DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020/026834 and using U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0311396 (hereinafter referred to as Ogata) as its English Translation Equivalent and as evidenced by WO2011/074494 (hereinafter referred to as Sakamoto).
Ogata, in the abstract, in [0026], [0037], [0038], and [0048], [0049], [0050], [0051], discloses a resist underlayer film-forming composition comprising an organic solvent, and a product (copolymer) of the following structures,
PNG
media_image1.png
73
270
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and
PNG
media_image2.png
136
218
media_image2.png
Greyscale
, and is the same claimed composition, with the same claimed compositional components, wherein the diepoxy compound is a heterocyclic structure, and alkylene group (claimed Y1) is completely fluorinated, and will inherently and necessarily form the claimed EUV resist underlayer composition. Ogata discloses the use of a salicylic acid in [0033], and [0102], as a catalyst during the making of the resist underlayer composition and is a crosslinking agent (claims 1-2, 6). Ogata, discloses that the copolymer of the two compounds illustrate above are copolymer i.e., form repeating structural units of both i.e., each can present in the claimed amount (at least about 50 % by mole) in the composition (claim 3). Ogata, in [0027], and [0104], discloses that the resist underlayer composition comprises a crosslinking agent (claim 4). Ogata, in [0026], and [0036], discloses that the resist underlayer composition also includes an acid catalyst that is a crosslinking catalyst (claim 5). Ogata, in [0013], discloses that the resist underlayer composition forms a resist underlayer film on the substrate (claim 7).
Although Ogata does not refer to the salicylic acid as the crosslinking agent, Ogata uses the salicylic acid as the crosslinking agent as evidenced by Sakamoto in the Description that salicylic acid can be used for promoting crosslinking in the composition for the resist underlayer.
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.
Claim(s) 8-9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/026834 and using U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0311396 (hereinafter referred to as Ogata) as its English Translation Equivalent and as evidenced by WO2011/074494 (hereinafter referred to as Sakamoto) in view of U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0189533 (hereinafter referred to as Okuyama).
Ogata, in [0014], discloses that the resist underlayer can be used as an underlayer for a resist layer in a lithographic process.
The difference between the claims and Ogata is that Ogata does not disclose the formation of a resist layer and the patterning process recited in claims 8-9.
Okuyama, in [0020]-[0022], [0060], [0067], discloses the formation of a resist underlayer film on a semiconductor substrate and formation of a resist underlayer followed by a resist layer, wherein the resist layer is subjected to exposure and developing, wherein the resist layer can be exposed to EUV ([0061]), and the resist pattern formed is used as etch mask to etch the underlying resist underlayer and the resist underlayer pattern formed is used as mask to pattern (etch) the underlying semiconductor substrate.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Ogata by employing the patterning process taught by Okuyama because Ogata teaches in [0025], using the resist underlayer film as the antireflecting coating that is placed underlying the overlying resist film during a lithography process and Okuyama in [0024], discloses using the resist underlayer film as an anti-reflecting coating for the resist layer during the exposure process.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 2, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The 35 U. S. C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections made in the previous office action are maintained. With respect to applicants argument that Ogata teaches against the use of a crosslinking agent as disclosed in paragraph [0029] of Ogata, Ogata lists a group of monomers that are not used in the making of the resist underlayer film-forming composition, However, Ogata, in [0033], and [0102], uses salicylic acid as a catalyst in the resist underlayer composition, and Sakamoto, as discussed in paragraph no. 3, above, discloses that salicylic acid can be used as a catalyst to promote crosslinking in the resist under layer composition i.e., Ogata does not completely omit crosslinking agents in the composition for the resist underlayer.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Daborah Chacko-Davis whose telephone number is (571) 272-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30AM-6:00PM EST Mon-Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark F. Huff can be reached on (571) 272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. 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.
/DABORAH CHACKO-DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 January 10, 2026.
Prosecution Insights