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 .
Claim Status
Previous action: claims 1 through 19 rejected
Present action: claims 1 through 7 and 9 through 19 rejected
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.
Rejection Note: Italicized and struck through claim limitations indicate limitations that are not explicitly disclosed in the primary reference, but disclosed in the secondary reference(s).
Claim(s) 1 through 7 and 9 through 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pore (US 2017/0100742) in view of Oda (US 2018/0281361)
Regarding claim 1,
Pore teaches:
A method of forming a modified organic polymer comprising polyimide, the method comprising:
providing a substrate (fig 2b:206; [para 0051]) in a reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]);
providing a first polymer precursor into the reaction chamber in a vapor phase (fig 1b:40,20; [para 0042]);
and providing a second polymer precursor into the reaction chamber in a vapor phase (fig 1b:50; [para 0042]) to deposit an organic polymer (fig 4b:420; [para 0061]) comprising polyimide ([para 0061]) on the substrate (fig 4a,4b:400; [para 0061]);
wherein the first polymer precursor comprises a molecule having at least two acid anhydride groups (pyromellitic dianhydride; [para 0043]) and the second polymer precursor comprises a molecule comprising at least two amine groups (1,6-diaminohexane; [para 0043]), and wherein the method further comprises providing a modifying agent (anhydride; [para 0039]) to increase the proportion of polyimide in the organic polymer on the substrate to form the modified organic polymer comprising polyimide ([para 0037,0039])
Pore does not teach how the modifying agent is introduced.
Pore teaches:
providing an anhydride into the reaction chamber in a vapor phase ([para 0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the anhydride, a modifying agent, as a vapor into the chamber so that the process can be conducted in situ and thereby reduce the chance of contamination.
Pore does not teach the modifying agent is selected from the group consisting of carboxylic acids, acid anhydrides, and primary amines.
Oda teaches:
the modifying agent is selected from the group consisting of carboxylic acids (m-hydroxybenzoic acid, 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid; [para 0058]), acid anhydrides, and primary amines (aminophenol; [para 0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the modifying agent to comprise a dehydrating agent (m-hydroxybenzoic acid, 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid) in order to catalyze the conversion of polyamic acid into polyimide by dehydration.
Regarding claim 2.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
the providing a first polymer precursor (fig 1b:40,20; [para 0042]) and the providing the second polymer precursor (fig 1b:50; [para 0042]) into the reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]) are repeated at least once (fig 1b:80; [para 0044]).
Regarding claim 3.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
providing the first polymer precursor (fig 1b:40,20; [para 0042]) and the second polymer precursor (fig 1b:50; [para 0042]) into the reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]) are repeated at least once (fig 1b:80; [para 0044]) before providing the modifying agent (post-deposition treatment; [para 0039]) into the reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]).
Regarding claim 4.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
the molecule comprising at least two acid anhydride groups is pyromellitic dianhydride (pyromellitic dianhydride; [para 0043]).
Regarding claim 5.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
the molecule comprising at least two amine groups comprises at least one primary amine (1,6-diaminohexane; [para 0043]).
Regarding claim 6.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
the molecule comprising at least two amine groups is selected from a group consisting of 4,4′-oxydianiline, 1,2-diaminoethane, 1,3-diaminopropane, 1,4-diaminobutane, 1,5-diaminopentane, 1,2-diaminopropane, 2,3-butanediamine, 2,2-dimethyl-1,3-propanediamine, 1,3-diaminopentane, 1,4-diaminopentane, 2,4-diaminopentane, 2,4-diamino-2,4-dimethylpentane, 1,5-diamino-2-methylpentane, 1,3-diaminobutane, 1,3-diamino-3-methylbutane, 2,5-diamino-2,5-dimethylhexane, 1,4-diamino-4-methylpentane, 1,3-diaminobutane, 1,5-diaminohexane, 1,3-diaminohexane, 1,6-diaminohexane ([para 0043]), 2,5-diaminohexane, 1,3-diamino-5-methylhexane, 4,4,4-trifluoro-1,3-diamino-3-methylbutane, 2,4-diamino-2-methylpentane, 4-(1-methylethyl)-1,5-diaminohexane, 3-aminobutanamide, 1,3-diamino-2-ethylhexane, 2,7-diamino-2,7-dimethyloctane, 1,3-diaminobenzene, 1,4-diaminobenzene, decane-1,10-diamine, and 4-nitrobenzene-1,3-diamine.
Regarding claim 7.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, above
Oda teaches:
a modifying agent is a dehydrating agent (m-hydroxybenzoic acid, 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid; [para 0058]).
Regarding claim 9.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Oda teaches:
the modifying agent comprises an aromatic ring (m-hydroxybenzoic acid, 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid, aminophenol; [para 0058]).
Regarding claim 10.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Oda teaches:
the modifying agent is selected from the group consisting of acetic acid, formic acid, benzoic acid, m-hydroxybenzoic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, p-aminobenzoic acid, m-aminobenzoic acid, benzene-1,4-dicarboxylic acid, acetic anhydride, succinic anhydride, maleic anhydride, phthalic anhydride, aniline, 4-aminophenol, and quinolone ([para 0058]).
Regarding claim 11.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
the method is a cyclic deposition method (fig 1b:40-80; [para 0044]) and comprises providing the first polymer precursor (fig 1b:40,20; [para 0042]) and the second polymer precursor (fig 1b:50; [para 0042]) into the reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]) alternately and sequentially (fig 1b; [para 0044]).
Regarding claim 12.
Pore teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
the method is a cyclic deposition method (fig 1b:40-80; [para 0044]) and comprises providing the first polymer precursor (fig 1b:40,20; [para 0042]) and the second polymer precursor (fig 1b:50; [para 0042]) into the reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]) at least twice ([para 0044]) before providing the modifying agent (post-deposition treatment; [para 0039]) into the reaction chamber (fig 2b:200; [para 0051]).
Regarding claim 13.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, above.
Pore teaches:
the reaction chamber during providing the modifying agent into the reaction chamber .
Oda teaches:
the temperature during providing the modifying agent is from about 200° C. to about 450° C ([para 0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modifying agent at 200 C to 450 C in order to catalyze the conversion of the polyamic acid of the organic layer into polyimide.
Regarding claim 14.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
the pressure of the reaction chamber is between about 2 Torr and about 8 Torr during ([para 0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the pressure of the reaction chamber to be between about 2 Torr and about 8 Torr during providing the modifying agent into the reaction chamber in order to make sure that the organic material remains in a vaporized state.
Given the teaching of the references, it would have been obvious to determine the optimum pressure involved. See In re Aller, Lacey and Hall (10 USPQ 233-237) It is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575,1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 15.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
a ratio of polyamic acid to the polyimide in the as-deposited organic polymer is reduced from at least about 3:1 (deposited polyamic film; [para 0070]) to less than about 1:30 (converted to polyimide; [para 0070]).
Pore does not teach any polyimide in the deposited organic polymer, and does not teach any polyamic acid in the converted layer
Regarding claim 16.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 1, further
Pore teaches:
polyamic acid is substantially removed from the modified organic polymer comprising polyimide (film mostly polyimide; [para 0039]).
Claim(s) 17, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pore (US 2017/0100742) in view of Oda (US 2018/0281361)
Regarding claim 17.
Pore teaches:
A method of reducing polyamic acid content of an organic polymer comprising polyimide and polyamic acid, the method comprising:
heating an as-deposited organic polymer ([para 0039]) ;
and contacting the as-deposited organic polymer with a modifying agent (anhydride; [para 0039]) to imidize polyamic acid into polyimide ([para 0039]).
Pore does not teach how the modifying agent is introduced.
Pore teaches:
providing an anhydride in a vapor phase ([para 0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the anhydride, a modifying agent, as a vapor into the chamber so that the process can be conducted in situ and thereby reduce the chance of contamination.
Pore does not teach the temperature of imidization.
Oda teaches:
heating an as-deposited organic polymer (polyamic acid; [para 0058]) to a temperature of at least 170° C. (240 C; [para 0058]); and contacting the as-deposited organic polymer with a modifying agent (catalyst; [para 0058]) comprising a hydroxyl group or a carbonyl group (hydroxybenzoic acid; [para 0058]) to imidize polyamic acid into polyimide ([para 0058,0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modifying agent at 240 C in order to imidize the polyamic acid and minimize the amount of catalyst need and suppress the generation of volatile compounds (paragraph 59)
Regarding claim 18.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 17, further
Oda teaches:
the temperature is at most about 325° C ([para 0054]).
Regarding claim 19.
Pore in view of Oda teaches the method of claim 17, further
Pore teaches:
the as-deposited organic polymer (fig 1b:30; [para 0044]) is a vapor-deposited layer (fig 1b:20,50; [para 0044]) on a semiconductor substrate (fig 2b:206; [para 0017,0051]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Oda teaches adding carboxylic acids, acid anhydrides, and primary amines as polymerizing catalysts rather than as modifying agents.
First, the claim states “modifying” the claim does not exclude the catalysts, catalytic polymerization is a modification and therefore catalytic polymerizers are a modifying agent. "A generic claim cannot be allowed to an applicant if the prior art discloses a species falling within the claimed genus." The species in that case will anticipate the genus. In re Slayter, 276 F.2d 408, 411, 125 USPQ 345, 347 (CCPA 1960); In re Gosteli, 872 F.2d 1008, 10 USPQ2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 1989)
The fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Pore explicitly requires “the polyamic acid is converted to a polyimide” (polymierization) and using “chemical treatment (e.g., using an anhydride)”, but does state the specific chemical agent used. One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore naturally look to the prior art specifically in the polymerization production of polyimide to learn what are obvious chemical agents that will cause polymerization. Oda states specific chemical agents that cause polymerization (modifying). The combination is therefore clear and explicit and obvious.
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 DAVID J GOODWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8451. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00 - 19:00.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571)272-5055. 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.
/D.J.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/ANTONIO B CRITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights