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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 15 and 17-29 are pending. Claims 1-14 and 16 have been canceled. Note that, Applicant’s response filed October 7, 2025, has been entered.
Objections/Rejection Withdrawn
The following objections/rejections as set forth in the Office action mailed July 14, 2025, have been withdrawn:
The objection to claims 16 and 17 due to minor informalities has been withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 15-21 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamochi et al (US2018/0012751), has been withdrawn.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 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 15 and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2020/207824; Kamei et al (US 2017/0330763); Shimizu et al (US 7,344,603), or Zhong (US 2013/0032296). Note that, instant claim 15 is a drawn to a one-component system which simply require the existence of a N-octane.
With respect to independent, instant claim 15, ‘824 teaches a method for manufacturing integrated circuit devices, optical devices, micromachines and mechanical precision devices, the said method comprising the steps of (1) providing a substrate having patterned material layers having line-space dimensions of 50 nm or below, aspect ratios of greater or equal 4, or a combination thereof, (2) contacting the substrate at least once with a composition and (3) removing the non-aqueous composition from the contact with the substrate. See page 4. The compositions are nonaqueous and contain an organic protic solvent, ammonia, and at least one additive of formulae I or II. See claim 1. Additionally, the compositions may contain an alkane solvent such as octane, nonane, etc. See claim 4 and page 6. ‘824 discloses the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
With respect to independent, instant claim 15, Kamei et al teach a semiconductor treatment composition includes particles having a particle size of 0.1 to 0.3 micrometers. See Abstract. The semiconductor treatment composition may be used as a treatment agent such as a cleaning agent for removing particles, metal impurities, and the like present on the surface of the treatment target. See para. 26. The semiconductor treatment composition according to one embodiment of the invention may include a water-soluble polymer, an organic acid, an amine, and the like in addition to a liquid medium (i.e., main component). See para. 36. When the semiconductor treatment composition is used as an etchant or a resist stripper, it is preferable that the liquid medium include an organic solvent as the main component, and function as a solvent. See para. 62. Suitable solvents include hydrocarbon solvents such as octane, decane, etc. See para. 67. Kamei et al disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
With respect to independent, instant claim 15, Zhong teaches a cleaning composition for removing temporary wafer bonding material is provided. The cleaning composition comprises an alkylarylsulfonic acid and an aliphatic alcohol dispersed or dissolved in a hydrocarbon solvent system. Methods of separating bonded substrates and cleaning debonded substrates using the cleaning composition are also provided. The invention is particularly useful for temporary bonding materials and adhesives. The methods generally comprise contacting the bonding material with the cleaning solution for time periods sufficient to dissolve the desired amount of bonding material for separation and/or cleaning of the substrates. See Abstract. Suitable hydrocarbon solvents for use as the solvent system include octane, decane, etc. The hydrocarbon solvent is preferably present in the composition at a level of from about 70% to about 96% by weight, more preferably from about 80% to about 94% by weight, and even more preferably from about 80% to about 90% by weight, based upon the total weight of the composition taken as 100% by weight. See paras. 24 and 25. Zhong discloses the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
With respect to independent, instant claim 15, Shimuzu et al teach a solvent for treating polysilazane, which is a single or mixed solvent comprising one or more members selected from the group consisting of xylene, anisole, decalin, cyclohexane, cyclohexene, methylcyclohexane, ethylcyclohexane, limonene, hexane, octane, nonane, decane, a C8-C11 alkane mixture, a C8-C11 aromatic hydrocarbon mixture, an aliphatic/alicyclic hydrocarbon mixture containing 5 to 25% by weight of C8 or more aromatic hydrocarbons, and dibutyl ether, wherein the number of 0.5 micron or more fine particles contained in 1 ml of the solvent is 50 or less. See columns 3 and 4. Shimuzu et al disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of ‘824, Kamei et al, Shimuzu et al, or Zhong anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claim 15 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 23-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamochi et al (US2018/0012751), WO2020/207824, or Shimizu et al (US 7,344,603). Note that, instant claim 23 is a drawn to a one-component system which simply require the existence of a N-nonane.
With respect to independent, instant claim 23, Kamochi et al teach a kit for manufacturing a semiconductor device comprising: a composition which contains a solvent A; a composition which contains a solvent B; and a composition which contains a solvent C, in which the kit is used when a temporary adhesive layer is formed on a first substrate using a temporary adhesive composition containing a temporary adhesive and the solvent A, at least some of an excessive amount of the temporary adhesive on the first substrate is washed using the composition containing the solvent B, a laminate is manufactured by bonding the first substrate and a second substrate through the temporary adhesive layer, one of the first substrate and the second substrate is peeled off from the laminate at a temperature of lower than 40° C., and then the temporary adhesive remaining on at least one of the first substrate or the second substrate is washed using the composition containing the solvent C. See para. 12. Suitable solvents include aliphatic hydrocarbons such as nonane, decane, etc. See para. 118. Kamochi et al disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Shimuzu et al and ‘824 are relied upon as set forth above. Shimuzu et al or ‘824 disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of Shimuzu et al, ’824, or Kamochi et al anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claim 23 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 15 and 17-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ueno et al (US2017/0306272). Note that, instant claims 15 and 23 are drawn to a one-component system which simply require the existence of a N-octanea or N-nonane, respectively.
With respect to independent, instant claims 15 and 23, Ueno et al teach cleaner composition consisting essentially of (A) 92.0 wt % to less than 99.9 wt % of an organic solvent, (B) 0.1 wt % to less than 8.0 wt % of a C3-C6alcohol, and (C) 0.001-3.0 wt % of a quaternary ammonium salt which is effective for removing any silicone adhesive residues on a silicon semiconductor substrate. See Abstract. Suitable organic solvents include aliphatic hydrocarbons of 5 to 20 carbon atoms. preferably 7 to 15 carbon atoms, and more preferably 8 to 12 carbon atoms, for example, octane, nonane, etc. See para. 22. Ueno et al disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of Ueno et al anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claims 15 and 23 and the respective dependent claims.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the rejection of the instant claims under 35 USC 102 using Kamochi et al, ‘824, Kamei et al, Shimuzu et al, or Zhong, Applicant states that Nowhere is n-octane having a purity of 98.5% or greater, as recited in amended claim 15 (and its dependent claims) disclosed (in any of the references as applied in the Office Action) with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation. Likewise, nowhere is n-nonane having a 98% or greater, as recited in new claim 23 (and its dependent claims) disclosed (in any of the references as applied in the Office Action) with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
In response, note that, the Examiner asserts that independent instant claims 15 and 23 are drawn to a one-component system which simply require the existence of N-octane (i.e., octane) or N-nonane (i.e., N-nonane), wherein N-octane or N-nonane is clearly taught by Kamochi et al, ‘824, Kamei et al, Shimuzu et al, or Zhong. In other words, instant claims 15 and 23 simply require n-octane or n-nonane, respectively, and the teaching of either n-octane or n-nonane is sufficient to anticipate each claim. Therefore, the Examiner asserts that Kamochi et al, ‘824, Kamei et al, Shimuzu et al, or Zhong disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation. Thus, the Examiner asserts that the teachings of Kamochi et al, ‘824, Kamei et al, Shimuzu et al, or Zhong are to sufficient to anticipate the claimed invention under 35 USC 102.
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 GREGORY R DEL COTTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1312. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:00pm, 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/G.R.D/January 3, 2026