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 .
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments, see page 8, line 19, filed 26 February 2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 12-14, 16-18, 20, 22, and 26 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0030600 A1), hereinafter Okada; in view of Sago et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2016/0358833 A1), hereinafter Sago; utilizing Fujii et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2015/174468 A1), hereinafter Fujii as a teaching reference; Claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0030600 A1), hereinafter Okada; in view of Sago et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2016/0358833 A1), hereinafter Sago; and further in view of Kubota (United States Patent Publication No. US 2013/0266900 A1), hereinafter Kubota; utilizing Fujii et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2015/174468 A1), hereinafter Fujii as a teaching reference; Claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0030600 A1), hereinafter Okada; in view of Sago et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2016/0358833 A1), hereinafter Sago; and further in view of Irisawa et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0046079 A1), hereinafter Irisawa; utilizing Fujii et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2015/174468 A1), hereinafter Fujii as a teaching reference; have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the reactive polymer of Okada is not within the scope of the alkali-soluble polymer of the present application. This argument is not persuasive. Paragraph [0027] of Okada states: “As long as the characteristic to be developed with an alkaline developing fluid can be provided to a photosensitive film, any reactive polymer can be used.” Thus, Okada defines the reactive polymer therein as being any polymer developable, i.e. soluble, by an alkaline developing fluid, i.e. an alkali-soluble polymer. Furthermore, Applicant argues that Okada teaches the reaction of glycidyl methacrylate with carboxyl groups to form the polymer lowers the acid content of the polymer and thus teaches away from an elevated acid content. This argument is not persuasive. The same paragraph of Okada (Paragraph [0027]) merely teaches the possible use of glycidyl methacrylate to form the reactive polymer therein, but again the only real limitation is that it be alkali-soluble. Applicant further argues that the photocuring of the film of Okada will lower the double-bond equivalent of the reactive polymer therein. This argument is not persuasive. The independent claim 1 of the present application merely limits to a “photosensitive resin layer,” not a “photocured resin layer” or something equivalent. There is no definition comprised in the original disclose of the present application to indicate that the term “photosensitive resin layer” is even implicitly photocured. Furthermore, Applicant argues, without any support, that the secondary reference Fujii “[e]ven if combined with Okada, [] would not yield the claimed range of 150-500 for component (B). Rather, Fujii teaches away from the claimed range.” This argument is not supported and thus not persuasive. Furthermore, Applicant argues that the unclaimed purported benefit of the present application differs from the intended use and intended benefit of primary reference Okada. Not only is this purported benefit of the present application not claimed, i.e. improved alkaline removability, but even if it were it would be non-limiting intended use claim language. For said reasons, the rejection of record is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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:
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 4-5, 7-10, 12-14, 16-18, 20, 22, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0030600 A1), hereinafter Okada; in view of Sago et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2016/0358833 A1), hereinafter Sago; utilizing Fujii et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2015/174468 A1), hereinafter Fujii as a teaching reference.
5. Regarding Claim 1, Okada teaches (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0061]) a photosensitive resin layered product, therein layer c represents a polyester film or substrate and layer b represents a photosensitive film layer. Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0025 and 0061]) a support film, therein Okada teaches a non-conductive substrate comprising polyethylene terephthalate, polyvinyl chloride, polymethylmethacrylate, polystyrene, or polyamide which are disclosed as comprising the support film of the present application. Okada teaches (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0061]) a photosensitive resin layer stacked on the support film. Okada teaches (Paragraph [0029]) the photosensitive resin layer comprises 30 wt% to 70 wt% of an alkali-soluble polymer, herein Okada teaches the alkali-soluble polymer comprising 10 to 90 wt% of the solids of the photosensitive resin and thus the cured film therefrom will be 10 to 90 wt% of the alkali soluble polymer, which is inclusive of the entirety of the 30 wt% to 70 wt% claimed by the present application. Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the photosensitive resin layer comprises 20 wt% to 50 wt% of an ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, herein Okada teaches 20 wt% to 80 wt% of the solids content of the photosensitive resin composition comprises a ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing crosslinker and thus 20 wt% to 80 wt% of the cured film therefrom will be the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing crosslinker, which is inclusive of the entirety of the 20 wt% to 50 wt% claimed by the present application. Okada teaches (Paragraph [0031]) the photosensitive resin layer comprises 0.01 wt% to 20 wt% of a photopolymerization initiator, herein Okada teaches 0.01 wt% to 20 wt% of the solids content of the photosensitive resin composition comprises a photopolymerization initiator and thus .01 wt% to 20 wt% of the cured film therefrom will be a photopolymerization initiator. Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0027 and 0050]) the alkali-soluble polymer comprises an aromatic group-containing (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component, herein Okada teaches the alkali-soluble polymer comprises benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component. Okada teaches (Paragraph [0028]) the alkali-soluble polymer has an acid equivalent of 350 to 5,611, herein Okada teaches an acid number of 10 to 200 mg of KOH/g of polymer which is the mass of KOH needed to neutralize a gram of polymer, whereas the term “acid equivalent” disclosed by the present application is the mass of polymer/mole of carboxyl group. Thus, a while a high acid number as taught by Okada indicates a greater amount of carboxyl groups, the present application discloses an acid equivalent wherein a higher value indicates a lesser amount (per gram of polymer) of carboxyl groups. Converting an acid number of 10 to 200 mg of KOH/g of polymer, as taught by Okada, to moles of KOH/g of polymer is found by dividing by the molecular mass of KOH, which is 56.1056 g/mol, is 1.782 x 10^-4 mol of KOH to 3.564 x 10^-3 mol of KOH/g of polymer. One mole of KOH neutralizes one mole of carboxyl group in the polymer, thus the inverse of these values equates to an acid equivalent of 280.5 to 5,611, which overlaps with the claimed range of the present application. Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound comprises at least 72 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, herein Okada teaches several cross-linking agents, including KAYARAD TMPTA wherein 72 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of KAYARAD TMPTA. Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound has a double bond equivalent of 184.5, herein Okada teaches several cross-linking agents, including ARONIX M-215 which has a double bond equivalent of 184.5. Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0027 and 0050]) the alkali-soluble polymer comprises benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component. Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0027 and 0050]) the alkali-soluble polymer comprises 84 wt% of benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component, herein Okada teaches a polymer comprising 18 parts by weight benzyl (meth)acrylate per polymer comprising 10 parts by weight glycidyl methacrylate (GMA), 62 parts by weight of methyl methacrylate, 20 parts by weight of methacrylic acid, and 18 parts by weight of benzyl methacrylate.
6. However, Okada fails to explicitly teach the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound comprises 50 to 100 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound AND has a double bond equivalent of 150 or more and 500 or less. That said, Okada teaches a number of ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compounds with proprietary information regarding, specifically, their molecular weight and might thus achieve the both the acrylate monomer equivalents and double bond equivalents claimed in the same compound.
7. Fujii teaches (Paragraph [0015]) that increasing the double bond equivalent of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, therein the photopolymerizable compound, that having an increased double bond equivalent value results in a lowered crosslinking density, thereby the permeation rate of the peeling liquid is improved and the peeling time is shortened. MPEP 2144.05(II)(A) states: “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Herein, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, including combining multiple compounds to comprise the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, such that it both comprises 50 to 100 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound AND has a double bond equivalent of 150 or more and 500 or less.
8. However, Okada fails to explicitly teach all components of the composition limited by the present application with a single experimental example. That said, all components of the composition are described with sufficient detail by the prior art. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art in view of Okada would have found it obvious to try the combining the prior art elements of Okada which meet the limitations of the present application above according to known methods to yield predictable results. Herein, Okada included each element claimed by the present application for the relevant claims, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods taught by Okada, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Furthermore, Okada teaches one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable given that all of the elements are of the relevant claims of the present application are taught by Okada and are, even if not taught in a single experimental example, are taught as being functional alternatives to achieve predictable results in Okada’s stated aim of good adhesion. (See: Okada Paragraph [0011]).
9. However, Okada fails to explicitly teach the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 30 µm or more.
10. Sago teaches (Paragraph [0035]) the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 30 µm to 300 µm, herein Sago teaches a photo-curable resin layer, analogous to a photosensitive resin layer, has a thickness of 10 µm to 300 µm, which overlaps with the range claimed by the present application. Sago teaches (Paragraphs [0024 and 0028]) teaches a photosensitive resin layer within this range exhibits good durability and reduced warpage.
11. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to incorporate the teachings of Sago wherein the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 30 µm to 300 µm. Doing so would result in good durability and reduced warpage, as recognized by Sago.
12. Regarding Claim 4, Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0027 and 0050]) the alkali-soluble polymer comprises 84 wt% of benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component, herein Okada teaches a polymer comprising 18 parts by weight benzyl (meth)acrylate per polymer comprising 10 parts by weight glycidyl methacrylate (GMA), 62 parts by weight of methyl methacrylate, 20 parts by weight of methacrylic acid, and 18 parts by weight of benzyl methacrylate.
13. Regarding Claim 5, Okada fails to explicitly teach the alkali-soluble polymer comprises 50 wt% or more, or 70 wt% or more of benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component. While Okada fails to explicitly teach the alkali-soluble polymer comprises 50 wt% or more, or 70 wt% or more of benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component, Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0027 and 0050]) the alkali-soluble polymer comprises 84 wt% of benzyl (meth)acrylate as a copolymerization component. MPEP §2144.05(II)(A) states: “’where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.’ In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).” Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to discover optimum or workable ranges of benzyl (meth)acrylate content.
14. Regarding Claim 7, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound comprises an acrylate monomer and a methacrylate monomer, herein Okada teaches several cross-linking agents, including KAYARAD TMPTA, which comprises both an acrylate monomer and a methacrylate monomer.
15. Regarding Claim 8, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) wherein the weight ratio between the acrylate monomer and the methacrylate monomer (acrylate monomer/methacrylate monomer) is 1.2 or more and 25.0 or less.
16. Regarding Claim 9, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0027]) the alkali-soluble polymer is free of styrene and a styrene derivative as copolymerization components.
17. Regarding Claim 10, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0028]) the alkali-soluble polymer has an acid equivalent of 410 to 5,611, herein Okada teaches an acid number of 10 to 200 mg of KOH/g of polymer which is the mass of KOH needed to neutralize a gram of polymer, whereas the term “acid equivalent” disclosed by the present application is the mass of polymer/mole of carboxyl group. Thus, a while a high acid number as taught by Okada indicates a greater amount of carboxyl groups, the present application discloses an acid equivalent wherein a higher value indicates a lesser amount (per gram of polymer) of carboxyl groups. Converting an acid number of 10 to 200 mg of KOH/g of polymer, as taught by Okada, to moles of KOH/g of polymer is found by dividing by the molecular mass of KOH, which is 56.1056 g/mol, is 1.782 x 10^-4 mol of KOH to 3.564 x 10^-3 mol of KOH/g of polymer. One mole of KOH neutralizes one mole of carboxyl group in the polymer, thus the inverse of these values equates to an acid equivalent of 280.5 to 5,611, which overlaps with the claimed range of the present application.
18. Regarding Claim 12, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound is free of a trimethylolpropane backbone-containing compound, herein Okada teaches several cross-linking agents, including KAYARAD TMPTA which is free of a trimethylolpropane backbone-containing compound.
19. Regarding Claim 13, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound comprises a tetra- or higher functional compound, herein Okada teaches several cross-linking agents, including KAYARAD TMPTA which is a tetra- or higher functional compound.
20. Regarding Claims 14 and 16, Okada teaches (Paragraph [0033]) the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound comprises at least 72 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, herein Okada teaches several cross-linking agents, including KAYARAD TMPTA wherein 72 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of KAYARAD TMPTA.
21. Regarding Claim 17, Okada fails to explicitly teach the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound comprises 50 to 100 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound AND has a double bond equivalent of 200 or more and 500 or less. That said, Okada teaches a number of ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compounds with proprietary information regarding, specifically, their molecular weight and might thus achieve the both the acrylate monomer equivalents and double bond equivalents claimed in the same compound.
22. Fujii teaches (Paragraph [0015]) that increasing the double bond equivalent of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, therein the photopolymerizable compound, that having an increased double bond equivalent value results in a lowered crosslinking density, thereby the permeation rate of the peeling liquid is improved and the peeling time is shortened. MPEP 2144.05(II)(A) states: “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Herein, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, including combining multiple compounds to comprise the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, such that it both comprises 50 to 100 wt% of an acrylate monomer based on the total weight of the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound AND has a double bond equivalent of 200 or more and 500 or less.
23. Regarding Claim 18, Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0029 and 0033]) the weight ratio between the alkali-soluble polymer and the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound is 1.40 or more, or 1.60 or more, herein Okada teaches the alkali-soluble polymer comprising 10 to 90 wt% of the solids of the photosensitive resin and comprises 20 wt% to 80 wt% of the solids content of the photosensitive resin composition. Thus, for example, Okada teaches both a composition comprising 50 wt% alkali-soluble polymer and 33 wt% ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, which equates to a ratio of 1.50. MPEP §2144.05(II)(A) states: “’where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.’ In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).” Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to discover optimum or workable ranges of a ratio of alkali-soluble polymer to ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound.
24. Regarding Claim 20, Okada teaches (Paragraphs [0029 and 0033]) the weight ratio between the alkali-soluble polymer and the ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound is 1.80 or more, herein Okada teaches the alkali-soluble polymer comprising 10 to 90 wt% of the solids of the photosensitive resin and comprises 20 wt% to 80 wt% of the solids content of the photosensitive resin composition. Thus, for example, Okada teaches both a composition comprising 50 wt% alkali-soluble polymer and 25 wt% ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound, which equates to a ratio of 2.00. MPEP §2144.05(II)(A) states: “’where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.’ In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).” Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to discover optimum or workable ranges of a ratio of alkali-soluble polymer to ethylenically unsaturated double bond-containing compound.
25. Regarding Claim 22, Okada fails to explicitly teach the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of more than 40 µm, more than 70 µm, more than 100 µm, or more than 150 µm.
26. Sago teaches (Paragraph [0035]) the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 40 µm to 300 µm, herein Sago teaches a photo-curable resin layer, analogous to a photosensitive resin layer, has a thickness of 10 µm to 300 µm, which overlaps with the range claimed by the present application. Sago teaches (Paragraphs [0024 and 0028]) teaches a photosensitive resin layer within this range exhibits good durability and reduced warpage.
27. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to incorporate the teachings of Sago wherein the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 40 µm to 300 µm. Doing so would result in good durability and reduced warpage, as recognized by Sago.
28. Regarding Claim 26, Okada fails to explicitly teach the thickness of the photosensitive resin layer is more than 200 µm.
29. Sago teaches (Paragraph [0035]) the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 200 µm to 300 µm, herein Sago teaches a photo-curable resin layer, analogous to a photosensitive resin layer, has a thickness of 10 µm to 300 µm, which overlaps with the range claimed by the present application. Sago teaches (Paragraphs [0024 and 0028]) teaches a photosensitive resin layer within this range exhibits good durability and reduced warpage.
30. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to incorporate the teachings of Sago wherein the photosensitive resin layer has a thickness of 200 µm to 300 µm. Doing so would result in good durability and reduced warpage, as recognized by Sago.
31. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0030600 A1), hereinafter Okada; in view of Sago et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2016/0358833 A1), hereinafter Sago; and further in view of Kubota (United States Patent Publication No. US 2013/0266900 A1), hereinafter Kubota; utilizing Fujii et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2015/174468 A1), hereinafter Fujii as a teaching reference.
32. Regarding Claim 3, Okada in view of Sago and further in view of Fujii as a teaching reference, teaches all limitations of Claim 1 above. However, Okada in view of Sago and further in view of Fujii as a teaching reference fails to explicitly teach that when the thickness of the photosensitive resin layer is designated as T [µm] and the absorbance at a wavelength of 365 nm of the photosensitive resin layer is designated as A, a relationship represented by the following expression: 0 < A/T <0.007; is satisfied.
33. Kubota teaches (Paragraphs [0068-0070]) that when the thickness of the photosensitive resin layer is designated as T [µm] and the absorbance at a wavelength of 365 nm of the photosensitive resin layer is designated as A, a relationship represented by the following expression: 0.001 ≤ A/T <0.007; is satisfied, herein Kubota teaches 0.001 ≤ A/T ≤ 0.020, which overlaps with the range claimed by the present application. Kubota teaches (Paragraphs [0068-0070]) that by keeping the A/T value within the range taught prevents insufficient photocuring reaction at the bottom parts of the exposed sections, while having adequate photoabsorption in the photosensitive layer.
34. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada in view of Sago and further in view of Fujii as a teaching reference to incorporate the teachings of Kubota that when the thickness of the photosensitive resin layer is designated as T [µm] and the absorbance at a wavelength of 365 nm of the photosensitive resin layer is designated as A, a relationship represented by the following expression: 0.001 ≤ A/T <0.007. Doing so would result in a prevention of insufficient photocuring reaction at the bottom parts of the exposed sections, while having adequate photoabsorption in the photosensitive layer, as recognized by Kubota.
35. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0030600 A1), hereinafter Okada; in view of Sago et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2016/0358833 A1), hereinafter Sago; and further in view of Irisawa et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2018/0046079 A1), hereinafter Irisawa; utilizing Fujii et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2015/174468 A1), hereinafter Fujii as a teaching reference.
36. Regarding Claim 21, Okada in view of Sago and further in view of Fujii as a teaching reference fails to explicitly teach the photopolymerization initiator comprises a 2,4,5- triarylimidazole dimer.
37. Irisawa teaches (Paragraphs [0042, 0045, and 0089]) the photopolymerization initiator comprises a 2,4,5- triarylimidazole dimer. Irisawa teaches (Paragraphs [0027 and 0046]) teaches said compounds are temperature activated and increase the resistance to an etching solution.
38. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada in view of Sago and further in view of Fujii as a teaching reference to incorporate the teachings of Irisawa wherein the photopolymerization initiator comprises a 2,4,5- triarylimidazole dimer. Doing so would result in an increased resistance to an etching solution, as recognized by Irisawa.
Conclusion
39. 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).
40. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
41. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to RICHARD D CHAMPION at telephone number (571) 272-0750. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Mon-Fri EST.
42. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MARK F 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.
43. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
44. 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.
/R.D.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/MARK F. HUFF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1737