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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-3 in the reply filed on 9/17/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no burden to search the groups together. This is not found persuasive because as set forth in the requirement for restriction, the groups are distinct and would requires additional search areas, creating a burden on the office.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al (9,958,781).
Matsumura et al teach a method of forming a film on a substrate, wherein the method includes applying a composition on a substrate and heating the composition in an oxygen atmosphere having an oxygen concentration of less than 1% by volume, preferably no greater than 0.1% by volume, and a temperature of 450 to 800 o C, preferably 500 to 600 o C (claims 1-3; instant claim 1).
The underlayer composition comprises an aromatic ring-containing compound (A) having a MW of 600 to 3,000, a solvent, and wherein the compound may comprise a combination of two or more types (column 39, lines 59-67). One example of compound (A) is a styrene-based polymer, wherein the polymer comprises a (meth)acrylate monomer, with examples including p-vinylphenol-methylmethacrylate, wherein methylmethacrylate has the structure of (B1), wherein each or R1 and R2 are methyl (column 9, line 60 top column 10, line59). Alternatively, the styrene-based polymer may have the following structure, wherein R31 is -COO- with the rings being the R2 organic group (instant claim 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
336
312
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to the amount of aromatic compound (A), the reference claims the compound (A) is preferably a compound of (5) or (6), falling under the novolac based resin (column 9, column 20, line 29 to column 21, line 59, claim 1). Examples use combinations of resins, wherein the resins are shown to be added in equal amounts (Table 1 examples 14 and 15), and wherein the contents are greater for one (Table 1 examples 3, 5, 8, 8/2, 6/4, and 2/8, respectively). While the reference doesn’t explicitly disclose that one polymer/ compound (A) is present in an amount greater than the other, the reference clearly prefers the compound of (5) or (6), therefore any additional types of compound (A) would be less preferred and in a lower amount than the preferred compound. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ a combination of compounds (A) as taught to be known by the reference, wherein one includes a (meth)acrylate monomer as in the styrene type polymer of (A) and a novolac compound, wherein the aromatic (novolac) compound of (5) or (6) is in an amount greater than the additional type of compound (A) (styrene type (A) having the (meth)acrylate unit) as required by the instant claims. Given the amounts of compounds in the examples having a combination of (A) compounds, when the compound of (5) or (6) is included as the preferred compound in the greater amount, the additional compound (A)/ styrene-type polymer would be included in an amount of 0.1 to 50 parts by mass of the compound or (5) or (6) (see table 1 as discussed above (instant claim 3).
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koumura et al (2014/0220783) in view of Matsumura et al.
Koumura et al disclose a resist underlayer composition comprising a first polymer A1 comprising a unit (1) meeting the limitations of the instant formula (B1), wherein R2 (instant R2) is a monovalent hydrocarbon group with examples including 1 to 12 carbon atoms and an aromatic ring, ( instant claims 1 and 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
376
330
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
148
314
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The composition further comprises a polymer A2, wherein the polymer comprises an aromatic ring-containing polymer such as exemplified acenaphthalene ([0081] or arylene (formula 6; instant claim 1), meeting the limitatios for the aromatic compound.
PNG
media_image4.png
94
302
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
462
324
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
88
272
media_image6.png
Greyscale
The molecular weights of the polymers in examples are all greater than 3,000, thus meeting the limitations of the instant claim 1, requirng the MW be no less than 400.
Given the amounts of the polymer in the exemplified compositions as set forth by Table 2, the reference clearly teaches that the two polymers (polymer and “compound A2) are added in amounts falling within the scope of the instant claims 1 and 3 for the first polymer being added in an amount of 0.1 to 50 parts by mass of the compound, and the compound being present in an amount of greater than the polymer (comprising instant formula (B1)).
The composition is used in a method of forming an underlayer film, and resist pattern, wherein the method includes applying the composition to a substrate, applying a silicon-containing film to the underlayer, applying a resist to the stack, exposing, then developing the resist, followed by dry-etching the substrate and underlying layers using the resist film as a mask ([0147]-[0161]). The application step includes heating the composition to a temperature of 150 to 500 o C ([0147]; instant claim 1) and may be done in an environment with a desired oxygen content.
Given the teachings of the reference, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Koumura et al, choosing as the heat treatment after application, that having a temperature of 450 to 500 o C, falling within the claimed range of 450 o C to 600 o C, as taught by the reference.
As far as the oxygen environment, the examples use oxygen at 20% by volume, but is not limited thereto.
However, Matsumura et al has been discussed above and teach a similar underlayer material, wherein the reference teaches it is preferably to control to oxygen content to 1% by volume or less, preferably 0.003% by volume to limit the oxidation of the underlayer material and achieve underlayer characteristics (column 3, lines 3-24).
Given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare an underlayer as set forth by Komura et al, choosing as the oxygen content in the heating environment to be 0.1 % by volume or less as taught by Matsumura et al to be advantageous by limiting the oxidation and optimizing the layer properties/ characteristics.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tagaki et al (2021/187559 and US equivalent 2,572,075 as a translation) in view of Matsumura et al.
Tagaki et al disclose a composition for a resist underlayer and method of forming a layer, wherein the composition comprises an aromatic ring-containing compound having a MW of greater than 400 (column 8, lines 19-30, lines 59-63), a first polymer having a unit (1) meeting the limitations of the instant (B1) (instant claim 2), wherein the aromatic compound is present in an amount greater than that of the first polymer (instant claim 1), wherein the polymer is present in an amount of 0.1 to 200 parts by mass of 100 parts of the compound (preferably 0.5 to 100. 1 to 50, 2 to 20, and most preferably 3 to 15; column 12, line 61 to column 13, line 4), overlapping the claimed range of 0.1 to 50 (instant claim 3).
PNG
media_image7.png
160
274
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
204
270
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The method of forming a layer using the composition comprises the application step as claimed, whichincludes a heating step at preferably 100 to 600 o C, preferably 200 to 500 o C, which overlaps the claimed range set forth by the instant claim 1.
PNG
media_image9.png
128
286
media_image9.png
Greyscale
The reference does not specifically disclose performing the heating step in an environment with a set oxygen content, however, the reference teaches that any known modifications may be made.
Matsumura et al has been discussed above and teach a similar underlayer material, wherein the reference teaches it is preferably to control to oxygen content to 1% by volume or less, preferably 0.003% by volume to limit the oxidation of the underlayer material and achieve underlayer characteristics (column 3, lines 3-24).
Given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare an underlayer as set forth by Tagaki et al, choosing to perform heating of the underlayer composition after application the oxygen content in the heating environment to be 0.1 % by volume or less as taught by Matsumura et al to be advantageous by limiting the oxidation and optimizing the layer properties/ characteristics.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kobayashi et al (2024/0310732) and Yoneda et al (2024/0105451) are cited for their teachings of similar compositions and methods filed after the instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANDA C WALKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1337. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 5:30am to 4pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/AMANDA C. WALKE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
