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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-11 and 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Houlihan (US2009/0104559; IDS, 04/22/2024).
Houlihan discloses a photoresist composition that is used over a substrate and the antireflective coating that is also disclosed. Houlihan discloses in example 19: a solution of EAdMA (2-Ethyladamantyl methacrylate)/AdOMMA (2-adamantanyloxymethyl methacrylate)/HAdA (2-hydroxyadamantantyl acrylate)/.alpha.-GBLMA (alpha.-gamma-butyrolactonyl methacrylate )/AdMA (1-adamantanyl methacrylate) (7.36 g). (Para, 0128). These disclosures teach the limitation of claim 1, ‘A resist composition comprising: a resin…’ and the limitation of claims 13-17. Houlihan discloses the photoresist composition also includes bis(4-tert-butylphenyl)iodonium bis-perfluoroethane sulfonimide, (0.22 g), bis(triphenylsulfonium) perfluorobutane-1,4-disulfonate (0.2 g), (bis(4-tert-butylphenyl)iodonium)-1,4-perfluorobutanedisulfonate (0.16 g), 2,6-disopropylaniline (0.04 g), FC 4430 (0.02 g), methyl-2-hydroxyisobutyrate (153.58 g), PGME (1-methoxy-2-propanol) (36.36 g), gamma-valerolactone (0.78 g). (Para, 0128). These disclosures teach the limitation of claim 1, ‘A resist composition comprising: …a solvent (B1) a compound represented by the following general formula (b-1)
wherein a content of an active component is 45% by mass or less based on total amount of the resist composition
PNG
media_image1.png
147
376
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R1 is an alkyl group having 1-10 carbon atoms.’ Moreover, these disclosures also teach the limitation of claims 2, 5 and 7-11. Houlihan discloses this solution was rolled overnight, and then filtered through a 0.2 micron PTFE filter. (Para, 0128).
Houlihan then discloses in example 20 a lithographic evaluation of the anti-reflective coating composition of example 18, using the photoresist composition of example 19. Houlihan discloses a silicon substrate coated with the bottom antireflective coating composition of Example 18 (DBARC) was prepared by spin coating the bottom antireflective coating solution onto the silicon substrate at a spin speed of 2350 rpm and soft baked at 120C. for 60 sec resulting in a DBARC with a film thickness of 40 nm. (Para, 0128). Houlihan discloses the photoresist composition from Example 19 was then coated onto the DBARC coated silicon substrate. (Para, 0129). Houlihan discloses the spin speed was 1500 rpm and the photoresist film thickness was 150 nm and PAB of 100C for 60 seconds. (Para, 0129). Houlihan discloses the coated wafer was then exposed using a Nikon S306D 193 nm exposure tool using a NA=0.75 and conventional Illumination with a sigma of 0.6 s with a binary reticle. (Para, 0129). Houlihan discloses after exposure, the coated wafer was baked at a PEB of 115C for 60 s and developed in 2.38% TMAH at 21C for 30 seconds. (Para, 0129). These disclosures teach the limitations of claim 18. Houlihan discloses a resolution down to 140 nm L/S feature (1:1 and 1:5 at same dose) was obtained with a dose of about 15-20 mJ/cm2. (Para, 0129).
Therefore, claims 1-3, 5, 7-11 and 13-18 are anticipated by the disclosures of Houlihan as discussed above.
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 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.
Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houlihan.
The disclosures of Houlihan as discussed in paragraph 3 above fail to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 4, ‘The resist composition according claim 1,wherein R1 in the general formula (b-1) is an ethyl group, an n-propyl group, an i-propyl group, an n-butyl group, an i-butyl group, an s-butyl group, or a t-butyl group.’ However, the recitations of claim 4 are obvious in view of the disclosures of Houlihan.
As discussed in paragraph 3 above Houlihan explicitly discloses the resist composition includes solvent components such as methyl-2-hydroxyisobutyrate (153.58 g), PGME (1-methoxy-2-propanol) (36.36 g). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that ethyl-2-hydroxyisobutyrate would be a reasonable substitute for methyl-2-hydroxyisobutyrate. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would also appreciate that ethyl-2-hydroxyisobutryrate would function similar to methyl-2-hydroxisobutyrate in the resist composition disclosed in Houlihan. Therefore, while the disclosures of Houlihan do not explicitly teach the limitation of claim 4 the disclosures of Houlihan as discussed above contemplate the limitation of claim 4 as well as the limitation of claim 6.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houlihan as applied to claims 1-3, 5, 7-11 and 13-18 in paragraph 3 above, and further in view of Bogan (EP 397460).
The disclosures of Houlihan as discussed in paragraph 3above fail to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 12, ‘ The resist composition according to claim 1,wherein the resin (A) comprises a novolac resin (A1).’ However, the disclosures of Houlihan further in view of the disclosures of Bogan provide such teachings.
Bogan discloses the use of highly branched novolaks in photoresists. Bogan discloses the novolak resins are used a film-forming binder in a photoresist composition which increases photo speed, and lithographic contrast of the photoresist. (Abstract). The disclosures of Houlihan further disclose that the inclusion of such novolaks in the photoresist optimizes side-wall profile of the image to be as close as perpendicular to the substrate as possible. (Pg, 2, 45-53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the present application by Applicant to modify the disclosures of Houlihan further in view of the disclosures of Bogan because both disclose photoresist composition and Bogan discloses a resin component which when added will improve the resulting lithographic patterning process of the resist composition disclosed in Houlihan.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEEN O SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6569. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30 am-4:00 pm.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/CALEEN O SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights