DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the RCE received June 23, 2026.
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, 3, 11-16 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BYUN et al (2018/0265710) in view of HAREMZA et al (2011/0230617) and KIM et al (2012/0172480)
The claimed invention now recites the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
646
646
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
804
678
media_image2.png
Greyscale
BYUN et al report a curable composition comprising a photopolymerization initiator, a solvent and an antistatic compound which can be an organometallic compound such as a metal oxide with tin or titanium, see page 6, para. [0072] :
PNG
media_image3.png
116
368
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
184
364
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The claimed Chemical Formula 1 is a metal oxide compound wherein any of the X, X’ and X” can be many ligands to include tin alkoxide which is met by BYUN et al.
The disclosure in BYUN et al is generic and meets any of the possible tin compounds recited.
Applicants are directed to page 5 para. [0062] for the photoinitiators recites which include acetophenone-based compounds which are recited in claim 1, namely the last three compounds which are methyl-substituted acetophenones, see below:
PNG
media_image5.png
94
402
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With respect to the solvent in claim 1, applicants are directed to page 5, para. [0065] for the solvents used in the photocurable formulation.
HAREMZA et al (2011/0230617) is cited to disclose equivalent photoinitiator to the acetophenone disclosed in BYUN et al. Page 7, paras. [0138 to [0145] report suitable photoinitiators for a photocurable composition comprising metal oxide pigments. Valerophenone is listed with acetophenone as equivalent initiators, such that claim 11 is met by this rejection, see below:
PNG
media_image6.png
72
372
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In addition, the photoinitiators as suitable as reported in HAREMZA et al include phosphine oxide as seen in para. [0139], which meets Chemical Formula [2-2].
Claim 3 is met by the prior art due to the identical photoinitiators taught in BYUN et al.
Claims 11 is met above the disclosure in HAREMZA et al for equivalent photoinitiators for photocurable composition such as acetophenone and valerophenone.
Claims 12-13 is an optional choice for the Chemical Formula 2-2 in claim 1 and is rejected as well with claim 1.
Claims 14 is met by the disclosure in KIM et al for the content of the antistatic agent in amounts of 2 parts by weight of the solids as reported on page 5, Table 2, Examples 1-6.
Claims 15, 16 and 21 are met by the method in BYUN et al.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive composition comprising photoinitiators, polymerizable monomer and metal complexes to employ tin ethoxide as a metal ligand antistatic compound and to formulate known photoinitiators as reported in HAREMZA et al like phosphine oxide with the reasonable expectation of same or similar results for high activity, reduced film thickness loss and improved resolution.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SAKAI et al (2016/0342085 A1) disclose resist composition comprising phosphine oxide photoinitiators and titanium dioxide, see the Abstract and para. [0074].
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 on M-F, IFP-Flex.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Hendricks, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1401. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 J. Chu
September 19, 2026
Prosecution Insights