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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
(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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi et al. (EP0581296).
With regard to claim 11, Kobayashi et al. teaches a solid ionically conductive material comprising a crosslinked polymer selected from the group consisting of polyorganosiloxanes and organosiloxane/oxyalkylene copolymers, where at least a portion of the silicon atoms of said polymer are bonded to the sulfur atom of a metal sulfonate group [page 3 lines 1-6]:
PNG
media_image1.png
46
113
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[page 3 line 8] by means of a hydrocarbylene or oxyalkylene radical, Mn+ is a metal ion from Group I or Group II of the Periodic Table, n is 1 or 2 and represents the valence of M, and said composition contains a non-aqueous electrolyte when said crosslinked polymer is a polyorganosiloxane [page 3 lines 10-12] which is equivalent to a polymer comprising a siloxane bond and an ionic group represented by General Formula (I0’) of instant claim 11 when M”p+ is a metal cation and p is an integer of 1 or more.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shibayama et al. (U.S. 2025/0348001).
Shibayama et al. teaches Application liquid 108 comprising the polymer from Synthesis Example 30, additive MA (maleic anhydride), and solvents PGEE, PGME, and DIW [0604] wherein the polymer from Synthesis Example 30 is the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
268
374
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
93
242
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[0585] which is equivalent to a polymer (A1) comprising a siloxane bond and an ionic group represented by General Formula (I0’) of instant claims 1 and 12 when Mm+ is a sulfonium cation and p is 1.
Claim 1 recites “A resist” which is merely part of the preamble. A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951). Claim 1 also recites “that generates acid upon exposure and exhibits changed solubility in a developing solution under action of acid” which refers to the use/function of the composition. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed composition is intended to be used does not differentiate the claimed composition from a prior art composition satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2, USPQ2d 1647 (1987). This recitation of the composition is drawn to intended use; therefore, this limitation does not add any patentable weight to the claim (MPEP 2106). Thus, claim 1 is merely directed to a composition comprising a polymer. Therefore, the liquid of Shibayama et al. comprising a polymer is the same as the instant claims.
Claims 1-4, 9, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamanaka et al. (U.S. 2013/0137037).
Yamanaka et al. teaches in 9.00 g of propylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate (abbreviated as "PGMEA"), 3.00 g of each of the condensation products (1) to (15) according to the present invention as listed in TABLE 1 was dissolved. The resulting solution was applied by spin coating to a silicon wafer and heated at 110°C for 1 minute, thereby obtaining a coating film with a thickness of 2 to 3 µm. The coating film was exposed through a photomask to an ultraviolet ray of 248 nm wavelength, close to KrF excimer laser wavelength. Subsequently, the exposed coating film was heated at 120°C for 3 minutes and developed by dissolving an unexposed portion of the coating film in 2.38 mass % aqueous tetramethylammonium hydroxide solution. The developed coating film was washed with water of room temperature (20°C) and then heated at 250°C for 1 hour. In this way, a negative resist pattern was obtained on the silicon wafer by transferring the pattern of the photomask to the coating film [0178] (claims 9 and 10) wherein condensation product (1) was prepared as followed: In a three-neck flask with an impeller stirrer and a reflux condenser, total 30 g of a mixture of the alkoxysilane (1), tetraethoxysilane (abbreviated as "TEOS"), PhSi(OEt)3 and Me2Si(OEt)2 was placed in such a manner that the molar feed ratios of the alkoxysilane (1), TEOS, PhSi(OEt)3 and Me2Si(OEt)2 were 5 mol %, 10 mol %, 55 mol % and 30 mol %, respectively. Further, 150 g of isopropanol and 110 g of water as a solvent and 0.10 g of acetic acid as a hydrolysis catalyst were placed in the three-neck flask. The resulting reaction system in the three-neck flask was subjected to hydrolysis and condensation reaction by heating at 90°C. After a lapse of 3 hours, the reaction solution was returned to room temperature. Upon addition of 200 ml of isopropyl ether and 200 ml of water into the three-neck flask, the reaction solution was stirred and thereby divided into two phases. The upper phase of the reaction solution was recovered and washed three times each with 200 ml of water. The washed solution was dehydrated by adding magnesium sulfate. Then, the solvent was removed from the dehydrated solution with an evaporator. There was thus obtained condensation product (1) as a viscous liquid. The condensation product (1) had a weight-average molecular weight (Mw) of 1050 [0170-0171] wherein alkoxysilane (1) is the following:
PNG
media_image4.png
207
404
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[0159] which is equivalent to a polymer (A1) comprising a siloxane bond and an ionic group represented by General Formula (I0’) of instant claims 1 and 12 when Mm+ is a sulfonium cation and m is 1, specifically a constitutional unit represented by General Formula (a0-1) of instant claims 2-4 when Ra01 is a divalent linking group containing an ester bond and a fluorine atom, Mm+ is a sulfonium cation and m is 1.
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.
Claims 5, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka et al. (U.S. 2013/0137037) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ando et al. (U.S. 2008/0241753).
With regard to claims 5, 6, and 8, Yamanaka et al. teaches the above polymer but does not teach a phenolic hydroxyl group, specifically a constitutional unit represented by General Formula (a1-1). Yamanaka et al. also fails to teach a crosslinking agent component.
However, Ando et al. teaches the negative resist composition of the present invention contains a silsesquioxane resin (A) (hereinafter referred to as a component (A), sometimes), an acid generator component (B) which generates an acid upon exposure (hereinafter referred to as a component (B), sometimes) and a crosslinking agent component (C) [0033] (claim 8) wherein the silsesquioxane resin (A) comprises a constituent unit (a1) represented by general formula (I) and a constituent unit (a2) represented by general formula (II) [0035]:
PNG
media_image5.png
426
411
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[0009] in which constituent unit (I) is equivalent to constitutional unit having a phenolic hydroxyl group of instant claim 5, specifically a constitutional unit represented by General Formula (a1-1) of instant claim 6 when Ra11 is a single bond, RAr1 is an aromatic hydrocarbon group, na2 is 1 where Ra12 is a hydrogen atom, and na3 is 0. Ando et al. also teaches the negative resist composition of the present invention can be applied for formation of a fine resist pattern having a high aspect ratio without causing thickness loss [0173].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Yamanaka et al. to include additional constitutional units such as those of Ando et al. and arrive at the instant claims through routine experimentation of combining equally suitable components for the sought invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka et al. (U.S. 2013/0137037) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Su et al. (U.S. 2020/0292940).
With regard to claim 7, Yamanaka et al. teaches the above composition but does not teach a photodecomposable base.
However, Su et al. teaches a photo sensitive composition that can be used as both a positive and a negative photo resist comprising: [0005] (A) a siloxane resin composition comprising 0 to 95 mole present of R1SiO3/2 siloxane units, 0 to 95 mole percent of R2SiO3/2 siloxane units, and 1 to 99.9 mole percent of (R3O)bSiO(4-b)/2 siloxane units wherein R1 is hydrogen, an alkyl group containing 1 to 20 carbon atoms, or an aromatic group containing 1 to 20 carbon atoms, R2 is a fluoroalkyl group containing 1 to 20 carbon atoms, R3 is independently selected from the group consisting of branched alkyl groups containing 3 to 30 carbon atoms, b has a value of 1 to 3, and wherein the siloxane resin composition the siloxane resin contains a molar ratio of R1SiO3/2+R2SiO3/2 siloxane units to (R3O)bSiO(4-b)/2 siloxane units of 1:99 to 99:1 and wherein the sum of R1SiO3/2 siloxane units, R2SiO3/2 siloxane units, and (R3O)bSiO4-b)/2 siloxane units is at least 5 mole percent of the total siloxane units in the resin composition; [0006] (B) a photo acid generator (PAG); and [0007] (C) an organic solvent [0004-0007]. Su et al. also teaches additives (D) may be optionally used in the photo sensitive composition. For example, if the photo sensitive composition is used as a positive photoresist, then the composition may include photo sensitizer, acid-diffusion controllers (photodecomposable bases), surfactants, dissolution inhibitors, cross-linking agents, sensitizers, halation inhibitors, adhesion promoters, storage stabilizers, anti-foaming agents, coating aids, plasticizers, among others [0018]. It should be noted that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See MPEP 2144.07. In the instant case, both Yamanaka et al. and Su et a. are directed to negative resist compositions comprising siloxane polymers and additives while Su et al. teaches additional well-known additives.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Yamanaka et al. to include additional additives such as acid-diffusion controllers (photodecomposable bases) and arrive at the instant claims through routine experimentation of combining equally suitable components for the sought invention with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. 2004/0034131, U.S. 2015/0210829, U.S. 2015/0291749, and U.S. 2011/0287369.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA E MALLOY whose telephone number is (571)270-5849. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30-3:00 EST M-F.
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.
/Anna Malloy/Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights