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 11/21/2025.
Claim Status
Claims 1-9 are under consideration.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/21/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shirakawa (US20180120706A1, published 2018).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4-9,
Shirakawa teaches a resist underlayer film [abstract] which may be used with EUV exposure [0657, 0810]. Shirakawa teaches their solvent may be an organic solvent [0614].
Shirakawa teaches a resin for their resist underlayer film may be for example ULP-18 (shown below) [0750],
PNG
media_image1.png
333
291
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where the first structure aligns with the instant reactive group in a side chain (comprising a hydroxy reactive group), and the second structure aligns with the instant terminal group structure (where X1 is -O- and R1 is a C6 alkyl group), reading on instant claims 1-2 and 4.
Examiner notes that it would be readily envisioned by a person of ordinary skill in the art that the second repeating unit of ULP-18 of Shirakawa shown above could be at a terminal of the polymer main chain, as any of the three repeating units would be expected to be at a terminal position of the polymer main chain.
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the second repeating unit of ULP-18 of Shirakawa (shown below) could be at a terminal of the polymer main chain, as any of the three repeating units would be expected to be at a terminal position of the polymer main chain, reading on instant claim 1.
Shirakawa teaches a resist underlayer film formed from a resist underlayer film forming composition may contain a resin, a crosslinking agent, and a thermal acid generator (crosslinking catalyst) [0068], reading on instant claims 5-6.
Shirakawa teaches a process for manufacturing a semiconductor (device) [0066] comprising steps of:
forming a resist underlayer film onto a substrate by coating and drying (baking) [0014, 0071],
forming a resist film by coating a resist composition onto the resist underlayer film [0639] and heating (baking) the film [0014, 0649, 0652],
exposing the resist film to light or electron beams [0014, 0047-0048, 0055],
developing the resist film to form a patterned film [0014, 0056], and
a step of subjecting the resist underlayer film and the substrate to be processed to dry etching, using the resist pattern as a mask, thereby forming a pattern [0014, 0038], reading on instant claims 7-9.
Claims 1-2 and 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishita (US20160238936A1, published 2016).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4-9,
Nishita teaches resist underlayer film formation composition for lithography includes: a polymer having a structure of Formula (1) containing a -O-X structure at a terminal of a polymer chain; a cross-linking agent; a compound promoting a cross-linking reaction (crosslinking catalyst); and an organic solvent, where X is a linear or branched C1-6 alkyl group [abstract], as well as EUV lithography [0010], reading on instant claims 1 and 5-6.
PNG
media_image2.png
101
226
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Nishita teaches synthesis example 1, comprising of hydroxyl groups (reactive group) as a side chain [0063], reading on instant claims 2 and 4.
Nishita teaches applying and baking their composition to form a resist underlayer film on a semiconductor substrate, applying and baking a resist solution to form a resist film, exposing the resist film to light or electron beams, developing the resist film, and dry etching the exposed underlayer film to form a desired pattern [0049-0054], reading on instant claims 7-9.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takei (US20070238029A1, published 2007) in view of Shirakawa (US20180120706A1, published 2018).
Regarding claims 1-9,
Takei teaches the polymer contained in their underlayer coating composition may be the following [0085], where the P2 structure reads on the instant unit comprising a reactive group on a side chain and a unit structure represented by the instant formula (2), where R2 is H, Y1 is -O-, A1 is a C2 alkylene group, and Z1 is a reactive hydroxy group, and the P3 structure contains a structure -O-CH2CH3 which reads on the instant formula (1) where C1 is -O- and R1 is a C2 alkyl group, reading on instant claims 2-4.
PNG
media_image3.png
284
246
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Takei teaches organic solvents such as ethylene glycol monomethyl ether [0108].
Takei teaches including an acid compound that includes for example sulfonic acid compounds such as p-toluene sulfonic acid, trifluoromethane sulfonic acid, and pyridinium p-toluenesulfonate, etc., and carboxylic acid compounds such as salicylic acid, sulfosalicylic acid, citric acid, benzoic acid, and hydroxybenzoic acid, etc., and so on [0092], reading on the instant crosslinking catalyst, reading on instant claim 5.
Takei teaches further including a crosslinking compound (agent) [0042], reading on instant claim 6.
Takei teaches coating their film forming composition onto a substrate then baking to form a film [0110], coating and baking a photoresist layer [0112], exposing the photoresist film to light [0113], developing the film to form a pattern [0115], and removal of the underlayer coating and processing of the semiconductor substrate are conducted by using the photoresist pattern formed as mentioned above as a protective coating (etching the underlayer film and processing the substrate) [0117], reading on instant claims 7-9.
However, Takei only teaches exposure using actinic rays such as ultraviolet rays, ArF excimer laser beams, and KrF excimer laser beams [0002].
Shirakawa, analogous art, teaches a similar underlayer film forming composition [abstract] comprising of a resin with a pendant hydroxy reactive group and a pendant alkyl group, as well as a crosslinking agent and a crosslinking catalyst [0750, 0068], where they perform an exposure using KrF exposure or EUV exposure [0296].
As both Shirakawa and Takei teach similar underlayer film forming compositions that may be exposed using KrF exposure, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that using the EUV exposure of Shirakawa as the exposure of Takei would result in a comparable and expected patterning process.
That is, the substitution of the EUV exposure of Shirakawa for the exposure of Takei, absent unexpected results, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application with the predictable result of patterning an underlayer film and processing an underlying substrate, reading on instant claim 1. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (See MPEP § 2143, B).
Examiner notes that it would be readily envisioned by a person of ordinary skill in the art that the P3 repeating unit of Takei shown above could be at a terminal of the polymer main chain, as any of the three repeating units would be expected to be at a terminal position of the polymer main chain. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the second repeating unit of P3 repeating unit of Takei could be at a terminal of the polymer main chain, as any of the three repeating units would be expected to be at a terminal position of the polymer main chain.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 regarding the amended claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The above rejections have been updated accordingly to account for the new claim amendment.
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/21/2025 with respect to the rejection of claim 3 have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the new claim amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Takei.
Conclusion
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