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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/7/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the silica abrasive" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1,3-6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al (US 2014/0209566) in view of Lee et al (US 2022/0025214).
Regarding claim 1, Fu et al disclose a CMP composition comprises abrasive particles of silica, wherein the abrasive particles can be present in the polishing composition at a concentration of about 0.01 wt. % or more, e.g., about 0.025 wt. % or more, about 0.05 wt. % or more, about 0.075 wt. % or more, about 0.1 wt. % or more, about 0.25 wt. % or more [0011]; and an oxidizing agent [0012]-[0013]; the oxidizing agent is cerium ammonium nitrate [0017]; and the polishing composition includes an aqueous carrier. The aqueous carrier contains water (e.g., deionized water) [0019]; the pH of the composition in the range of 1-7 [0020]; and aforesaid teaching of the pH range 1-7 overlaps the claimed ranges of about 1.5 or less (for claim 1); and overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious; MPEP 2144.05.
Fu et al disclose that the metal oxide (abrasive) particles can have an average particle size of about 10 nm or more, e.g., about 25 nm or more, about 50 nm or more, about 75 nm or more, or about 100 nm or more [0013], which overlaps the claimed range of about 30 nm to about 75 nm (for claim 5) and about 30 nm to about 75 nm.
Fu et al fail to disclose the abrasive particle is a cationic silica abrasive as required in the claim 1.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee et al disclose a polishing composition comprises silica modified with a cationic compound, the modified silica may have a positive charge on the surface thereof, thereby achieving improvement in polishing rate and flatness without generation of scratches [0069]. Both the Fu et al and Lee et al disclose that the polishing composition may be used for tungsten (see Fu et al {0030] and Lee et al [0076].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Lee et al's teaching of utilizing cationic silica abrasive particles into the composition of Fu et al for achieving improvement in polishing rate and flatness without generation of scratches as suggest by Lee et al.
Regarding claim 3, Fu et al disclose above that the pH of the composition in the range of 1-7 [0020]; and aforesaid teaching of the pH range 1-7 overlaps the claimed range of about 1 or less; and overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious; MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 4, Fu et al disclose that the abrasive particles can be present in the polishing composition at a concentration of about 0.01 wt. % or more, e.g., about 0.025 wt. % or more, about 0.05 wt. % or more, about 0.075 wt. % or more, about 0.1 wt. % or more, about 0.25 wt. % or more [0011], which overlaps the claimed range of 0.025 to about 5 wt%. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 9, Fu et al disclose that the oxidizer in the polishing composition at a concentration of about 0.001 wt. % or more, e.g., about 0.0025 wt. % or more, about 0.005 wt. % or more, about 0.0075 wt. % or more, about 0.01 wt. % or more,
about 0.025 wt. % or more, about 0.05 wt. % or more, about 0.075 wt. % or more, or about 0.1 wt. % or more [0015].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAMIM AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1457. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH (8-5:30pm).
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
SHAMIM AHMED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1713
/SHAMIM AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights