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 Status
Claims 1-20 are under consideration
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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 1-3 and 6-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hatakeyama (US20180364570A1, published 2018).
Regarding claims 1-3, 6-13, and 15,
Hatakeyama teaches a positive or negative resist composition comprising of a base polymer and a photoacid generator (photoactive compound) for use in manufacturing of microelectronic devices [abstract, 0003, 0019, 0090], where the base polymer would be readily envisioned to includes a plurality of polymer chains, reading on the instant plurality of polymers.
Hatakeyama teaches a process for forming a pattern comprising the steps of applying the resist composition defined above onto a substrate, baking to form a resist film, exposing the resist film to high-energy radiation which may be EUV radiation, and developing the exposed film in a developer [0029-0030].
Hatakeyama teaches the photoresist layer formed on a substrate such as SOG or an organic antireflective film (underlying material layer which would be readily envisioned to be formed on a substrate such as a silicon wafer) [0141], reading on the instant deposition of a material layer on a substrate.
Hatakeyama teaches a crosslinking reaction takes place under the action of acid (such as the acid generated from the photoacid generator) [0005], reading on the instant formation of crosslinks between two or more polymers in portions of the photoresist layer exposed to the radiation.
Hatakeyama further teaches a post exposure bake [0141], which would be readily envisioned by a person of ordinary skill in the art to further promote crosslinking reactions.
Hatakeyama teaches their polymer may contain recurring units formed from the following monomers (a1), (b), and (c) respectively [0060-0062, 0068-0069], where R11 is an acid labile group, RA is H or methyl, and the OH group functions as a reactive group, reading on the instant recurring units z, x, and y respectively, reading on instant claims 10.
PNG
media_image1.png
92
76
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
102
65
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
77
75
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Hatakeyama further teaches further including a crosslinker which may be an epoxy compound, melamine compounds, hydroxy-containing compound, and compounds having a double bond such as an alkenyl ether group, where the compounds may be introduced into a polymer side chain as a pendant [0130], reading on the instant recurring unit v where a moiety comprising the crosslinker is CL and L4 is a direct bond, reading on instant claims 1 and 6-7.
The examiner interprets the instant CL group to be any structure containing the requisite groups, where the CL precursor only needs to be used to form a portion of the CL group.
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the crosslinker would bond to a reactive site when included as a pendant group in a polymer side chain, such as the OH group of the recurring units formed from following structure, resulting in a recurring unit reading on instant recurring unit v where the crosslinker and ester group are represented by CL and L4 is a direct bond, or the crosslinker is represented by CL and L4 is an ester group.
PNG
media_image3.png
77
75
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Hatakeyama teaches their crosslinker may be trimethylol propane trivinyl ether or trimethylolpropane triglycidyl ether (shown below) [0131-0132], reading on instant claims 2-3 and 8-9.
PNG
media_image4.png
103
247
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
90
133
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Hatakeyama teaches recurring unit (c) is optional [0083], reading on instant claims 11-12.
Hatakeyama teaches their acid labile group with the following structure, where each of R19-R21 may be a C1 alkyl group (t-butyl group, well known acid labile group in the art) [0065], reading on instant claims 13 and 15.
PNG
media_image6.png
72
207
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hatakeyama teaches their acid labile group with the following structure, where each of R15-R17 is preferably a C1-C20 alkyl group [0065], where the acid labile group contains an alkoxy group, reading on the instant Q including a CL group attached thereto of instant claim 19.
PNG
media_image7.png
79
220
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14,
The claims do not actually affirmatively require the addition of a 3D ring structure.
As this claim only add further limitations to the 3D ring structure, the examiner maintains that Hatakeyama anticipates and/or renders obvious the instant claim 14.
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatakeyama (US20180364570A1, published 2018) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 16-18,
Hatakeyama teaches the above limitations set forth.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the crosslinker would bond to a reactive site when included as a pendant group in a polymer side chain, such as the OH group of the recurring units formed from following structure, resulting in a recurring unit reading on instant recurring unit x where Ar1 would include at one or more occurrences a CL attached thereto, where the CL groups would also function as the instant reactive X1 group, reading on instant claim 16.
PNG
media_image2.png
102
65
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Each recurring unit, when present in the polymer would be readily envisioned by a person of ordinary skill in the art to comprise of more than one unit as each unit is “recurring”, reading on instant claims 17-18.
Claims 4-5 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatakeyama (US20180364570A1, published 2018) as applied to claims 1 and 16-18 above, and further in view of Wang (US20210341837A1, published 2021).
Regarding claims 4-5, 17-18, and 20,
Hatakeyama teaches the above limitations set forth, reading on instant claims 17-18 and 20.
Hatakeyama teaches their crosslinker may contain hydroxyl groups [0130].
However, Hatakeyama is silent to examples of crosslinkers with hydroxyl groups.
Wang, analogous art, teaches a photoresist composition comprising of a crosslinker which may be one of the following [abstract, 0075], reading on instant claims 4-5.
PNG
media_image8.png
167
245
media_image8.png
Greyscale
As both Hatakeyama and Wang teach photoresist composition comprising of hydroxy-containing compounds as crosslinkers, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that using the crosslinker of Wang as the crosslinker of Hatakeyama would result in a comparable and expected photoresist composition.
That is, the substitution of the crosslinker of Wang for the crosslinker of Hatakeyama, absent unexpected results, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application with the predictable result of forming a photoresist composition. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (See MPEP § 2143, B).
Regarding claim 16,
The examiner maintains that Hatakeyama has rendered said claims obvious and/or anticipated.
Assuming arguendo that Hatakeyama fails to explicitly teach crosslinking exposed portions of the photoresist layer, Wang teaches that a portion of the photoresist layer exposed to radiation undergoes a crosslinking reaction [0033], as well as a post exposure baking step performed to cause crosslinking in the photoresist layer [0035-0036], reading on instant claim 16.
As both Hatakeyama and Wang teach crosslinkable photoresist compositions comprising of crosslinkers and a post exposure bake, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the composition of Hatakeyama would similarly undergo a crosslinking reaction when exposed to radiation and heat, as taught by Wang.
Regarding claim 19,
Hatakeyama teaches forming an integrated circuit in their substrate [0141].
Hatakeyama is silent to a subsequent etching step.
Wang teaches a subsequent etching step to extend the pattern of the photoresist into an underlying substrate (material layer) [0037].
As both Hatakeyama and Wang teach photoresist composition comprising of hydroxy-containing compounds as crosslinkers, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to perform a subsequent etching step as taught by Wang with the process of Hatakeyama in order to form the desired integrated circuit, reading on instant claim 19. Further, such a process would be well-known in the art and readily envisioned by a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 16-18 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US20210389670A1, published 2021).
Regarding claims 16-18,
Chen teaches a positive or negative photoresist composition [0046] comprising of a photoacid generator and a polymer [0117], where the polymer is made of repeating monomer units A, B, and/or C with a polymethylmethacrylate backbone [0055],
where the monomer unit A has a pendant sensitizer group S (which may be a phenyl group) and a crosslinking group X (which may be a C2-C30 aliphatic group having an epoxy functional group) [0048-0050], reading on the instant recurring unit x where Ar1 would include at one or more occurrences a CL attached thereto,
the monomer unit B has a pendant acid labile (ALG) group such as a t-butyl group [0048, 0051], reading on the instant recurring unit z, and
the monomer unit C has a pendant organic group O which may be a C1-C30 group substituted with an OH group [0048, 0052], reading on the instant recurring unit y.
Each repeating monomer unit, when present in the polymer, would be readily envisioned by a person of ordinary skill in the art to comprise of more than one unit as each unit is “repeating”, reading on instant claims 17-18.
Chen teaches a process flow of manufacturing a semiconductor device comprising steps of forming a resist coating on a substate [0031, exposure to actinic radiation where exposed portions undergo a crosslinking reaction [0034-0036], and development using a developer [0040], reading on instant claim 16.
Given that Chen discloses the photoresist composition that encompasses the presently claimed polymer, including the instantly claimed recurring units, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application, to use the polymer comprising of the instantly claimed recurring units, which is both disclosed by Chen and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20070015082 A1 teaches a crosslinker may be pendent to a polymer bound sensitizer. US20150331317A1 teaches a photoresist comprising of a polymer with epoxy groups pendant to an acid labile group. US20210364916A1 teaches a photoresist composition comprising of a polymer with a crosslinker with functional groups aligning with the instant crosslinkers, including a melamine compound.
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, 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.
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.
/A.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734