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 .
Amendment to the specification and claims was submitted on 05/22/2026, the previous 112(b) rejections to claims 1-20 are withdrawn.
Claim Status
Claims 1-21 are under consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 16, particularly the newly amended claim limitation “the material being deposited without affecting a composition of the second portions”, it is unclear how the material may be selectively deposited over the second portions without affecting the composition of at least some portion of the second portions. It is interpreted by the examiner that selective deposition would be expected to affect the composition of at least a surface potion of the second portions.
Claims 2-15 and 17-18 depend on claims 1 and 16.
Regarding claim 21, it is unclear how the deposition gas and etch gas each have the same gas mixture, yet may contain differences in mixing ratio. It is interpreted by the examiner that two gases with the same gas mixture would necessarily have the same mixing ratio.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 14-15, filed 05/22/2026, with respect to the 103 rejection to independent claim 19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 19 discloses:
A method of patterning an underlying layer, the method comprising: depositing a metal-free polymer film over a substrate comprising an underlying layer by a spin-on process; oxidizing a portion of the metal-free polymer film by exposing the substrate to an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) irradiation through a photomask, the portion of the metal-free polymer film being a region exposed to the EUV irradiation, the oxidizing comprising a photoreaction in response to the EUV irradiation; loading the substrate into a processing chamber; exposing the substrate to a plasma to selectively remove the region exposed to the EUV irradiation, the plasma being generated in the processing chamber, wherein an etch rate of the region exposed to the EUV irradiation is greater by at least a factor of 2 than an etch rate of a region masked by the photomask and not exposed to the EUV irradiation; and patterning the underlying layer disposed under the metal-free polymer film using the masked region as an etch mask.
The closest prior arts Hirano and Park each teach similar compositions and methods as disclosed in the office action filed 02/27/2026.
However, neither Hirano nor Park teach the above steps of oxidizing a portion of a metal-free polymer by exposure to EUV irradiation, where the exposed portion is exposed to a plasma for selective removal (dry development), wherein an etch rate of the region exposed to the EUV irradiation is greater by at least a factor of 2 than an etch rate of a region masked by the photomask and not exposed to the EUV irradiation.
Neither Hirano, Park, nor the prior art in general provide sufficient motivation to make it obvious to modify their inventions to arrive at the instantly claimed invention.
Claim 20 depends on allowable independent claim 19.
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 Alexander Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2261. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5:30 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, Keith Walker can be reached at (571) 272-3458. 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.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights