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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 13 May 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, line 6, filed 11 October 2024, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-3, 6, and 9-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wada (Japanese Patent Publication no. JP 2005-275153 A), hereinafter Wada; Claims 1-5 and 9-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ichikawa et al. (Japanese Patent Publication no. JP 2011-116742 A), hereinafter Ichikawa; Claims 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wada (Japanese Patent Publication no. JP 2005-275153 A), hereinafter Wada; Claims 4-5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichikawa et al. (Japanese Patent Publication no. JP 2011-116742 A), hereinafter Ichikawa; have been fully considered and, in light of the amendments made are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Takahashi et al. (United States Patent Publication no. US 2006/0068320 A1), hereinafter Takahashi.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
4. A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
5. Claims 1-3, 6-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (United States Patent Publication no. US 2006/0068320 A1), hereinafter Takahashi.
6. Regarding Claims 1-3, 6-9, and 13, Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0167-0360]) an acid-decomposable resin. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically anions (I-27, I-28, I-37, and I-53) and cations (IV-2 to IV-5)) a specific compound, wherein the specific compound has two or more cationic moieties and the same number of anionic moieties as that of the cationic moieties. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically cations (IV-2 to IV-5)) at least one of the cationic moieties is a group represented by General Formula (I) of the present application. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically anions (I-27, I-28, I-37, and I-53)) the specific compound is anionic moiety which is represented by General Formulae (B-6), (B-7), and (B-9) of the present application. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically anions (I-27, I-28, I-37, and I-53)) the specific compound has at least two kinds of groups represented by General Formulae (B-6), (B-7), and (B-9). Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically cations (IV-2 to IV-5)) specific compound has one or more organic cations of an organic cation represented by General Formulae (II), (III), and (IV) of the present application. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically cations (IV-2 to IV-5)) in General Formula (II) of the present application at least two of Ar1, Ar2, or Ar3 each represent an aromatic hydrocarbon ring group having a substituent. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically cation (IV-4)) the cationic moiety has at least one acid group. Takahashi teaches (Paragraph [0164]) a content of the specific compound being 16.0% to 20.0% by mass with respect to a total solid content of the actinic ray-sensitive or radiation-sensitive resin composition. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically cation (IV-5)) the specific compound has one or more organic cations represented by General Formula (III) of the present application, therein Wada teaches a triphenylsulfonium cation which is substituted, wherein two or three of the phenyl groups being substituted with a halogen, such as fluorine. Takahashi teaches (Paragraph [0423]) a resist film formed of the actinic ray-sensitive or radiation-sensitive resin composition. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0142-0160]) the specific compound has the organic cation represented by General Formula (II) of the present application.
7. Regarding Claims 10-11, Takahashi teaches (Paragraph [0423]) a step of forming a resist film on a substrate using the actinic ray-sensitive or radiation-sensitive resin composition. Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0424-0425]) a step of exposing the resist film. Takahashi teaches (Paragraph [0426]) a step of developing the exposed resist film using a developer to form a pattern.
8. A person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that each element of the composition claimed herein, although not necessarily in a single experimental example, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the teaching of Takahashi being the lack of an actual combination of said composition elements in a single experimental example. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the composition elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to compose the composition taught in the detailed description of Takahashi.
9. Claims 4-5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (United States Patent Publication no. US 2006/0068320 A1), hereinafter Takahashi, in view of Namai et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication no. WO 2015/025859 A1), hereinafter Namai.
10. Regarding Claims 4-5 and 12, Takahashi teaches all limitations of Claims 1-2 above. Furthermore, Takahashi teaches (Paragraphs [0066-0166], therein specifically anions (I-27, I-28, I-37, and I-53)) the specific compound is anionic moiety which is represented by General Formula (AX-1) of the present application. However, Takahashi fails to explicitly teach the specific compound has an anionic moiety AB- which is represented by any of General Formulae (BX-1), (BX-2), and (BX-4) of the present application.
11. Namai teaches (Paragraphs [0140-0205]) an anionic moiety which is represented by any of General Formulae (BX-1), (BX-2), and (BX-4) of the present application. Namai teaches (Paragraphs [0142-0143]) an anionic moiety which is represented by any of General Formulae (BX-1), (BX-2), and (BX-4) of the present application has acid capture capabilities.
12. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi to incorporate the teachings of Namai wherein an anionic moiety which is represented by any of General Formulae (BX-1), (BX-2), and (BX-4) of the present application. Doing so would result in the specific compound having acid capture capabilities, as recognized by Namai. Furthermore, doing so would involve the simple substitution of an anionic moiety taught by Takahashi with an anionic moiety taught by Namai. Said modification would be a simple substitution of one known element, an anionic moiety taught by Takahashi, with an anionic moiety which is represented by any of General Formulae (BX-1), (BX-2), and (BX-4) of the present application, taught by Namai. Said modification would be both functional and predictable.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to RICHARD D CHAMPION at telephone number (571) 272-0750. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Mon-Fri EST.
14. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MARK F 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.
15. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
16. 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.
/R.D.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/MARK F. HUFF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1737