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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/14/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara (WO 2020/241537 and its US equivalent 2022/0064444 as a translation) in view of Serizawa et al (JP 2006-003436 and its machine translation).
Nara disclose a resin composition, color filter, and solid-state imaging element wherein the film is a curable resin composition to form a dry film (including a support/ carrier for transfer, [0088]). The resin composition comprises a polymerizable compound ([0071]-[0072], carboxylic group-containing compound (having a crosslinking group; instant claim 11), a polymerization initiator, an IR-absorber (750 nm to 150 nm, preferably 800nm to 1000nm; instant claims 4 and 5), and thermosetting component (claim 1; instant claims 1, 4). The polymerizable compound includes bi-functional compounds including bisphenol A-based compounds (only compound so 100%, polyvalent (meth)acrylates of bisphenol A; instant claims 8-10). The material preferably further comprises a colorant ([0076]-[0081]; instant claim 3).
Regarding the transmittance required by the instant claims 1, the teaches that the composition comprises an infrared absorber and additional components similar to that of the instant invention, and has a transmittance of less than 20% between 800 and 1200nm, which would meet the limitations of the instant claims ([0085]). Furthermore, the reference is silent with respect to the properties of the optical density at 550nm as required by the instant claim 2, and the oxidation potential of the infrared absorber as set forth by the instant claim 6, however, the instant specification teaches that the properties are achieved by the combination of components. The reference teaches the inclusion of similar additives, including the IR-dye (chosen from the small group including cyanine dyes, and teaches a positively charged aromatic dye, and the instant specification teaches that dyes having such features lend to the claimed IR dye / absorber oxidation potential), therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the material and compounds of the reference to inherently possess the claimed properties given their similarity to those features in the claimed invention absent evidence to the contrary.
With respect to the instant claim 12, the claim sets forth that the transfer material is used for a specific device, however, the claim is drawn to a photosensitive transfer material, which is defined by her components and properties, not by its intended use. Therefore, the material needs only to be capable of use in an LED array, and the material is suitable for use in a wide variety of applications and forming a wide variety of devices, which would include an LED array (comprising color filters), solid-state image sensor, and color filter device ([0003]).
Nara et al fails to teach an additional thermoplastic resin layer, however, Serizawa et al teach a similar multi-layer transfer material, wherein the reference comprises a support, a second photosensitive layer 12, a first photosensitive layer 13, a water vapor transmission layer 14, and a protective film 15, wherein the second photosensitive layer is a curable resin layer comprising a thermoplastic resin binder (polyvinyl alcohol, polyurethane, polyamides; [0090]) having a color forming agent, wherein preferred compounds include leuco crystal violet ([0206], [0207]; instant claims 1 and 21), preferred by the instant invention as coloring agent B. Therefore, the second photosensitive layer between the support and the first photosensitive layer comprises a thermoplastic resin binder and a coloring agent as required by the instant claim 1, now amended. The addition of the second photosensitive layer increases the strength of the pattern upon etching ([0034]-[0036], [0038], [0043]).
Therefore, given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Nara et al, choosing to include an additional photosensitive layer to improve the pattern and etch resistance/ strength of the pattern for further processing as taught to be known and advantageous in the art by Serikawa et al. The resultant material would also meet the limitations of the instant claims.
Claim(s) 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara et al in view of Serikawa et al, in further view of Kim et al (2021/0036263).
Nara and Serikawa et al have been discussed above, and teaches a film having components which would result in the claimed properties of transmittance at 830 nm, optical density at 550 nm (instant claims 13 and 16). The reference teaches that the light-shielding film may be employed in a variety of applications, and includes solid-state imaging devices and color filters. The reference is silent with respect to the film having through-holes, however, Kim et al in a similar field of endeavor with similar films, teaches a light-shielding film comprising similar components to that of Nara ([0168]). The reference further teaches that the film layer comprises through-holes extending from the first surface to the second surface ([0025], [0172]-[0175]; instant claim 13).
The reference teaches devices such as those taught by Nara, including display panels, light-emitting layers ([0071]; instant claims 18-20).
With respect to the instant claim 17, the claim sets forth that the transfer material is used for a specific device, however, the claim is drawn to a photosensitive transfer material, which is defined by her components and properties, not by its intended use. Therefore, the material needs only to be capable of use in an LED array, and the material is suitable for use in a wide variety of applications and forming a wide variety of devices, which would include an LED array (comprising color filters), solid-state image sensor, and color filter device ([0003] and [0071] of the secondary reference).
With respect to the angle of the through-hole sidewalls and the size, the reference is silent. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed features through routine experimentation and optimization of material properties including pattern shape, LED brightness and luminous efficacy.
Given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Nara in view of Serikawa, choosing as the light-shielding film for various optical devices, through-holes as taught to be known by Kim et al to achieve improved color filter properties and resolution.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara in view of Serikawa in view of Takasaki (JP2000-122273 and its machine translation).
Nara and Serikawa have been discussed above. The reference provides a non-limiting list of polymerization initiators, including trihalomethyltriazines, oxadiazole, and imidazoles, but fails to specifically disclose a sulfonium or iodonium salt.
Takasaki et al disclose initiators including those disclosed by Nara, thus teaching the suitability of the compounds in each material. The reference further includes iodonium and sulfonium salts as initiators ([0051]).
Therefore, given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Nara in view of Serikawa, choosing as the initiator, that taught as known and equivalent to those of Nara by Takasaki et al. The resultant material would also meet the limitations of the instant claim 7.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In the response filed 1/14/2026, applicant amended the instant independent claim 1 to require that the additional thermoplastic resin layer comprising a coloring agent having an absorption wavelength as defined in the claim, is located between the temporary support and the photosensitive layer.
Applicant has argued that the secondary reference structure differs from the claimed invention as the layer is not between the photosensitive layer and the temporary support as the layer of the secondary reference is a second photosensitive layer, and that the amendment “clearly means that the thermoplastic resin layer is present separately than the photosensitive layer (response, page 9, paragraphs 1 and 2).” However, the claim as amended does not clearly require that the thermoplastic layer cannot be a photosensitive layer, simply that there is at least a photosensitive layer and a thermoplastic layer between the support and the photosensitive layer.
The material of the rejection of record, Nara in view of Serizawa et al, includes a supports/ carrier for transfer and a photosensitive layer as taught by Nara, with Serizawa et al teaching a second photosensitive layer comprising a thermoplastic resin binder between the support and the photosensitive layer comprising components as set forth by claim 1. The stack of the references would include the temporary support, a layer having a thermoplastic resin as taught by Serizawa, and a photosensitive layer of Nara, wherein the additional layer between the support and the photosensitive layer of Nara provided improved strength and etch resistance. The resultant material would comprise the layers as claimed, and the fact that the thermoplastic layer is also a photosensitive layer, an additional photosensitive layer, is not excluded by the instant claims and is between the support and a photosensitive layer. The instant claim 1 simply requires a photosensitive layer and a layer having thermoplastic properties, and does not require only one photosensitive layer or exclude the thermoplastic layer from having additional photosensitive components. Therefore, the arguments are not persuasive and the rejections of record are maintained.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANDA C WALKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1337. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 5:30am to 4pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/AMANDA C. WALKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722