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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07 March 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, line 20, filed 25 November 2024, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2008/0227037 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama; and further in view of Baek et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2020/0081346 A1), hereinafter Baek; and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2012/0202158 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama 2; Claims 9-11 and 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2017-095444 A), hereinafter Higo; in view of Baek et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2020/0081346 A1), hereinafter Baek; Claim 25 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2017-095444 A), hereinafter Higo; in view of Baek et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2020/0081346 A1), hereinafter Baek; and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2012/0202158 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama 2; Claims 16, 19, and 21-23 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2013/0078572 A1), hereinafter Shimizu; in view of Shibaski et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2009/0029181 A1), hereinafter Shibasaki; and further in view of Arimitsu et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2017/0293225 A1), hereinafter Arimitsu; Claim 17 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2013/0078572 A1), hereinafter Shimizu; in view of Shibaski et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2009/0029181 A1), hereinafter Shibasaki; and further in view of Arimitsu et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2017/0293225 A1), hereinafter Arimitsu; and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2012/0202158 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama 2; and Claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2013/0078572 A1), hereinafter Shimizu; in view of Shibaski et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2009/0029181 A1), hereinafter Shibasaki; and further in view of Arimitsu et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2017/0293225 A1), hereinafter Arimitsu; and further in view of Baek et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2020/0081346 A1), hereinafter Baek; have been fully considered and, in light of the 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 Ikeda et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2011/0244393A1), hereinafter Ikeda; and Lee et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) WO 2021/060672 A1; utilizing United States Patent Publication No. US 2022/0342313 A1 as an English language equivalent), hereinafter Lee.
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 1-5 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2008/0227037 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama; in view of Ikeda et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2011/0244393A1), hereinafter Ikeda; and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2012/0202158 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama 2.
6. Regarding Claims 1-5 and 27, Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraphs [0034-0064]) a polymer having pendant acid-labile groups. While not clearly defined by the present application, Cambridge defines pendant as: “hanging from or over something.” In the context of the present application, a pendant group is understood to mean a moiety bonded to, but not comprising part of, the backbone or main chain of the polymer. This is also sometimes referred to as a side group. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraph [0035-0036 and 0234-0239]) the acid-labile groups are 20 wt.% to 80 wt.% of the polymer having pendant acid-labile groups. Herein, Hatakeyama teaches an acid-labile group comprising the polymer wherein the mole fraction of the repeating unit comprising an acid-labile group comprising the polymer is 0 < a ≤ 1.0, which is sufficiently close to the claimed 20 wt.% to 80 wt.% of the polymer having repeating units comprising pendant acid-labile groups. As set forth in MPEP § 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Furthermore, the polymer of Synthetic Example 13 comprising 51.37 wt. % repeating units comprising pendant acid-labile groups. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraph [0059]) a polymer having crosslinking groups, therein stating the pendant groups therein enhanc[e] crosslinking efficiency. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraph [0059]) the crosslinking groups include the epoxy group of Claim 1 of the present application. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraphs [0059, 0062, and 0234-0239]) the crosslinking groups are 20 wt.% to 70 wt.% of the polymer having the crosslinking groups. Herein, Hatakeyama teaches an acid-labile group comprising the polymer wherein the mole fraction of the repeating unit comprising an acid-labile group comprising the polymer is 0 < b ≤ 0.7, which is sufficiently close to the claimed 20 wt.% to 80 wt.% of the polymer having the crosslinking groups. As set forth in MPEP § 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Furthermore, the polymer of Synthetic Example 13 comprising 31.39 wt. % repeating units having the crosslinking groups. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraph [0059]) a polymer having crosslinking groups. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraphs [0140-0141]) a solvent. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraphs [0055-0058]) the acid-labile group is connected to the polymer having the pendant acid-labile groups by a connecting group including, but not limited to, -C(=O)O-. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraph [0059]) the crosslinking group is connected to the polymer with a crosslinking group by a connecting group including, but not limited to, -C(=O)O-. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraphs [0055-0058]) the acid labile group is selected from the group consisting of those limited by Claim 5 of the present application. Hatakeyama teaches (Paragraph [0059]) the crosslinking group is connected to the acid labile group by the second connecting group.
7. However, Hatakeyama fails to explicitly teach a thermal acid generator. Furthermore, Hatakeyama fails to explicitly teach the thermal acid generator selected from Claim 1 of the present application. Furthermore, Hatakeyama fails to explicitly teach the composition comprises 5 wt.% to 40 wt.% of the thermal acid generator. Furthermore, Hatakeyama in view of Baek fails to explicitly teach a photobase generator. Furthermore, Hatakeyama fails to explicitly teach the photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claim 27 of the present application.
8. Ikeda teaches (Paragraphs [0040-0047], principally compound (i) of Paragraph [0046]) a thermal acid generator, therein a compound that generates an acid when excited. Ikeda teaches (Paragraphs [0040-0047], principally compound (i) of Paragraph [0046]) the first thermal acid generator listed in Claim 1 of the present application. Ikeda teaches (Paragraph [0047]) the composition comprises 5 wt.% to 10 wt.% of the thermal acid generator. Therein, Ikeda teaches 0.5 wt. % to 20 wt. % thermal acid generator. As set forth in MPEP § 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Ikeda teaches (Paragraphs [0008 and 0113]) that use of said thermal acid generator results in an exact desired shape of the patterned photoresist.
9. 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 Hatakeyama to incorporate the teachings of Ikeda to comprise a thermal acid generator, 5 wt.% to 10 wt.% of the thermal acid generator, and the first thermal acid generator listed in Claim 1 of the present application. Doing so would result in an exact desired shape of the patterned photoresist, as recognized by Ikeda.
10. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0145-0160 and 0264, particularly 0147]) a photobase generator. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0145-0160 and 0264, particularly 0147]) the photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claim 27 of the present application. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0026-0035 and 0145]) said photobase generator produces basic amino compounds which neutralize acids.
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 Hatakeyama to incorporate the teachings of Hatakeyama 2 to comprise a photobase generator and a photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claim 27 of the present application. Doing so would have resulted in a photobase generator which produces basic amino compounds which neutralize acids, as recognized by Hatakeyama 2.
12. Claims 9-11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2017-095444 A), hereinafter Higo; in view of Ikeda et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2011/0244393A1), hereinafter Ikeda.
13. Regarding Claims 9-11 and 14-15, Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0036-0071]) a polymer having pendant acid-labile groups. Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0008-0035]) a polymer having crosslinking groups. Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0008-0035]) the pendant crosslinking groups are connected to polymer through the acid-labile groups. Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0008-0035]) the crosslinking group is the epoxy group of Claim 9 of the present application. Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0036-0071]) the acid-labile group is connected to the polymer having the pendant acid-labile groups by a connecting group including, but not limited to, -C(=O)O-. Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0008-0035]) the crosslinking group is connected to the acid-labile by a second connecting group including, but not limited to, -C(=O)O-. Higo teaches (Paragraphs [0036-0071]) the acid labile group is selected from the group consisting of those limited by Claim 14 of the present application.
14. However, Higo fails to explicitly teach a thermal acid generator. Furthermore, Higo fails to explicitly teach the thermal acid generator selected from Claim 9 of the present application. Furthermore, Higo fails to explicitly teach the composition comprises 5 wt.% to 40 wt.% of the thermal acid generator.
15. Ikeda teaches (Paragraphs [0040-0047], principally compound (i) of Paragraph [0046]) a thermal acid generator, therein a compound that generates an acid when excited. Ikeda teaches (Paragraphs [0040-0047], principally compound (i) of Paragraph [0046]) the first thermal acid generator listed in Claim 9 of the present application. Ikeda teaches (Paragraph [0047]) the composition comprises 5 wt.% to 10 wt.% of the thermal acid generator. Therein, Ikeda teaches 0.5 wt. % to 20 wt. % thermal acid generator. As set forth in MPEP § 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Ikeda teaches (Paragraphs [0008 and 0113]) that use of said thermal acid generator results in an exact desired shape of the patterned photoresist.
16. 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 Higo to incorporate the teachings of Ikeda to comprise a thermal acid generator, 5 wt.% to 10 wt.% of the thermal acid generator, and the first thermal acid generator listed in Claim 9 of the present application. Doing so would result in an exact desired shape of the patterned photoresist, as recognized by Ikeda.
17. Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2017-095444 A), hereinafter Higo; in view of Ikeda et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2011/0244393A1), hereinafter Ikeda; and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2012/0202158 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama 2.
18. Higo in view of Ikeda teaches all limitations of Claim 9 of the present application above. However, Higo in view of Ikeda fails to explicitly teach a photobase generator. Furthermore, Higo in view of Ikeda fails to explicitly teach the photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claim 26 of the present application.
19. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0145-0160 and 0264, particularly 0147]) a photobase generator. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0145-0160 and 0264, particularly 0147]) the photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claim 27 of the present application. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0026-0035 and 0145]) said photobase generator produces basic amino compounds which neutralize acids.
20. 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 Higo in view of Ikeda to incorporate the teachings of Hatakeyama 2 to comprise a photobase generator and a photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claim 26 of the present application. Doing so would have resulted in a photobase generator which produces basic amino compounds which neutralize acids, as recognized by Hatakeyama 2.
21. Claims 16, 19, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2013/0078572 A1), hereinafter Shimizu; in view of Shibaski et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2009/0029181 A1), hereinafter Shibasaki; and further in view of Lee et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) WO 2021/060672 A1; utilizing United States Patent Publication No. US 2022/0342313 A1 as an English language equivalent), hereinafter Lee.
22. Regarding Claims 16, 19, and 21-23, Shimizu teaches (Paragraphs [0645-0648]) a thermal acid generator. Shimizu teaches (Paragraphs [0374-0532]) a photobase generator. Shimizu teaches (Paragraphs [1001-1003]) an alcohol. Shimizu teaches (Paragraphs [0989-1022]) a solvent. Shimizu teaches (Paragraphs [0989-1022]) the composition comprises 5 wt.% to 40 wt.% of alcohol. Herein, Shimizu teaches 85 wt. % to 99.8 wt. % of alcohol given that Shimizu teaches a composition comprising a solvent (which is taught as being an alcohol), a resin, and a photobase generator, wherein that 0.02 wt. % to 10 wt. % resin and 0.05 to 50 parts by weight photobase generator compared to 100 parts by weight resin (Paragraph [0452]).
23. However, Shimizu fails to explicitly teach a polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups, wherein the pendant carboxylic acid groups are 10 wt.% to 60 wt.% of the polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups. Furthermore, Shimizu fails to explicitly teach a polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups, wherein the pendant carboxylic acid groups are 20 wt.% to 50 wt.% of the polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups. Furthermore, Shimizu fails to explicitly teach a main chain of the polymer having the pendant carboxylic acid groups is a hydrocarbon chain. Furthermore, Shimizu fails to explicitly teach the polymer having the pendant carboxylic acid groups is a polyhydroxystyrene, polyacrylate, or polymethylmethacrylate. Furthermore, while Shimizu teaches (Paragraphs [1001-1003]) a polyhydric alcohol such as ethylene glycol, Shimizu fails to explicitly teach one of the alcohols of Claim 16 of the present application.
24. Shibasaki teaches (Paragraphs [0022-0039]) a polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups, wherein the pendant carboxylic acid groups are 20 wt.% to 60 wt.% of the polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups. Shibasaki teaches (Paragraphs [0022-0038]) a polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups, wherein the pendant carboxylic acid groups are 20 wt.% to 50 wt.% of the polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups. Shibasaki teaches (Paragraphs [0022-0038]) a main chain of the polymer having the pendant carboxylic acid groups is a hydrocarbon chain. Shibasaki teaches (Paragraphs [0022-0038]) the polymer having the pendant carboxylic acid groups is a polyacrylate or polymethylmethacrylate. Shibasaki teaches (Paragraph [0013]) said polymer has high in-depth curability and superior thermostability.
25. 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 Shimizu to incorporate the teachings of Shibasaki to comprise a polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups, wherein the pendant carboxylic acid groups are 20 wt.% to 60 wt.% of the polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups; a polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups, wherein the pendant carboxylic acid groups are 20 wt.% to 50 wt.% of the polymer having pendant carboxylic acid groups; a main chain of the polymer having the pendant carboxylic acid groups is a hydrocarbon chain; the polymer having the pendant carboxylic acid groups is a polyacrylate or polymethylmethacrylate. Doing so would result in high in-depth curability and superior thermostability, as recognized by Shibasaki.
26. Lee teaches (Paragraphs [0022-0023], Claim 3) an alcohol of those limited by Claim 16 of the present application. Lee teaches (Paragraph [0010]) the use of triols and tetraols results in a decrease of pattern defects and the capability to create fine patterns.
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 Shimizu to incorporate the teachings of Lee of alcohol of those limited by Claim 16 of the present application. Doing so would result in a decrease of pattern defects and the capability to create fine patterns, as recognized by Lee.
28. Claim 17 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2013/0078572 A1), hereinafter Shimizu; in view of Shibaski et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2009/0029181 A1), hereinafter Shibasaki; and further in view of Lee et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) WO 2021/060672 A1; utilizing United States Patent Publication No. US 2022/0342313 A1 as an English language equivalent), hereinafter Lee; and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2012/0202158 A1), hereinafter Hatakeyama 2.
29. Regarding Claims 17 and 24, Shimizu in view of Shibaski and further in view of Lee teaches all limitations of Claim 16 of the present application above. However, Shimizu in view of Shibaski and further in view of Lee fails to explicitly teach the photobase generator selected from Claims 17 or 24 of the present application.
30. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0145-0160 and 0264, particularly 0147]) the photobase generator is selected from at least one of the photobase generators of Claims 17 and 24 of the present application. Hatakeyama 2 teaches (Paragraphs [0026-0035 and 0145]) said photobase generator has the functionality of a photobase generator incorporated into the polymer, i.e. producing basic amino compounds which neutralize acids.
31. 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 Shimizu in view of Shibaski and further in view of Lee to incorporate the teachings of Hatakeyama 2 to comprise a photobase generator. Doing so would have resulted in a photobase generator has the functionality of a photobase generator incorporated into the polymer, i.e. producing basic amino compounds which neutralize acids, as recognized by Hatakeyama 2.
32. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2013/0078572 A1), hereinafter Shimizu; in view of Shibaski et al. (United States Patent Publication US 2009/0029181 A1), hereinafter Shibasaki; and further in view of Lee et al. (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) WO 2021/060672 A1; utilizing United States Patent Publication No. US 2022/0342313 A1 as an English language equivalent), hereinafter Lee; and further in view of Ikeda et al. (United States Patent Publication No. US 2011/0244393A1), hereinafter Ikeda.
33. Regarding Claim 18, Shimizu in view of Shibaski and further in view of Lee teaches all limitations of Claim 16 of the present application above. However, Shimizu in view of Shibaski and further in view of Lee fails to explicitly teach the thermal acid generator selected from Claim 18 of the present application.
34. Baek teaches (Paragraphs [0051-0063]) the thermal acid generator selected from Claim 18 of the present application. Baek teaches (Paragraph [0063]) the thermal acid generator therein enhanced the crosslinking of the resin and improved density and uniformity of the resultant layer.
35. 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 Shimizu in view of Shibaski and further in view of Lee to incorporate the teachings of Baek to comprise the thermal acid generator selected from Claim 18 of the present application. Doing so would result in enhanced crosslinking and improved density and uniformity, as recognized by Baek.
Conclusion
36. 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.
37. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark 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.
38. 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).
39. 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.
/RICHARD DAVID CHAMPION/Examiner, Art Unit 1737