006 | JP |
2006294794 | Oct 2006 | JP |
2007041090 | Feb 2007 | JP |
2007103923 | Apr 2007 | JP |
2007242710 | Sep 2007 | JP |
2007305880 | Nov 2007 | JP |
2008066441 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2008096486 | Apr 2008 | JP |
2009147254 | Jul 2009 | JP |
2011040716 | Feb 2011 | JP |
495834 | Jul 2002 | TW |
I222100 | Oct 2004 | TW |
I233149 | May 2005 | TW |
200604763 | Feb 2006 | TW |
200700932 | Jan 2007 | TW |
03036386 | May 2003 | WO |
2008064155 | May 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Chinese Office Action dated Sep. 11, 2013 for Chinese Application No. 200980134188.6. |
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 Fees dated Aug. 23, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/723,181. |
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. 10, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/329,314. |
Office Action dated Sep. 24, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/329,315. |
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. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Dec. 26, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,472. |
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 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. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Oct. 29, 2012 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2012/030487. |
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 Jul. 23, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/970,465. |
Office Action dated Aug. 5, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-525091. |
Office Action dated Jul. 15, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,270. |
Office Action dated Jul. 8, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2009-200191. |
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. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Oct. 10, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/801,554. |
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. |
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. |
Office Action dated Apr. 15, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-525072. |
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 May 13, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-183857. |
Office Action dated May 27, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-535223. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Mar. 20, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/970,465. |
Office Action dated Apr. 3, 2014 for Chinese patent application No. 200980134188.6. |
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 5, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,475. |
Search Report dated Apr. 9, 2014 for Taiwanese Application No. 98128358. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Feb. 9, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,270. |
Notice of Allowance and Fees dated Jan. 21, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/257,874. |
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. |
Office Action dated Feb. 6, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/862,475. |
Office Action dated Jan. 6, 2015 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2010-183857. |
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. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130306884 A1 | Nov 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61479372 | Apr 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13429357 | Mar 2012 | US |
Child | 13948725 | US |