DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-8 and 11-14 are pending. Claim 1 has been amended and claims 9 and 10 were previously canceled.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 and 11-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 11-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,820,736. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant claims and patented claims are directed to resist compositions comprising sulfonium salts having phenyl-substituted phenyl via a linking group. Formula (I) of ‘736 when defined as: R1, R2 and R3 each independently represent *—O—R10, * —O—CO—O—R10 or *—O-L10-CO—O—R10, and * represents a bonding site to the benzene ring, L10 represents an alkanediyl group having 1 to 6 carbon atoms, R10 represents an acid-labile group, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 and R9 each independently represent a halogen atom, a haloalkyl group having 1 to 12 carbon atoms or a hydrocarbon group having 1 to 18 carbon atoms, the hydrocarbon group may have a substituent, and —CH2— included in the haloalkyl group and the hydrocarbon group may be replaced by —O—, —S—, —CO— or —SO2—, A1, A2 and A3 each independently represent a hydrocarbon group having 2 to 20 carbon atoms, the hydrocarbon group may have a substituent, and —CH2— included in the hydrocarbon group is replaced by —O— or —S—, m1 represents an integer of 1 to 5, m2 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m3 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m4 represents an integer of 0 to 4, m5 represents an integer of 0 to 4, m6 represents an integer of 0 to 4, m7 represents an integer of 0 to 4, m8 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m9 represents an integer of 0 to 5, in which 1≤m1+m7≤5, 0≤m2+m8≤5, 0≤m3+m9≤5, and AI- is a sulfonic acid anion represented by formula (I-A) encompasses formula (I) of instant claim 1 when R4 is an iodine atom, R5, R6, R7, R8 and R9 each independently represent an alkyl hydrocarbon group having 1 to 18 carbon atoms, the hydrocarbon group may have a substituent, and —CH2— included in the haloalkyl group and the hydrocarbon group may be replaced by —O— or —CO—, A1, A2, and A3 represent *-X01-L01-, *-X02-L02-, and *-X03-L03- respectively when X01, X02, and X03 are -O- or -S- and L01, L02, and L03 are chain hydrocarbon groups having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, m1 represents an integer of 1 to 5, m2 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m3 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m4 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m5 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m6 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m7 represents an integer of 0 to 4, m8 represents an integer of 0 to 5, m9 represents an integer of 0 to 5, in which 1≤m1+m7≤5, 0≤m2+m8≤5, 0≤m3+m9≤5, and AI− is a sulfonic acid anion represented by formula (I-A). Claims 12-15 of ‘736 encompass instant claims 11-14 respectively.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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:
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatakeyama et laal. (U.S. 2020/0089111).
Hatakeyama et al. teaches a resist composition comprising a base polymer and an acid generator containing a sulfonium salt having an iodized benzene ring [abstract] (claim 1) where the resist composition is of positive tone, the resist composition comprises a base polymer comprising recurring units containing an acid labile group, preferably recurring units having the formula (a1) or recurring units having the formula (a2) [0066] (claim 1) and a specific example of the base polymer includes the following polymer 1 used in the examples:
PNG
media_image1.png
198
379
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[0138] which is equivalent to a resin having an acid-labile group of instant claim 1 including a structural unit represented by formula (a1-2) of instant claim 11 when Ra5 is an alkyl group having 1 carbon atom, La2 is -O-, Ra7 is an alkyl group having 1 carbon atom, n1’ is 0, and n1 is 0; and a structural unit represented by formula (a2-A) of instant claim 12 when Ra50 is a hydrogen atom, Aa50 is a single bond, and mb is 0 respectively. Hatakeyama et al. also teaches wherein the sulfonium salt in the resist composition has the following formula (1):
PNG
media_image2.png
131
407
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[0013] wherein r is an integer of 1 to 3, R5 is a C1-C20 monovalent hydrocarbon group which may contain a heteroatom, in case of r=1, two R5 may be the same or different and may bond together to form a ring with the sulfur atom to which they are attached, q is an integer or 0 to 4, R4 can be fluorine, iodine, or a C1-4 monovalent hydrocarbon group, p can be 0, L2 and L3 can be single bonds, R1 can be a single bond, R2 can be a C1 divalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group, L1 can be an ether bond, n is an integer of 0 to 3, m is an integer of 1 to 5, and X- is a non-nucleophilic counter ion [0013] which is typically a fluorinated sulfonate, fluorinated imide or fluorinated methide ion [0014], examples include fluoroalkylsulfonate ions such nonafluorobutanesulfonate [0058-0060] which is equivalent to a salt represented by formula (I) of instant claims 1-6 when m1 is 1, m2 and m3 are 0 or 1, A1, A2, and A3 are *-L01-X01-, *-L02-X02-, and *-L03-X02- respectively where L01 to L03 are (chain) alkanediyl groups having 1 carbon atom and X01 to X03 are -O-, m4, m5, and m6 are 1 to 5 where R4, R5, and R6 are iodine atoms, m7, m8, and m9 are 0 to 4 where R7, R8, and R9 are fluorine atoms, iodine atoms, or alkyl groups having 1 to 4 carbon atoms, and AI- is a sulfonic acid anion of instant claim 7, specifically a sulfonic acid anion represented by formula (I-A) of instant claim 8 when Q1 and Q2 are fluorine atoms, L1 is a saturated hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms in which all the hydrogen atoms are substituted with fluorine atoms, and Y1 is a methyl group having substituents (fluorine atoms). Hatakeyama et al. further teaches examples of the cation in the sulfonium salt having formula (1) are given [below], but not limited thereto [0063] and examples of the invention are given [below] by way of illustration and not by way of limitation [0135], although some preferred embodiments have been described, many modifications and variations may be made thereto in light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described without departing from the scope of the appended claims [0152]. Hatakeyama et al. also teaches an object of the invention is to provide a resist composition which achieves a high sensitivity, minimal LWR and improved CDU independent of whether it is of positive or negative tone, and a pattern forming process using the resist composition [0011].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make additional compositions comprising additional salts such as the above defined compounds and arrive at the instant claims through routine experimentation of substituting equally suitable components for the sought invention in order to achieve high sensitivity, minimal LWR, and improved CDU.
