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 5, filed 27 March 2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 and 5 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, have been fully considered and, in light of the claim amendments made, are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 1 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, has been withdrawn.
2. Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, line 11, filed 27 March 2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Maruyama et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2022/138044 A1), hereinafter Maruyama; and Claims 13-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maruyama et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2022/138044 A1), hereinafter Maruyama; have been fully considered and, in light of the claim amendments made, are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Maruyama in a 35 U.S.C. 103 obviousness rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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:
4. 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.
5. Claims 1 and 3-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maruyama et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Publication No. WO 2022/138044 A1), hereinafter Maruyama.
6. Regarding Claims 1 and 3-17, Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) an onium salt compound comprising a sulfonate anion. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the onium salt compound comprises a structure wherein a polymerizable unsaturated bond is linked to an aromatic group substituted with one iodine atom via a carbon chain having two carbons, wherein at least one carbon atom may be replaced by an ether bond, ester bond or lactone ring-containing moiety. Herein, Maruyama teaches a monomer combined with other monomers to form the last listed repeating unit of experimental polymers P-2, P-3, P-4, and P-6 which meets said limitation, save for number of carbon atoms. Furthermore, Maruyama teaches the corresponding Structural Unit (III) which as the general structure of formula (iii-2) which teaches said monomers, but has the broader limitation for moiety L5 which is defined as “L5 is a single bond, -R30a-CO-O-, -R30a-O- or -R30a-O-CO-. R30a is a divalent group containing -O-, -CO- or -COO- between carbon-carbon bonds of an alkanediyl group having 1 to 12 carbon atoms or an alkanediyl group having 2 to 12 carbon atoms.” Thus, Maruyama teaches, at minimum, a monomer combined with other monomers to form the last listed repeating unit of experimental polymers P-2, P-3, P-4, and P-6 wherein said monomer Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the onium salt compound comprising a sulfonate anion further comprising a sulfonium or iodonium cation. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the onium salt compound having the formula (1) of the present application. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the onium salt compound having the formula (1a) of the present application. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the onium salt compound having the formula (1b) of the present application. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the onium salt compound wherein the cation Za+ of formula (1) of the present application has the structure of formula (Z-1) of the present application. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) a polymer comprising repeat units derived from the onium salt compound. Maruyama teaches (Paragraph [0174]) a resist composition comprising a base polymer containing the polymer of claim 6 of the present application and an organic solvent. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) the polymers further comprise repeat units having the formula (b1) of the present application. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) wherein the polymer further comprises repeat units having the formula (c) of the present application. Maruyama teaches (Paragraph [0170], Table 1, specifically the composition of experimental example compositions 9, 11, 13, and 17-18 comprising acid diffusion controller Q-1) the resist composition further comprising a quencher, therein an acid diffusion controller. Herein, Applicant in the present application in Paragraph [0236] describes a quencher as “the quencher refers to a compound capable of trapping the acid, which is generated by the acid generator in the resist composition upon light exposure, to prevent the acid from diffusing to the unexposed region,” while Maruyama in Paragraph [0113] describes an acid diffusion controller as being “blended in the present composition for the purpose of suppressing a chemical reaction caused by an acid in a non-exposure region by suppressing diffusion of an acid generated from the acid generator in the resist film by exposure.” Maruyama teaches (Paragraph [0169], Table 1, specifically the composition of experimental example compositions 9, 11, 13, and 17-18 comprising photoacid generator PAG8, PAG9, and PAG12) the resist composition further comprising a photoacid generator. Maruyama teaches (Paragraph [0174]) the resist composition further comprising a surfactant. Maruyama teaches (Paragraph [0159]) applying the resist composition onto a substrate to form a resist film thereon. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0160-0161]) exposing the resist film to high-energy radiation, therein radiation. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0162-0165]) developing the exposed resist film in a developer. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0160]) radioactive rays, i.e. high-energy radiation, is selected from ArF excimer laser of wavelength 193 nm, KrF excimer laser of wavelength 248 nm, or electron beam (EB). Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) wherein X1 of formula (1) of the present application is an ether bond or ester bond, and X2 to X4 of formula (1) of the present application are a single bond, ether bond, ester bond, sulfonic ester bond or carbonate bond. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) wherein X2 of formula (1) of the present application is an ether bond, ester bond, sulfonic ester bond or carbonate bond. Maruyama teaches (Paragraphs [0058-0067 and 0172-0173]) wherein L1 of formula (1) of the present application is a C2-C15 hydrocarbylene group in which some or all hydrogen may be substituted by a heteroatom-containing moiety, and some constituent -CH2- may be replaced by a lactone ring-containing moiety.
7. A person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that each element of the process claimed herein, although not necessarily in a single experimental example, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the experimental examples of Maruyama being, for Claims 1, 3-12, and 15-17, a further carbon comprising L1 of formula (1) of the present application, and for Claims 13-14, the lack of an actual combination of said process elements in a single experimental example. Herein with regards to Claims 13-14, it’s worth noting that the only limitation claimed by the present application in Claim 13 not taught by a single experimental example is applying the resist composition onto a substrate to form a resist film thereon. Paragraph [0175] of Maruyama teaches applying an underlayer film onto a substrate, i.e. a silicon wafer, and then applying the resist composition onto the underlayer film. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to follow the fabrication method taught in the detailed description of Maruyama.
Conclusion
8. 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).
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KEITH D HENDRICKS can be reached at (571) 272-1401. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
12. 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).
13. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/R.D.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights