DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the amendment received July 10, 2026.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHOI et al (TW 201807502 A).
The claimed invention now recites the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
870
662
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
712
688
media_image2.png
Greyscale
CHOI et al meet the claimed invention wherein an underlayer composition comprising a compound (A-6), (A-7), (A-10) and (A-11), see below:
PNG
media_image3.png
134
518
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
594
516
media_image4.png
Greyscale
meets the claimed compound Formula (1) wherein R5 is also seen as any of the aldehyde compounds defined for (a-2):
as alkylene divalent group. (A) reacted with compound (B) of claim 1, 2 and 3, see below:
PNG
media_image5.png
248
944
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 2 is met by formula A-8 in para. [0104] above.
Claim 3 is for R and R being hydrogen is met by any of A-6- to A-11 for the carbazole compound.
Claim 4 for the crosslinking agent is disclosed in para. [0078] to [0082], see [0079] to [0082] below:
PNG
media_image6.png
418
304
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 5 to the acid is disclosed in para. [0084]:
PNG
media_image7.png
74
508
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
196
502
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 6 to the solvent is reported in paras.[0071] and [0072]:
PNG
media_image9.png
132
514
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
156
512
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Butyrolactone has a boiling point of 206o C meeting claim 6.
Claims 7 and 8 to the underlayer film wherein a coated film is test by thermogravimetric analysis in paras. [0114] to [0125] . The method of producing a semiconductor device is taught in the Background-Art wherein the underlayer is designed for photolithographic processing methods.
No claims above are allowed.
The rejection is repeated wherein the structures of Formula 3 and Formula 4 are the condensed polymers of a reaction between the carbazole and an aldehyde-type compounds such as glyoxal, see Synthesis Example 2 of the current specification (page 16 of the PGPub).
Applicants are directed to the aldehyde compounds in CHOI et al wherein the list of equivalent aldehydes include glyoxal. See below:
PNG
media_image11.png
206
634
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHOI et al (TW 201807502 A) above further in view of HORIGUCHI et al (WO-2008047638 A1).
The claimed invention has been recited above and is included by reference.
CHOI et al disclose each of the claimed components above however, lack the explicit method of forming a semiconductor device and lack the disclosed used of a photoacid generator.
HORIGUCHI et al is cited to disclose underlayers for photoresists wherein the addition of photoacid generators (claim 5) and crosslinkers (claim 4) in the underlayer composition is taught wherein the underlayer can be coated without heating at a high temperature, see para [0005] in the translation below for the photoacid:
PNG
media_image12.png
234
948
media_image12.png
Greyscale
The crosslinking agent can be found in para. [0021] in the translation below:
PNG
media_image13.png
266
940
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-8 have been addressed in the previous paragraph rejection under 35 USC 103 under CHOI et al.
HORIGUCHI et al disclose the use of the underlayers in the formation of semiconductor devices in the Background of the art as well teaching that typical method for forming semiconductor devices is taught.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of resist underlayer composition to add a photoacid generator to the art of CHOI et al along with a crosslinking agent to the underlayer comprising a compound reaction product of propargyl carbazole with an aldehyde/ketone such as (A-1) and employ them in methods for forming semiconductor devices by coating a substrate, overcoating with a photoresist, exposing and developing to form patterns with the reasonable expectation of same or similar results for underlayers which can be coated without high heat and continue to have high heat resistance.
The rejection is repeated wherein the structures of Formula 3 and Formula 4 are the condensed polymers of a reaction between the carbazole and an aldehyde-type compounds such as glyoxal, see Synthesis Example 2 of the current specification (page 16 of the PGPub).
Applicants are directed to the aldehyde compounds in CHOI et al wherein the list of equivalent aldehydes include glyoxal. See below:
PNG
media_image11.png
206
634
media_image11.png
Greyscale
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 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
September 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights