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 .
Amendment to the claims and abstract were submitted on 08/26/2026, claim 2 is canceled, and the 112(d) rejection to claim 2 is withdrawn.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 5-13, and 16-19 are under consideration
Claims 2-4 are canceled
Claims 14-15 are withdrawn
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/26/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 6-13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemura (US20200041903A1, published 2020) in view of Tsubaki (US20120315449A1, published 2012) and Ohashi (US20100055608A1, published 2010).
Regarding claims 1, 6-13, and 16-19,
Takemura teaches a photosensitive resin composition comprising of a solvent and an alkali-soluble polymer having a polyamide structural unit, a polyamide-imide structural unit, or a polyimide structural unit, selected from a polyamide, a polyamide-imide, a polyimide, a polyimide precursor, a polybenzoxazole, and a polybenzoxazole precursor, including a reaction product of a diamine containing at least one of a diamine shown by the following general formula (1) and a diamine shown by the following general formula (2), together with at least one of a tetracarboxylic dianhydride shown by the following general formula (3) as well as a dicarboxylic acid and a dicarboxylic halide shown by the following general formula (4) [abstract].
PNG
media_image1.png
561
286
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Takemura teaches an example resin formed from 6FAP and AN-9 [0282], reading on the instant resin (A), reading on instant claims 6-9, and 13.
PNG
media_image2.png
104
344
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
199
403
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Takemura teaches a photoacid generator [0044], reading on the instant photoacid generator (B).
Takemura teaches a crosslinking agent may be the following [0222], where u is 1-3, reading on the instant crosslinking agent (C).
PNG
media_image4.png
130
311
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Takemura teaches a thermal acid generator as shown below [0316].
PNG
media_image5.png
168
176
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, Takemura fails to teach a compound aligning with that of instant component (D).
Ohashi, analogous art, teaches a resist composition comprising of photoacid generator [0002] which further contains a quencher as a compound capable of suppressing the rate of diffusion when the acid generated by the acid generator diffuses within the resist film. The inclusion of quencher facilitates adjustment of resist sensitivity and holds down the rate of acid diffusion within the resist film, resulting in better resolution. In addition, it suppresses changes in sensitivity following exposure and reduces substrate and environment dependence, as well as improving the exposure latitude and the pattern profile [0206-0207]. Ohashi teaches the quencher may be a nitrogen containing compound such as tetrabutylammonium acetate [0208, 0223].
As both Ohashi and Takemura teach photosensitive resist compositions comprising of a photoacid generator, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include the a tetrabutylammonium acetate quencher as taught by Ohashi to the composition of Takemura for the benefits disclosed by Ohashi.
However, Takemura only discloses their composition for use as a positive photosensitive resin composition.
Tsubaki, analogous art, teaches a positive resist composition decreases solubility in a negative developer when exposed to irradiation, then developing with a negative developer [abstract], functioning as a negative resist composition.
As both Takemura and Tsubaki teaches positive resist compositions, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the resist film of Takemura may similarly function as a negative photoresist composition when exposed then developed with a negative developer, reading on instant claim 1.
Takemura teaches their resin may further contain a tetracarboxylic acid diester unit shown by the following general formula (22), wherein W1 represents a tetravalent organic group, and R16 is more preferably group shown by the following general formula ( 23-1 ) [0034-0037],
PNG
media_image6.png
132
389
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
31
369
media_image7.png
Greyscale
where Rf is a linear, branched, or cyclic alkyl group or an aromatic group having 1 to 20 carbon atoms, provided that all of or a part of the hydrogen atoms is substituted by a fluorine atom, reading on instant claims 10-12.
Takemura teaches that a cured film of their invention is excellent as a protective film for electric and electronic parts as well as an insulating protective film using the polymer as a base resin [0079], reading on instant claims 16-19.
Claims 1, 5, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iio (US20220043348A1, published 2/20/2022) in view of Ohashi (US20100055608A1, published 2010).
Regarding claims 1, 5, and 9,
Iio teaches a negative photosensitive resin composition comprising of an alkali-soluble resin containing at least one or more structures selected from a polyimide structure, a polyamide structure, a polybenzoxazole structure, a polyamide-imide structure, and a precursor structure thereof, a compound that generates an acid by light (photoacid generator), a crosslinking agent [abstract], and a solvent [0171], aligning with the instant components (A), (B), and (E).
Iio teaches their crosslinking agent is more preferably selected from an amino condensate modified by formaldehyde or formaldehyde-alcohol; and a phenol compound having two or more methylol groups or alkoxymethylol groups by average in one molecule [0138], aligning with the instant component (C).
Iio teaches their photoacid generator may be a sulfonium salt comprising of a triphenylsulfonium cation and a trifluoromethanesulfonate anion [0116-0117], where one of their acid generators may be used or a combination of two or more thereof may be used [0128], reading on instant claim 5.
Iio teaches their polymer may be formed from 2,2-bis(3-amino-4-hydroxyphenyl)hexafluoropropane (6FAP) and 3,3′,4,4′-oxydiphthalic dianhydride (s-ODPA) [0198], reading on instant claim 9.
PNG
media_image8.png
237
460
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
252
449
media_image9.png
Greyscale
However, Iio fails to teach a compound aligning with that of instant component (D).
Ohashi, analogous art, teaches a resist composition comprising of photoacid generator [0002] which further contains a quencher as a compound capable of suppressing the rate of diffusion when the acid generated by the acid generator diffuses within the resist film. The inclusion of quencher facilitates adjustment of resist sensitivity and holds down the rate of acid diffusion within the resist film, resulting in better resolution. In addition, it suppresses changes in sensitivity following exposure and reduces substrate and environment dependence, as well as improving the exposure latitude and the pattern profile [0206-0207]. Ohashi teaches the quencher may be a nitrogen containing compound such as tetrabutylammonium acetate [0208, 0223].
As both Ohashi and Iio teach photosensitive resist compositions comprising of a photoacid generator, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include the a tetrabutylammonium acetate quencher as taught by Ohashi to the composition of Iio for the benefits disclosed by Ohashi, reading on instant claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 08/26/2026 with respect to the 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the new claim amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ohashi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2261. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5:30 EST.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at (571) 272-3458. 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.
/Alexander N. Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights