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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/25/2022, 06/07/2023, 08/30/2023, 09/04/2024, 11/19/2024, and 03/12/2025 are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed 01/21/2026 has been considered and is entered. No new claims are added. Claim 1 has been amended. No new matter has been added with these amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims and arguments based thereon have changed the scope of the claims. As such, the rejections and arguments set forth in the prior office action are withdrawn as the scope thereof is not sufficient to cover the amended scope of the claims.
After further search and consideration, the Examiner makes a new grounds of rejection over 35 USC 103 in view of Matsumura et al (US 20160314984 A1), and a further 103 combination-type rejection in view of Matsumura and Kori.
Concerning applicant’s assertions of superior/remarkable effects, paragraph [0014] does not present data to further assert the superiority and unexpected nature of these effects – while the Examiner appreciates the argument based thereon, argument alone is not sufficient to establish superior and unexpected results.
Applicant’s Amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al (US 20160314984 A1)
Regarding Claim 1-8, Matsumura discloses a method comprising the application of a resist underlayer film material composition onto a substrate so as to form a coating film on the substrate (abstract), wherein the composition for resist underlayer formation is described from [0039]-[0341].
Matsumura does not disclose a particular experimental embodiment that meets the sum total of limitations of the claims.
These limitations are met by the general disclosure of the reference.
The composition comprises a compound (A), described from [0040]-[0206], a solvent (B) described from [0207]-[0230], an acid generator (C) described from [0231]-[0239], a crosslinking agent (claim 4) [0240]-[263], and other components such as surfactants (claim 6) as described from [0264]-[0272].
The crosslinker (D) is described from [0240]-[0263], wherein the crosslinker may be a phenolic crosslinker having hydroxy groups and/or methylmethoxy groups present thereon. The crosslinker is present relative to the compound resin (A) in an amount ranging from 0.1 to 50 parts by mass per 100 parts by mass of compound (A) (claim 5).
The solvent (B) may comprise a single solvent or a mixture thereof, such as an alcohol ether acetate solvent such as propylene glycol ether acetate and/or gamma-butyrolactone (the former of which is considered a low boiling solvent and the latter is considered a high boiling point solvent at applicant’s specification one pages 39-40) (claims 7-8)
The compound (A) may be an aromatic ring-containing compound having a molecular weight between 600 and 3000 g/mol as described from [0136]-[0166] as bounded by formula (5) (also referred to as Partial structure (I)):
PNG
media_image1.png
240
320
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Where:
Each of R101 to R104 independently represents a hydrogen atom, hydroxy group, nitro group, or C1-C20 monovalent organic group
Subscripts a11 and a12 are an integer of 0-9
Subscripts b11 and b12 are an integer of 0-4
Subscripts n11 and n12 are each independently 0-2
Subscripts k11 and k12 are each independently 0-9
*11 indicates binding site to a separate structure
In a preferred embodiment, R101-R104 may include alkynyl or propynyl (propargyl) groups
The aromatic ring structure may have an intermolecular bond-forming group as exemplified by formulas (7-1)-(7-3):
PNG
media_image2.png
188
288
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Where, in particular, (7-1) comprises R groups R105-R1-7 as each independently a H atom or a C1-C20 monovalent hydrocarbon group. Exemplary compounds are discussed from [0165]-[0166], where particular embodiments are as follows:
PNG
media_image3.png
190
352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
236
376
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The above compounds meet the limitations of the claims where:
The core of the compounds is a fluorene unit (first structure in claim 1, page 3)
X is a naphthyl group
Subscript n1 = 2
Subscript n2 =1 or 2
R1 is a group conforming to formula IC where RA is a phenyl group (C6 divalent organic group) or a CH2 group, a double bond is present or a triple bond is present, and RB is H – a vinylphenyl group or a propargyl group, respectively (Claim 2, where 1F is a propargyl group)
Subscript n3=0
The above structures do not meet the limitation where a+b is 1 and b is between 0.4 and 0.6. However, the structures of an exemplary embodiment do not exist in a vacuum completely separate from the teachings of the broader reference – and thus are not utterly separated from the formula (5) . The reference very clearly lays out that the structure of formula (5) may have between 0 and 9 substituents per naphthyl substituent as bounded by parameters (a11) and (a12) – such substituents include hydroxyl groups and the moieties provided in the exemplary embodiments. From the disclosure of the reference, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to envision instances where the above compounds had one or more -OH group substituents present on one or both naphthyl substituents and/or additional vinylphenyl/propargyl substituents present therein ranging from the 0-9 substituents described regarding formula (5).
For instances where the number of hydroxyl groups and oxyvinylphenyl/oxypropargyl groups are equal (such as adding a hydroxyl group to each naphthyl group) – the fraction of a:b is 50:50 or a and b both are 0.5, meeting the claim limitation for where a+b=1 and 0.4<b<0.6. In instances where a single instance of a compound conforming to the formula (5) is used, the dispersity Mw/Mn is 1.00 – monomers are monodisperse as there is no variation in molecular weight.
The above compounds having the structures above and an additional hydroxyl group on each naphthyl group have molecular weights of 923.08 (vinylphenyl compound) and 568.63 (propargyl compound) falling within the claimed limitations of claim 3 for a molecular weight less than 2500.
Claim(s) 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al (US 20160314984 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kori et al (US 20170184968)
Regarding Claims 9-20, Matsumura teaches the limitations of the claims as discussed above regarding claim 1.
However, Matsumura does not disclose the patterning limitations or directly teach them. Matsumura’s composition is considered
These limitations are met by Kori.
Kori discloses an aromatic compound for an organic film such as an underlayer film, and an organic film comprising the compound and a solvent (Background, Summary of Invention).
The compound of Kori is generally described has the general formula R-(X)m1, where R is a single bond or C1-C50 organic group. X is a group represented by formula (1B) in [0017 and [0059]-[066]], where two examples have been selected for brevity:
PNG
media_image5.png
95
316
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
94
286
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Where X2 is a divalent organic group having 1-10 carbon atoms, subscript n1 is 0 or 1, subscript n2 is 1 or 2, and X3 is a group defined in [0018] and [0059] as formula (1C), n5 is 0-2:
PNG
media_image7.png
104
342
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Where R10 is a H or saturated or unsaturated hydrocarbon group of 1-2 carbon atoms, where the benzene ring in this group may also be methyl or methoxy substituted.
The compound for forming an organic film satisfies a molecular weight distribution ratio (dispersity or polydispersity index) of Mw/Mn being equal to or greater than 1.00 and less than or equal to 1.25 ([0026]).
Examples of the compound R that bears at least one X are presented in [0067], such as the ones presented below (these are not the sum total of the teachings of the reference, refer to [0067]:
PNG
media_image8.png
136
338
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
136
338
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Wherein X is as described above. These compounds are all present in the instant claim 1, and the disclosure clearly places X to be a phenyl or naphthyl ring with an OH or OR1 group and an X2 group, where claimed X2 is analogous to the reference’s X3, and the claimed R1 corresponds with the oxypropargyl or -O-X2-O-vinyl group (X2 is a divalent group having 1-10 carbons) where the claimed R1 is an RA-C=C-RB group having RA as an organic group having 1-10 carbon atoms and two oxygens therein and RB is a H atom.
The fluorene-core compound is analogous with the core of the compounds presented regarding Matsumura above regarding claims 1-8.
The compounds above vary in molecular weight, where preferably the compound is 2500 or less in molecular weight ([0027] and [0072])
The composition for forming an organic film also comprises a solvent ([0075]-[0081], or a mixture of solvents, such as a mixture of a high-boiling point solvent and another solvent. Additional components include crosslinking agents such as those in JP 2007199653 (incorporated by reference) and acid generators ([0076] and [0088]-[0091].
The compositions of the reference are formed into films as described by the reference at [0096]-[0103], where the compounds of the reference are dissolved in solvent then cast onto a substrate by spin coating and heating. The reference states that this method may performed for all instances where the reference calls for the formation of an organic film.
The composition(s) of the reference are treated in a resist process as outlined in [0104]-[0131], wherein in one embodiment the composition is formed into an organic film (an underlayer film) on a body to be processed such as a substrate, then forming a resist underlayer film on the organic film where the resist underlayer film comprises a silicon atom, then forming a resist upper layer film thereatop, patternwise exposing the assembly to radiation and then developing so as to develop a pattern in the upper layer film, then transferring the pattern to the underlying Si-containing resist underlayer film and then to the organic underlayer film using the upper layer pattern as a mask. After the organic underlayer (inventive composition layer) is patterned by etching, the substrate (body) is processed. The body to be processed preferably has steps having heights of 30nm or more (Claims 9 and 12 – the claim language uses “comprising” and as such does not exclude additional layers or steps; Claims 10 and 13 – the resist underlayer film referenced in the reference is a middle-layer and can be considered a middle-layer film).
In a separate embodiment the composition is formed into an organic film (an underlayer film) on a body to be processed as a substrate, forming an inorganic hard mask thereatop as a middle layer and the hard mask is SiN or SiO2 or SiON, forming an organic antireflective film on the hard mask, forming a resist upper layer film atop the organic antireflective film, forming a circuit pattern in the resist upper layer film (exposing and developing the resist layer), then transferring the pattern to the organic antireflective film and the inorganic hard mask middle layer using the patterned upper layer film as a mask, transferring the pattern from the inorganic hard mask middle layer to the organic underlayer film, then further transferring the pattern from the organic underlayer film to the body (substrate) to be processed using the organic underlayer pattern as a mask (claim 11 and 14 – while the body in this embodiment is not explicitly having steps of 30nm or higher provided thereon, the general disclosure regarding patterning discusses that such features may be present on substrates and a person of ordinary skill in the art would consider such features to be equally possible on this embodiment as it is on the others in the reference).
The compositions of the reference are formed into films as described by the reference at [0096]-[0103], where the compounds of the reference are dissolved in solvent then cast onto a substrate by spin coating and heating. Such methods may be applied to forming an organic planarizing film from the composition, where the film composition is applied on a substrate to be processed by spin-coating and then heated to cure. Baking is performed at 100 to 600 degrees Celsius for 10-300 seconds (Claim 15) The atmosphere present in this baking process may be between 0.1% and 21% oxygen (claim 16 and 17 – claim 16 delimits a lower limit of 1%, claim 17 defines an upper limit of 1% - the reference range encompasses the ranges of the claims) such as air or a mixed O2/N2/Ar gas atmosphere. The substrate to be processed in this manner preferably has a structure with steps having a height of 30nm or more (Claims 18-20).
As discussed above, the fluorene-core compound of Kori is structurally analogous with the core of the compounds presented regarding Matsumura above regarding claims 1-8. A person having ordinary skill in the art would expect these fluorene derivatives to behave similarly to one another as a result of this chemical structural similarity.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to arrive at the claimed invention from the general disclosure of the references Matsumura and Kori, which provide compounds and components for compositions that are substantially similar to each other and the claimed subject matter, as well as methods for processing such - a person of ordinary skill in the art would expect that the chemical similarity of the claimed compositions would result in similar processability and similarly patterned underlayer films.
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 ANDREW PRESTON TRAYWICK whose telephone number is (571)272-2982. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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.P.T./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights