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.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-7 are pending in the Amendment filed 09/16/2025.
The rejection of claims 1-2 and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chang et al. (US 20240392194 A1); and claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al., are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s persuasive arguments [“Remarks”, pg. 4] (persuasively arguing that the provisional application of Chang does not support relied upon subject matter in the non-provisional application, i.e., “diethylformamide”), and Applicant’s perfection of claim to foreign priority. See also, “Interview Summary” mailed 09/16/2025.
However, claims 1-7 are rejected in view of newly cited reference to Hayashi et al. (US 20230039366 A1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Newly cited reference to Hayashi et al. (US 20230039366 A1) discloses a composition for cleaning patterned and polished wafers [para. 0001-05], the composition [claim 1] comprising a hydrate of a quaternary alkylammonium fluoride [claim 1], 0.01 to 10% by mass [claim 6]; an N-substituted amide compounds, 50 to 95% by mass [claim 8], and dipropylene glycol dimethyl ether (DPGDME), 5 to 50% by mass [claim 8].
Hayashi fails to explicitly disclose an embodiment comprising diethylformamide, but teaches that that N-substituted amide is selected from a list that includes diethylformamide [para. 0040, “N,N-diethylformamide”].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cleaning composition of Hayashi, to include diethylformamide as the N-substituted amide, as suggested by Hayashi, in order form an effective cleaning composition, as taught by Hayashi [para. 0040; claim 1].
Additionally, as to the claimed Hansen solubility parameters of the mixed solvents, given the high polarity parameter of diethylformamide and low hydrogen parameter of (DPGDME), it is likely that a major proportion of the disclosed range (estimated to be about 55 wt% DEF and above), would fall within the claimed range.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi et al. (US 20230039366 A1).
As to claim 1, Hayashi discloses a metal residue removing liquid [claim 1, para. 0001-5], comprising:
a mixed solvent (S0) that contains a first organic solvent (S1) and a second organic solvent (S2) [claim 1];
a salt (F) of a base containing no metal ions and hydrofluoric acid [claim 1, “a hydrate of a quaternary alkylammonium fluoride”] ; and
water [claim 1, “a hydrate of a quaternary alkylammonium fluoride”; para. 0052, “water derived from the hydrate of the quaternary alkylammonium fluoride”],
wherein the first organic solvent (S1) is diethylformamide [para. 0040], and
the mixed solvent (SO) has a value of 0.6 or more, which is obtained by subtracting a hydrogen bond term (δH) of a Hansen solubility parameter from a polar term (δP) of a Hansen solubility parameter [claim 8].
Hayashi et al. (US 20230039366 A1) discloses a composition for cleaning patterned and polished wafers [para. 0001-05; para. 0062], the composition [claim 1] comprising a hydrate of a quaternary alkylammonium fluoride [claim 1], 0.01 to 10% by mass [claim 6]; an N-substituted amide compounds, 50 to 95% by mass [claim 8], and dipropylene glycol dimethyl ether (DPGDME), 5 to 50% by mass [claim 8].
Hayashi fails to explicitly disclose an embodiment comprising diethylformamide, but teaches that that N-substituted amide is selected from a list that includes diethylformamide [para. 0040, “N,N-diethylformamide”].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cleaning composition of Hayashi, to include diethylformamide as the N-substituted amide, as suggested by Hayashi, in order form an effective cleaning composition, as taught by Hayashi [para. 0040; claim 1].
Additionally, as to the claimed Hansen solubility parameters of the mixed solvents, given the high polarity parameter of diethylformamide and low hydrogen parameter of DPGDME, it is likely that a major proportion of the disclosed range [claim 8], here estimated to be about 55 wt% DEF and above, would fall within “the claimed range of the mixed solvent (SO) has a value of 0.6 or more”. Therefore, since the broad proportion of the disclosed solvent ranges of Hayashi meets the requirements of claim 1, it is sufficient to render obvious claim 1.
As to claim 2, modified Hayashi discloses the metal residue removing liquid according to claim 1, wherein a content of the first organic solvent (S1) is 40 to 70% by mass with respect to the total mass of the metal residue removing liquid [claim 8, “50 to 95% by mass”].
Here, the disclosed range of Hayashi encompasses the claimed range, and therefore supports a prima facie case of obviousness over the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05, I.
As to claim 3, modified Hayashi discloses the metal residue removing liquid according to claim 1, wherein a content of the second organic solvent (S2) is 10 to 30% by mass with respect to the total mass of the metal residue removing liquid [claim 8, “5 to 50% by mass”].
Here, the disclosed range of Hayashi encompasses the claimed range, and therefore supports a prima facie case of obviousness over the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05, I.
As to claim 4, modified Hayashi discloses the metal residue removing liquid according to claim 1, wherein the metal residue contains at least one selected from the group consisting of aluminum, copper, titanium, nickel, ruthenium, tungsten, cobalt, and oxides thereof [para. 0001-5].
As to claim 5, modified Hayashi discloses a metal residue removing method [para. 0001-5; para. 0062], comprising bringing the metal residue removing liquid according to claim 1 into contact with a process object [para. 0001-5; para. 0062].
As to claim 6, modified Hayashi discloses the metal residue removing method according to claim 5, wherein the process object includes metal wiring [para. 0001-5; para. 0062].
As to claim 7, modified Hayashi discloses the metal wiring manufacturing method [para. 0001-05; para. 0062], comprising:
etching a metal layer of a substrate that includes the metal layer to form metal wiring [para. 0001-5; para. 0062]; and
bringing the metal residue removing liquid according to claim 1 into contact with the etched substrate [para. 0001-5; para. 0062].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: The additionally cited references are cited to show compositions comprising diethylformamide in conjunction with another organic solvent and/or fluoride salts [Abstracts].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M REMAVEGE whose telephone number is (571)270-5511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00 AM - 3:30 PM.
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.
/CHRISTOPHER REMAVEGE/Examiner, Art Unit 1713