DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the amendment received September 11, 2025.
The rejection of claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, and 16, 17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as clearly anticipated by MARUYAMA et al (2019/0354013) is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1 cancelling the structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
82
250
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1,4-Bis((vinyloxy) methyl) cyclohexane
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MARUYAMA et al (2019/0354013) and OHSAWA et al (2002/0076643) is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1 canceling the structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
82
250
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1,4-Bis((vinyloxy) methyl) cyclohexane
New ground for rejection is made in view of the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, and 16, 17, and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IMADA et al (2017/0260315) in view of TOIDA et al (202/0409261).
The claimed invention now recites the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
630
646
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
872
644
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
214
668
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
444
652
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
668
624
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
668
662
media_image7.png
Greyscale
IMADA et al discloses a photoresist composition comprising a photoacid, a crosslinking agent and a resin binder, see para. [0188] for a photoresist composition. The working examples lack the claimed crosslinking agent, however para. [0123] list known curing agents which may be contained in the photosensitive composition to include the following:
PNG
media_image8.png
166
360
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The highlighted compound has the following structure meeting the listed crosslinking agents in claim 1:
PNG
media_image9.png
234
1158
media_image9.png
Greyscale
TOIDA et al report a photoresist composition over an underlayer wherein the underlayer description is found in starting in para. [0307] to [0357].
The photoresist composition is reported in para. [0270] for the content of the optically active diazonaphthoquinone compound, and additive agents to include crosslinking agents as seen in para. [0269].
Claim 2 is met by the novolak resin in IMADA et al, para. [0026].
Claim 4 is met by the photoacid generated by exposure in IMADA et al. para. [0128].
Claim 5 is met by the para. [0190] in IMADA et al for a 1100 C prebake.
Claim 6 is met by the presence of the photoacid generated by exposure.
Claim 7 is met by the exposure reported in para. [0191] for g/h/I line exposure.
Claim 8 and 9 is met by para. [0307] of TOIDA et al and para. [0370] to [0371] wherein etching is performed on the underlayer with the resist pattern as a mask.
Claim 16, is met by the disclosure on page 17, para. [0190] in IMADA et al
Claims 17 and 19 are inherently present in IMADA et al upon exposure to UV light and the curing temperature is reported in to the presence of the crosslinkers.
Claim 20 for the
Claim 21 is met by polyhydroxystyrene in para. [0095] of IMADA et al.
Claim 22 is met by the method in para. [0487] for forming a positive resist pattern by development with TMAH in TOIDA et al.
None of the claims above are allowed.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive composition to duplicate the process of forming a pattern as reported in TOIDA et al containing as polyhydroxystyrene with any of the crosslinkers with a vinyl ether functional group as those found in IMADA et al such as a trimethylol trivinyl ether reported in in IMADA et al with the reasonable expectation of forming resist patterns which are rectangular and dimensional stable, with the photoresist being highly sensitive and forming high resolution patterns.
Claims 10-15 are seen allowable over the prior art of record wherein the cited references lack the functional group Z to aldehyde and sulfonic acid in formula (I) of the method.
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 JOHN S CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-1329. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, IFP-Flex.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Huff, can be reached at telephone number 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 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).
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.
/John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
J. Chu
November 24, 2025
Prosecution Insights