With regard to claim 13, Hatakeyama et al. teaches in the resist composition, a quencher may be blended [0102], onium salts such as sulfonium salts, iodonium salts and ammonium salts of sulfonic acids which are not fluorinated at α-position as described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,795,942 (JP-A 2008-158339) and similar onium salts of carboxylic acid may also be used as the quencher. While an α-fluorinated sulfonic acid, imide acid, and methide acid are necessary to deprotect the acid labile group of carboxylic acid ester, an α-non-fluorinated sulfonic acid or carboxylic acid is released by salt exchange with an α-non-fluorinated onium salt. An α-non-fluorinated sulfonic acid and a carboxylic acid function as a quencher because they do not induce deprotection reaction [0103] and examples of the quencher include a compound (onium salt of α-non-fluorinated sulfonic acid) having the formula (2) and a compound (onium salt of carboxylic acid) having the formula (3) [0104] wherein formula (3) is the following:
PNG
media_image3.png
35
434
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[0104] where R102 can be an adamantyl group substituted with a carbonyl group [0105-0106] which is equivalent to a salt generating an acid having an acidity lower than that of an acid generated from the acid generator of instant claim 13. Hatakeyama et al. also teaches examples of the invention are given below by way of illustration and not by way of limitation [0135], although some preferred embodiments have been described, many modifications and variations may be made thereto in light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described without departing from the scope of the appended claims [0152], and an object of the invention is to provide a resist composition which achieves a high sensitivity, minimal LWR and improved CDU independent of whether it is of positive or negative tone, and a pattern forming process using the resist composition [0011]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make additional compositions comprising the above compounds and arrive at the instant claims through routine experimentation of combining equally suitable components for the sought invention in order to achieve high sensitivity, minimal LWR, and improved CDU.
With regard to claim 14, Hatakeyama et al. teaches pattern formation using the resist composition may be performed by well-known lithography processes. The process generally involves coating, prebaking, exposure, and development. If necessary, any additional steps may be added [0126], e.g. after the exposure, the resist film may be baked (PEB) on a hotplate at 60 to 150° C for 10 seconds to 30 minutes, preferably at 80 to 120° C for 30 seconds to 20 minutes [0129].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 18, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues regarding the 103 rejection over Hatakeyama, the evidence provided in the specification was presented to show the unexpected results due to the specified A1 in formula (I). Therefore, the comparison should be made between the compounds having the same structures except for A1 and is improper to compare the results obtained from compounds having additional distinguishing features. For example, Example 24 may be compared to Comparative Example 6 and Example 40 may be compared to Comparative Example 12. Example 24 provided LER of 3.78 while Comparative Example 6 provided LER of 3.85; Example 40 provided LER of 3.72 while Comparative Example 12 provided LER of 3.81. Applicant confirmed that in the technical field of fine processing of semiconductors, the difference in LER values is deemed significant.
The Examiner is not persuaded by the results. The difference in LER values for the first comparison (Ex 24 vs Comp Ex 6) is only a 1.8% difference while the difference between the second comparison (Ex 40 vs Comp Ex 12) is 2.4%. These small differences would be expected for compounds that are structurally similar. This is made evident by Applicants other exemplary compounds and their subsequent LER values. Thus, the instant claims are still obvious over the entire disclosure of Hatakeyama such that one of ordinary skill in the art would easily arrive at the instant claims based on routine experimentation of substituting equally suitable linking groups in order to achieve optimum resist properties desired therein.
Applicant also argues claim 1 has been amended such that “at least one of R4 represents an iodine atom”.
The Examiner considers the examples to be commensurate in scope with currently amended claim 1.
Applicant requests the double patenting rejection over U.S. Patent No. 11,820,736 be held in abeyance.
The double patenting rejection is maintained for reasons of record.
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 ANNA E MALLOY whose telephone number is (571)270-5849. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 EST M-F.
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.
/Anna Malloy/Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/MARK F. HUFF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights