DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the amendment received April 15, 2026.
Bolded text is new to the office action.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-6 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KONOSHIMA et al (2019/0265592) in view of YANAGISAWA et al (2015/0315153).
The claimed invention now recites the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
326
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
KONOSHIMA et al report a positive metal containing composition comprising an organometallic compound, a photoacid, and a metal chelate and other ingredients.
On page 4, para. [0033] a metal chelate compound is reported which contains a central metal and ligands coordinated to the central metal, see below for the specific metal elements and the ligand:
PNG
media_image2.png
464
380
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Applicants are directed to para. [0054], page 6 for the disclosed photoacid generator which include the following halogen element:
PNG
media_image3.png
86
368
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The disclosure in KONOSHIMA et al meet the claimed photoresist composition of claim 1 for the first ligand bonded to the central metal and the second ligand not bonded with the central metal.
The PAG can be seen as a ligand which is not bonded to the central metal in the metal chelate compound reported as the organic tin compound above.
Claim 2 and 3 are meets the halogen element in para. [0052] of KONOSHIMA et al.
Claim 4 is met by the photoacids having no having a halogen element as seen in KONOSHIMA, para. [0054] for toluene sulfonic acid salt which is generated by exposure to UV radiation.
Claims 5 and 6 are met by the disclosure in YANAGISAWA et al on page 4, para. [0047] for a toluene sulfonate naphthalimide which is a heteroatom containing compound with a fused ring.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive metalorganic films to select known combination of the ligands and a second ligand not bonded to the central metal such as a photoacid generator having halogen elements with the reasonable expectation of same or similar results for high fine conductive pattern having good appearance and high reliability.
The rejection is repeated wherein the prior art of KONOSHIMA et al disclose a thermal acid generator containing a trifluoromethanesulfonic acid which is not bonded to the central metal and a photoacid generator such as p-toluene sulfonic acid as an additional ligand KONOSHIMA et al teaches mixtures of the thermal acid generator and the photoacid generator see para. [0051] to [0056] with the compounds highlighted below:
PNG
media_image4.png
544
380
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
556
380
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-15 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TALAPIN et al (2022/0011664A1) in view of ZI et al (2022/0291587).
The claimed invention recites the following for claims 17 and 20
PNG
media_image6.png
266
604
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
130
634
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
584
636
media_image8.png
Greyscale
TALAPIN et al disclose a photosensitive, inorganic ligand-capped inorganic nanocrystal particles. The reference discloses bifunctional ligands and a two-component ligand system.
The two-component ligand system contains a surface-binding anionic ligands or inorganic ligands having halogens, see para. [0039] for the CdCl3 –. These ligands bind to a nanocrystal reported in para. [0026] – [0031], with para. [0030], attached below:
PNG
media_image9.png
222
376
media_image9.png
Greyscale
The second component contains photochemically active cations and molecules reported in para. [0043] to [0048]. The ligands include PAG cations having sulfonium and iodonium cations which may be paired with anions having halogen groups, see para. [0044], below:
PNG
media_image10.png
332
370
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
254
364
media_image11.png
Greyscale
TALAPIN et al meets the recited first ligand, second ligand components of claims 17 having a halogen element as seen in Example 2, page 15, para. [0139] to [0145], the nanocrystal ligand and the photoacid generators are disclosed in para. [0142] and [0143], below:
PNG
media_image12.png
606
372
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Claims 7-10 are met above for the first ligand having a halogen element and claims 8 and 9 are met by the anionic ligands such as alkylamine which contains a heteroatom bonded to the nanocrystal, see in para. [0039] below:
PNG
media_image13.png
242
368
media_image13.png
Greyscale
The use of a single metallic ligands or a combination to optimize the results of the photoresist is known in the art so as to meet claim 10 for an additional first ligand.
Claims 11-15 are met wherein in para.[0039] for the heteroatom containing ligands bonded to the disclosed nanocrystals in para. [0030].
Claim 17 is met by the disclose in KONOSHIMA et al for the photoacid generator meeting the second ligand having and TALAPIN et al for the first and photochemically active cations having halogen elements, see para [0044], above.
Claims 18 and 19 are met by the disclosed bifunctional ligands in para. [0042], wherein the metal-free anion includes X as a halogen element and other such as triflate and carbamate meeting the ligands without a halogen.
Claim 20 is met by the disclose in ZI et al (2019/0103306) wherein a process for forming a pattern image is disclosed with an underlayer which is overcoated with a metallic photoresist, see claims 15-20 and para. [0046] the pre-exposure bake and para. [0058] for the post-exposure bake in the method of pattern formation and making a semiconductor device.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive metallic compositions to employ a similar method steps on the composition of TALAPIN et al for form patterned image for manufacturing a semiconductor device and select multiple anionic ligands to optimize the photosensitive, inorganic ligand-capped nanocrystals for high resolution and low cost per patterned element.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN S. CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-1329. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, IFP-Flex.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Hendricks, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1401. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
J. Chu
June 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights