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
The Amendment filed 06/24/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5, and 9-11 remain pending in the application. Claims 4, 6-8, and 12-20 are canceled. Claims 1-3, 5, and 9 are amended and support for amendments are found in the original claims and specification. Applicant’s cancelation of Claim 4 has rendered moot the 35 USC 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 03/24/2026.
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 1-3, 5, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shingo et al. (JP 2020/200389A; cited in the IDS submitted on 08/18/2023; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Shingo”) in view of Hiroshi et al. (JP 2012/174533A (A); English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Hiroshi”) as evidenced by Toagosei (“General Properties of IXE®”; as cited in the Remarks submitted on 06/24/2026; hereafter as “Toagosei”).
Regarding Claims 1, 9-11, Shingo teaches an adhesive containing curable resin composition [Claims 1, 10; Example 1; ¶ 0009], corresponding to the curing resin composition of Claim 1, to the cured product of Claim 10, and to the adhesive of Claim 11. Shingo teaches the curable resin composition comprises:
(A) cyanate ester resin [Claim 1], corresponding to the cyanate ester resin of Claim 1;
(B) epoxy resin [Claim 1], corresponding to the epoxy resin of Claim 1; and
(C) a latent curing agent comprising an active hydrogen-containing amine-based latent curing agent, such as adducts of amines and epoxy [Claims 1, 4; ¶ 0037], thereby reading on wherein the active hydrogen-containing amine latent curing agent (C) comprises (C-1) an amine-epoxy adduct of Claim 1.
However, Shingo does not teach the (D) ion scavenger of Claims 1 and 9.
Nevertheless, Hiroshi teaches an insulating adhesive material produced from a curable compound comprising epoxy resin, polyester resin, amine curing agent [¶ 0002, 00028], and further comprising an inorganic cation scavenger such as IXE-100 [¶ 0030, 0145-0146], corresponding to the ion scavenger (D) of Claim 1.
Toagosei teaches that the IXE-100 of Hiroshi is zirconium-based, has a particle diameter of 1 µm, and a Na+ ion exchange capacity of 3.3 meq/q [Table], which corresponds with wherein the ion scavenger is inorganic fine particles containing zirconium of Claim 1, and has a Na+ ion exchange capacity of 1.0 meq/q or more of Claim 1.
Hiroshi offers the motivation that the ion scavenging agent can further enhance the heat resistance and moisture resistance of the cured product.
Shingo and Hiroshi are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of preparing curable resin compositions comprising epoxy resin and amine-based curing agents that can be used to make adhesives and semi-conductor products.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the IXE-100 of Hiroshi with the curable resin composition of Shingo, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 2-3 and 5, Shingo further teaches:
An cyanate ester resin represented by NC – O – A1 – Y1 – A2 – O – CN, wherein Y1 represents divalent hydrocarbon group, −O−, −S−, or single bond substituted with a fluorine atom or a cyanate group, and A1 and A2 each independently represent an unsubstituted or phenylene group in which 1 to 4 of its cyclic hydrogen atoms are substituted with alkyl groups [¶ 0015-0017], corresponding with the compound represented by formula (1), NC – O – A1 – Y1 – A2 – O – CN, wherein Y' represents a divalent hydrocarbon group optionally substituted with a fluorine atom or a cyanato group, -O-, -S-, or a single bond; and Al and A2 each independently represent a phenylene group optionally substituted with one to four alkyl groups of Claim 2; and
thereby reading on Y1 is represented by −S− (Y-4) of Claim 3; and
wherein the latent curing agent comprises modified amine, epoxy, and phenolic resin [¶ 0045], corresponding to the latent curing agent (C-4) of Claim 5.
While Shingo does not teach all the claimed limitations of Claims 2, 3, and 5 in single embodiments, one of ordinary skill would recognize that these limitations are obvious modifications as suggested by Shingo.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shingo et al. (JP 2020/200389A; cited in the IDS submitted on 08/18/2023; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Shingo”) in view of Komuro et al. (US 2019/0031790 A1; as cited in the IDS submitted on 08/18/2023; hereafter as “Komuro”) as evidenced by Toagosei (“General Properties of IXE®”; as cited in the Remarks submitted on 06/24/2026; hereafter as “Toagosei”).
Regarding Claims 1, 9-11, Shingo teaches an adhesive containing curable resin composition [Claims 1, 10; Example 1; ¶ 0009], corresponding to the curing resin composition of Claim 1, to the cured product of Claim 10, and to the adhesive of Claim 11. Shingo teaches the curable resin composition comprises:
(A) cyanate ester resin [Claim 1], corresponding to the cyanate ester resin of Claim 1;
(B) epoxy resin [Claim 1], corresponding to the epoxy resin of Claim 1; and
(C) a latent curing agent comprising an active hydrogen-containing amine-based latent curing agent, such as adducts of amines and epoxy [Claims 1, 4; ¶ 0037], thereby reading on wherein the active hydrogen-containing amine latent curing agent (C) comprises (C-1) an amine-epoxy adduct of Claim 1.
However, Shingo does not teach the (D) ion scavenger of Claims 1 and 9.
Nevertheless, Komuro teaches for a curable resin composition [Claim 1; ¶ 0142-0146] comprising epoxy resin [Claim 1], amine-based curing agents [¶ 0147], and further comprising an ion scavenger such as IXE-100, that captures cations such as zirconium phosphate [¶ 0118], corresponding to wherein the ion scavenger (D) is inorganic particles consisting of zirconium of Claims 1 and 9.
Toagosei teaches that the IXE-100 of Komuro has a particle diameter of 1 µm and a Na+ ion exchange capacity of 3.3 meq/q [Table], which corresponds with wherein the ion scavenger is inorganic fine particles of Claim 1, and has a Na+ ion exchange capacity of 1.0 meq/q or more of Claim 1.
Shingo offers the motivation that the curable resin composition has excellent adhesive properties [¶ 0037, 0041], and use of an ion scavenger, such as IXE-100, improves adhesion and fluidity of the resin composition [¶ 0116].
Shingo and Komuro are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of preparing curable resin compositions comprising epoxy resin and amine-based curing agents that can be used to make adhesives.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the IXE-100 of Komuro with the curable resin composition of Shingo, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 2-3 and 5, Shingo further teaches:
An cyanate ester resin represented by NC – O – A1 – Y1 – A2 – O – CN, wherein Y1 represents divalent hydrocarbon group, −O−, −S−, or single bond substituted with a fluorine atom or a cyanate group, and A1 and A2 each independently represent an unsubstituted or phenylene group in which 1 to 4 of its cyclic hydrogen atoms are substituted with alkyl groups [¶ 0015-0017], corresponding with the compound represented by formula (1), NC – O – A1 – Y1 – A2 – O – CN, wherein Y' represents a divalent hydrocarbon group optionally substituted with a fluorine atom or a cyanato group, -O-, -S-, or a single bond; and Al and A2 each independently represent a phenylene group optionally substituted with one to four alkyl groups of Claim 2; and
thereby reading on Y1 is represented by −S− (Y-4) of Claim 3; and
wherein the latent curing agent comprises modified amine, epoxy, and phenolic resin [¶ 0045], corresponding to the latent curing agent (C-4) of Claim 5.
While Shingo does not teach all the claimed limitations of Claims 2, 3, and 5 in single embodiments, one of ordinary skill would recognize that these limitations are obvious modifications as suggested by Shingo.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 5, and 9-11 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.
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 DORIS LING whose telephone number is (571)270-3961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, ARRIE LANEE REUTHER can be reached on (571)270-7026. 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.
/DORIS LING/Examiner, Art Unit 1764
/KREGG T BROOKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights