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 .
Response to Amendment
In view of the amendment filed 08/13/2026:
Claims 1-3 and 5-13 are pending.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Park et al. (“Thermally assisted nanotransfer printing with sub–20-nm resolution and 8-inch
wafer scalability”, Sci. Adv. 2020; 6: eabb6462), and further in view of Nitto (“Thermal Release
Sheet for Electronic Component Processing REVALPHA”, https://www.nitto.com/us/en/products/e_parts/electronic001/- see attached), and Park ("Multi-material pattern formation over the large area for semiconductor device applications", Masters Thesis, Korea University, 2018- herein referred to ask Park2).
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a method of printing a nanostructure comprising:
preparing a template substrate on which a pattern is formed (“First, we prepared an 8-
inch Si wafer consisting of approximately 50 chips with three line/space structures with
different widths of 250 nm/250 nm, 500 nm/500 nm, and 1 µm/1 µm, fabricated by a
conventional photolithography process, as shown in Fig. 1 (B and C) and fig. S2.”- see pg. 2);
forming a replica pattern having an inverse phase of the pattern by coating a polymer
thin film on an upper portion of the template substrate, adhering a thermal release tape to an
upper portion of the polymer thin film, and separating the polymer thin film from the template
substrate 9” After spin-coating poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) dissolved in a mixture of
toluene and acetone onto the hydrophobic surface of the Si mold, the spin-coated PMMA thin
film was attached with an adhesive PI film, and the two films were subsequently detached
together”- see pg. 3 and replica pattern in Figure 1a);
forming a nanostructure by depositing a functional material on the replica pattern (“the
functional materials are initially formed on the surface of the replicated polymer pattern by
physical vapor deposition (PVD)”- see pg. 2); and
printing the nanostructure deposited on the replica pattern to a substrate by positioning
the nanostructure on the substrate, applying heat and pressure to the nanostructure (“To
transfer the functional nanostructures on the PMMA replica pattern on a large area, both
uniform pressure and heat conduction over the entire patterning area are required during the
contact printing process, as schematically illustrated in Fig. 2A”- see pg. 3 and Figure 1A), and
weakening an adhesive force between the thermal release tape and the replica pattern by the
heat (“a heat-injection process is also needed to move the functional nanostructures with the
replica pattern onto the target substrate by weakening the adhesion between the adhesive PI film and the replica thin film”- see pg. 3 and Figure 2B), and
wherein the thermal release adhesive layer is configured to lose the adhesive force
when a temperature exceeds a predetermined temperature range, such that the heat applied
during the printing weakens the adhesive force of the thermal release adhesive layer to
separate the thermal release tape from the replica pattern (“the functional nanostructures
on a polymeric replica pattern can be transfer-printed onto the desired substrates after
weakening the adhesion between the adhesive film and the replica pattern through a uniform
heat-injection process” and “Appropriately applied heat weakens the adhesion between the
adhesive film and the polymeric replica pattern, allowing the functional nanostructures on the
polymer replica pattern to be transfer-printed on the substrates”- see pg. 2).
Park teaches the thermal release tape is a polyimide film and further emphasizes that
high quality-patterns are obtainable on most 8-inch wafer materials, but thermal endurance is
limited to short printing times of 25 seconds when uniform pressure and heat is provided at
150 °C (“Here, it should be emphasized that high-quality patterns on most 8-inch wafer
materials with thermal endurance can be obtained for a short printing time of 25 s when
reliably providing both uniform pressure and heat transfer at 150°C”- see pg. 4). However, Park
fails to teach wherein the thermal release tape comprises a thermal release adhesive layer
disposed between two films.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to electronic component manufacturing
processes with temporary fixing of thermal release tapes, Nitto teaches a thermal release tape
comprises a thermal release adhesive layer disposed between a release liner and a polyester
backing films (see single coated adhesive type on pg. 2). The thermal release tape of Nitto adheres tightly at room temperature and does not damage the substrate upon tape removal
(see pg. 1). Further, Nitto teaches thermal release tapes with release start points at various
temperatures of 120, 150, and 170 °C. (see pg. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the thermal release tapes of Park
with the thermal release tape of Nitto such that the thermal release tape comprises thermal
release adhesive layer disposed between a release liner and a backing film, for the benefit of
the thermal release tape tightly adhering at room temperature while not causing damage to the
substrate upon tape removal. Further, Nitto teaches the thermal release tape can be optimized
to vary the thermal release temperature, which would be beneficial for modifying the thermal
endurance of Park, which can consequently vary the printing times.
Further, Park teaches diverse pattern geometries are created with various semiconducting and metallic materials through the thermally-assisted nanotransfer printing process (see Figure 3E on pg. 5), fails to explicitly teach the two or more different functional materials are deposited to form a monolayer structure having a periodicity in which the two or more different functional materials have their respective elemental compositions, and the two or more different functional materials are simultaneously printed onto the substrate as the monolayer structure.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to nanotransfer printing, Park2 teaches forming a nanostructure comprising depositing two or more different functional materials on the replica pattern such that the nanostructure is formed as a monolayer structure having a periodicity in which the two or more different functional materials have their respective elemental compositions, and the two or more different functional materials are simultaneously printed onto the substrate as the monolayer structure (see Figure 3-1 on pg. 31 and Figure 3-4 on pg. 34). The method of Park2 allows for multiple performance devices to be printed on one device through a one-step printing process (“As mentioned above, the formation of the 3D hierarchical multi-material nanopattern can be simply realized by using one-step printing process. The purpose of this study is effectively to apply to various devices based on multi-material pattern formation method… These experimental results are expected to produce various types of devices in the future, and active research and industrial applications for multiple performance devices showing various characteristics in one device will be possible.”- see pg. 34).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the depositing step of Park modified with Netto comprise the step of depositing two or more different functional materials on the replica pattern such that the nanostructure is formed as a monolayer structure having a periodicity in which the two or more different functional materials have their respective elemental compositions, and the two or more different functional materials are simultaneously printed onto the substrate as the monolayer structure, as taught by Park2, for the benefit of fabricating multiple performance devices on a single device through a one-step printing process.
Regarding claim 2, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein the template substrate has a surface pattern in the form
of a concave-convex by forming a pattern of a desired size (see Figure 1C on pg. 2) using
photolithography, and proceeding to a surface etching with a reactive ion etching (RIE) process
(“The 8-inch Si master mold consisting of three line/space widths (250 nm/250 nm, 500 nm/500
nm, and 1 µm/1 µm) with a depth of 250 nm was fabricated by conventional KrF photolithography and reactive ion etching (RIE)”- see pg. 6).
Regarding claim 3, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein the method proceeds with the replica pattern remaining
adhered to the thermal release tape (see replica pattern in Figure 1A) by uniformly adhering
the thermal release tape to one surface of the polymer thin film (see attaching step in Figure 1A) and peeling off the polymer thin film from the template substrate (see detaching step in
Figure 1A).
Regarding claim 5, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 3.
Further, Park teaches wherein the adhering of the thermal release tape uniformly to
one surface of the polymer thin film is carried out through a rolling process or a pressing
process (“When manually attaching and detaching the PI film, a defect-punctured PMMA
replica pattern was obtained owing to the uneven contact between the PI film and the PMMA
film through nonuniform pressure, resulting in many void defects and an abnormal line pattern
with numerous microcracks, as shown in Fig. 1 (D and E). On the other hand, when using a
laminating or rolling press system, replication of the PMMA surface pattern on the 8-inch wafer
was successful with uniform contact at an appropriate amount of pressure on the entire
surface, showing excellent pattern formation of well-defined line structures (Fig. 1, F and G, and
figs. S3 and S4)”- see pg. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park2 teaches wherein the forming a nanostructure by depositing a functional material is carried out by tilting the replica pattern so that a surface of the replica pattern on which the deposition is carried out and a direction of the deposition form a predetermined angle and depositing the functional material on a surface of the replica pattern, such that the deposition of the functional material is carried out only on a raised portion on the surface of the replica pattern (“To deposit selectively on the protruded region of the replica pattern, we tilt-deposited functional material with an appropriate angle. In this experiment, the angle was about 50° with a sputter target”- see pg. 29-30).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the nanostructure of Park modified with Nitto and Park2 formed by tilting the replica pattern so that a surface of the replica pattern on which the deposition is carried out and a direction of the deposition form a predetermined angle and depositing the functional material on a surface of the replica pattern, as taught by Park2, for the benefit of depositing the functional material only on a raised portion on the surface of the replica pattern.
Regarding claim 7, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Park teaches the method further comprising: brush coating the upper portion of the
template substrate with a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) polymer prior to coating the polymer
thin film on the upper portion of the template substrate (“Before the replication process, the 8-
inch Si master mold was surface-treated with a hydroxyl terminated polydimethylsiloxane brush
to impart hydrophobicity onto the Si surface for easy separation of the replica material from
the master mold. After spin-coating poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) dissolved in a mixture
of toluene and acetone onto the hydrophobic surface of the Si mold…”- see pg. 2-3).
Regarding claim 8, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein the coating of the polymer thin film on the upper portion
of the template substrate is carried out by a spin coating (“After spin-coating poly(methyl
methacrylate) (PMMA) dissolved in a mixture of toluene and acetone onto the hydrophobic
surface of the Si mold, the spin-coated PMMA thin film was attached with an adhesive PI film”- see pg. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein the functional material is Pt (“After Pt deposition on the
8-inch PMMA replica pattern by the PVD sputtering system, we transfer-printed Pt nanowires
onto a transparent and flexible polyethylene terephthalate (PET) substrate”- see pg. 4) or
silicon oxide (“The sample was then etched by CF4 plasma [gas flow rate, 30 standard cubic
centimeters per minute (sccm); working pressure, 15 mtorr; plasma power, 60 W; etching time,
20 s] and O2 plasma (gas flow rate, 30 sccm; working pressure, 15 mtorr; plasma power, 60 W;
etching time, 30 s), finally resulting in a self- assembled, highly ordered sub–20-nm SiOx line
structure with a line/space width of 18 nm/14 nm”-see pg. 7).
Regarding claim 10, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein the positioning of the nanostructure deposited on the
replica pattern on the substrate and applying heat and pressure to the nanostructure is carried
out at 150 °C (“After Pt deposition on the 8-inch PMMA replica pattern by the PVD sputtering
system, we transfer-printed Pt nanowires onto a transparent and flexible polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) substrate for 25 s by passing them between two 150°C hot rolls”- see pg. 4).
Regarding claim 11, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein the positioning of the nanostructure deposited on the replica pattern on the substrate and applying heat and pressure to the nanostructure is carried
out for 25 seconds (“Here, it should be emphasized that high-quality patterns on most 8-inch
wafer materials with thermal endurance can be obtained for a short printing time of 25 s when
reliably providing both uniform pressure and heat transfer at 150°C”- see pg. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Park teaches wherein after the nanostructure is printed onto the substrate, the
replication pattern is washed with an organic solvent so that the polymer thin film is removed
and the nanostructure is printed onto the substrate (“Functional nanopatterns on the substrate
are ultimately obtained after removing with solvent the residual polymer replica film used as a
medium for the pattern transfer process.”- see pg. 2).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al.
(“Thermally assisted nanotransfer printing with sub–20-nm resolution and 8-inch wafer
scalability”, Sci. Adv. 2020; 6: eabb6462), Nitto (“Thermal Release Sheet for Electronic
Component Processing
REVALPHA”, https://www.nitto.com/us/en/products/e_parts/electronic001/- see attached), and Park ("Multi-material pattern formation over the large area for semiconductor device applications", Masters Thesis, Korea University, 2018- herein referred to ask Park2), and further in view of Tsuchiya et al. (WO2021192319A1- Machine translation provided herein).
Regarding claim 13, Park modified with Nitto and Park2 teaches the method of claim 1.
Further, Nitto teaches another of the time films is a PET base film wherein one of the
two films is silicone coated release film and another of the two films is PET base film (see polyester backing in single-coated adhesive type on pg. 2). While Nitta teaches a release liner,
Nitto fails to explicitly teach the release liner is a silicone coated release film.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to electronic component manufacturing
processes with temporary fixing of thermal release tapes, Tsuchiya teaches thermal a release
liner is a thermal release adhesive layer comprises a silicone coated release film (“As the
release liner, a known release paper or the like can be used. The release liner is used as a
protective material for the heat-expandable adhesive layer, and is peeled off when the heat-
release type adhesive sheet is attached to the adherend. Examples of the release liner include a
plastic film (for example, PET film) surface-treated with a release agent such as silicone-based”
and “layer-forming composition material containing a resin component and heat-expandable
particles is applied onto a release liner (for example, a silicone-treated PET film)”- see pg.). The
release liner protects the heat-expandable adhesive layer (“The release liner is used as a
protective material for the heat-expandable adhesive layer, and is peeled off when the heat- release type adhesive sheet is attached to the adherend”- see pg.), and the silicone coating is
used as a release agent that promotes the release of the thermal release tape (“Examples of
the release liner include a plastic film (for example, PET film) surface-treated with a release
agent such as silicone-based”- see pg.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the release liner of Park modified with
Nitto and Park2 to be a silicone coated release film, as taught by Tsuchiya, for the benefit of protecting the heat-expandable adhesive layer and promoting the release of the thermal release tape.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 (see Remarks filed 08/13/2026) 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.
Applicant's arguments regarding claim 13 (see pg. 9-10 of Remarks) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant recites that Tsuchiya’s adhesive layer based on an expansion-based release would run counter to the uniform-contact requirement underlying the defect-transfer of Park and relies on Park’s teaching related to a uniform surface contact and pressure between the PI film and the polymer film being of paramount importance for successful large-area patterning (see pg. 9 of Remarks). However, the passage related to uniform surface contact and pressure between the PI film and the polymer film being of paramount importance for successful large-area patterning (see pg. 2 right column of Park; “In step 1, surface-patterned polymer replica films are produced by peeling off the spin-coated polymeric material from the Si master mold using an adhesive polyimide (PI) film. During the replication process, uniform surface contact and pressure between the PI film and polymer film is of paramount importance for successful large-area patterning. In step 2, the functional materials are initially formed on the surface of the replicated polymer pattern by physical vapor deposition (PVD). The functional nanostructure on the replica pattern is then transfer-printed on the 8-inch wafer via a short (≤20 s) contact and release process using a heat-rolling press system capable of supplying uniform pressure and heat”) is related to the replication process in the first step and not during the subsequent transfer-printing step where heat is applied to weaken the adhesion between the adhesive film and the polymeric replica pattern. Tsuchiya similarly describes the adhesive sheets are peeled due to weakened adhesion with heat application. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would look to the thermal release adhesive of Tsuchiya to modify the thermal release adhesive of Park.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARIELLA MACHNESS whose telephone number is (408)918-7587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30-2:30 PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/ARIELLA MACHNESS/ Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights