Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/302,880

PHOTORESIST MATERIALS AND ASSOCIATED METHODS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
May 14, 2021
Examiner
LEE, ALEXANDER N
Art Unit
1737
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
8 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
9-10
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
72 granted / 98 resolved
+8.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
132
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
55.1%
+15.1% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 98 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Amendment to the claims was submitted with corrections on 12/05/2025, the 112(d) rejection is withdrawn. Claim Status Claims 1-2, 5, 9-12, 21-23, 26-30, and 35-39 are under consideration. Claims 3-4, 6-8, 13-20, 24-25, and 31-34 are canceled. Claim Objections Claims 1-3, 10-13, 15-16, 21, 27, 29-37 are objected to because of the following informalities: Each instance of “carboxylic ligand” should be “carboxylate ligand”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-2, 5, 9-12, 21-23, 26-30, and 35-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claims 1-2, 5, 9-12, 21-23, 26-30, and 35-39, The independent claims 1, 21, and 27 have been amended to disclose the first substituent of the first carboxylic acid is directly bonded to a first tin atom of the plurality of tin clusters. However, since the instant first substituent is a substituent of a first carboxylic acid, the substituent would necessarily be indirectly bonded through the carboxylate moiety, as disclosed by the instant specification at [0039-0040, figures 3A and 3B], where a substituent of a carboxylic acid is represented by R1 or R2 in figure 3A, or as R2 in figure 3B. As seen in figures 3A and 3B, the substituent of a carboxylic acid is indirectly bonded to a tin atom through a carbon and oxygen atom. There is no support in the specification for direct bonding a substituent of a carboxylic acid to a tin atom. PNG media_image1.png 603 848 media_image1.png Greyscale Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments regarding the claim amendments filed 12/05/2025 regarding the 112(a) rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the instant specification discloses the limitation of a first substituent of a first carboxylate ligand directly bonded to a first tin atom, referring to R1 of figure 3B and paragraph [0040]. However, as previously indicated in the office action filed 08/28/2025, each substituent of a carboxylic acid, such as R1 and R2 of figure 3A and R2 in figure 3B, is necessarily indirectly bonded to a tin atom through a carboxylate group. Paragraph [0040] which discloses the R1 group is a substituent of a carboxylic acid refers only to figure 3A, not figure 3B. The Applicant asserts that the examiner agreed during the interview on 11/06/2025 to call the applicant’s representative to resolve any remaining issues if the application is not in condition for allowance. However, no such agreement was made during the interview, as noted in the examiner interview summary filed 11/10/2025. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2261. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5:30 EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Huff can be reached at (571) 272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /A.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1737 /JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 14, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 16, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 19, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 03, 2023
Interview Requested
Feb 22, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 22, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 27, 2023
Response Filed
Jun 27, 2023
Final Rejection — §112
Aug 10, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 10, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 04, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 06, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 14, 2024
Interview Requested
Feb 21, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 21, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 26, 2024
Response Filed
May 29, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Jun 27, 2024
Interview Requested
Jul 09, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 09, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 24, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 30, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 04, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 10, 2025
Interview Requested
Jan 21, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 21, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 03, 2025
Response Filed
May 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jun 09, 2025
Interview Requested
Jun 24, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 24, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 14, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 06, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 05, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596304
Silanol-containing organic-inorganic hybrid coatings for high resolution patterning
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12566383
Non-Destructive Coupon Generation via Direct Write Lithography for Semiconductor Process Development
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12547075
METHOD OF FORMING PHOTORESIST PATTERN
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12535738
PHOTORESIST TOP COATING MATERIAL FOR ETCHING RATE CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12535739
METHOD OF FORMING PHOTORESIST PATTERN
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

9-10
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+5.8%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 98 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month