CTNF 18/377,365 CTNF 68314 DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE This Office action is in response to the application received October 6, 2023. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-15 AIA Claim (s) 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a) (1 ) as being clearly anticipated by KOSHIBA et al (4,963,463) . The claimed invention recites the following: PNG media_image1.png 602 626 media_image1.png Greyscale KOSHIBA et al anticipates the claimed invention at Example 2, col. 8, lines 47- col. 9, line 6 wherein the composition comprises a polymer novolak condensed with 1,2-naphthoquinone-(2)-diazo-5-sulfonic chloride and formulate with a photoacid defined as p-nitrobenzyl 9,10,-diethoxyanthracene sulfonate, see below: PNG media_image2.png 384 382 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 120 366 media_image3.png Greyscale None of the claims above are allowed . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of LIU et al (2014/0154624), TANAKA et al (2013/0022914), AYOTHI et al (2015/0086925), KOSHIBA et al and IMADA et al (2017/0260315) . The claimed invention recites the following: PNG media_image1.png 602 626 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 542 622 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 732 618 media_image5.png Greyscale LIU et al (2014/0154624) report a positive working photosensitive resin composition comprising an acrylic resin having pendant acid labile groups comprising copolymers of a hydroxystyrene and methacrylate comonomers, see page 5, paras. [0021], [0024] and [0025] below meeting claims 15 and 16 and in combination with novolaks: PNG media_image6.png 176 364 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 666 388 media_image7.png Greyscale The composition is formulated with a photoacid and mixtures thereof as disclosed on page 3, para. [0017] below: PNG media_image8.png 168 380 media_image8.png Greyscale The method as recited in claim 14 is met by the disclosure below from paras. [0055] to [0058 ], below: PNG media_image9.png 374 374 media_image9.png Greyscale IMADA et al disclose photosensitive composition comprising a novolak resin with a quinone diazide photosensitizer which include naphthoquinone-1,2-diazide -4-sulfonic acid esters and naphthoquinone-1,2-diazide -5-sulfonic acid esters of polyhydroxybenzophenones and other polyaromatic compounds see para. [0105] to [0109] as seen below: PNG media_image10.png 682 368 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 410 378 media_image11.png Greyscale These photosensitizers meet the claimed photoreactive additives compounds of Formulae 3A to 3E in claims 4, 13 and 20. Claim 5 is met by the disclose percent of the DNQ in the formulation to the polymer resin, see With respect to claim 6, TANAKA et al is cited to disclose a composition comprising a polymer resin, a photoacid, a photo additive that includes the DNQ groups and a quencher as disclosed on page 23, paras. [0118] and [0119] see below: PNG media_image12.png 164 374 media_image12.png Greyscale PNG media_image13.png 234 364 media_image13.png Greyscale PNG media_image14.png 56 360 media_image14.png Greyscale The photoacid generator is reported to be any of those listed such as an onium salt and a diazonaphthoquinone compound. TANAKA et al lacks a photodecomposable base (PDB), however AYOTHI et al reports the equivalence of the quenchers used in photoresists that are amines and photodecomposable bases, see page 7, paras. [0094] to [0096] shown here: PNG media_image15.png 412 392 media_image15.png Greyscale With respect to claims 7 and 8, LIU et al disclose that the polymers disclose polymers having repeat units from styrenic repeat units and (meth)acrylate repeat units and may have a novolak resin implying that novolak may not be present as well. Claim 9 is met by the art above for functional equivalence of a basic compound (amine) with a photo-decomposable quencher as reported above in AYOSHI et al such that substituting a (PDB) for an organic basic compound in IMADA et al in (para. [0143]) would be evident to the skilled artisan. Claim 10 is met by KOSHIBA et al for the DNQ groups bonded to the polymer resin as disclosed in Example 2 (having styrenic and methacrylate repeat units) and the teaching for basic compounds such as imidazole which can function as a quencher and can be substituted with a (PDB). Claim 11 is met the disclosure of LIU et al for a styrenic/methacrylate copolymer formulated with a diazonaphthoquinone as a photoacid . Claim 12 is met by LIU et al in para. [0017] for the diazonaphthoquinone sulfonate esters which are reacted with -OH containing compounds. Claim 13 is met by IMADA et al and LIU et al above for the naphthoquinone diazides reacted with poly(hydroxy)aromatic compounds. The method of claims 14-20 is taught in Example 2 of KOSHIBA et al and each of the dependent limitations has been reported in the references in the current rejection and AYOSHI et al (para [ 0013] ) and IMADA et al ( para. [0147]) disclose the exposure steps which can be with EUV. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive composition seeing the art IMADA et al to formulate a photoresist composition with a polymer resin that may have NQD bonded to the -OH groups, a photoacid, a photo additive with NQD and a photodecomposable base with the reasonable expectation of same or similar results for a composition which is excellent in high resolution, excellent heat resistance . 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. PARK et al (2011/0123927) disclose a photoresist composition comprising a polyimide resin formulated with a novolak resin and a photoacid which can be a mixture of onium salts, and quinone diazide compounds as recited in para. [0047] below: PNG media_image16.png 174 366 media_image16.png Greyscale MAMMATO et al (5,019,488) disclose negative photoresist composition in a reversal image process wherein the composition comprises either a quinone diazide sulfonyl ester or an oxime sulfonate ester photoacid. 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 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 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). 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. /John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 J.Chu May 21, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/377,365 Page 2 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/377,365 Page 3 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/377,365 Page 4 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/377,365 Page 5 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/377,365 Page 6 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/377,365 Page 7 Art Unit: 1737
Prosecution Insights