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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending. Note that, Applicant’s response filed February 5, 2026, has been entered.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-17, in the reply filed on February 5, 2026, is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Applicant submits that the search and examination of all the claims may be made without serious burden. This is not found persuasive because the invention of Group I, which is drawn to a cleaning composition, is materially different and patentably distinct from the invention of Group II, which is drawn to a method of cleaning a mask, wherein each Group would require a separate search based on their separate classification thereby placing an undue burden on the Examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on February 5, 2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 12-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With respect to instant claims 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, and 13, it is suggested that Applicant delete “includes” or “include” and insert “comprises” or “comprise”. Note that, instant claims 14-17 have also been objected to due to their dependency on claim 12.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-14, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shigeta et al (US 9,824,899).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, Shigeta et al teach an etching liquid for an oxide containing at least zinc and tin used for a display device such as a liquid crystal display (LCD) or an electroluminescence display (LED), and to an etching method using the same. See column 1, lines 1-15. The liquid contains (A) one or more selected from the group consisting of sulfuric acid, nitric acid, methanesulfonic acid, hydrochloric acid, perchloric acid or salts thereof; (B) oxalic acid or a salt thereof and water, and (E) zinc at a concentration in a range of 10-5000 mass ppm, wherein the pH value is −1 to 1. See claim 1.
The concentration of an acid or a salt thereof selected as component (A) is preferably 0.5% by mass or more, more preferably 1% by mass or more, and still more preferably 2% by mass or more in terms of acid. At the same time, it is preferably 30% by mass or less, more preferably 20% by mass or less, and still more preferably 15% by mass or less. Especially, it is preferably 0.5-30% by mass, more preferably 1-20% by mass, and still more preferably 2-15% by mass. (B) Oxalic acid contained in the etching liquid of the present invention is not particularly limited as long as it is capable of supplying an oxalate ion. Moreover, the concentration of the oxalate ion selected as component (B) is preferably 0.1% by mass or more, more preferably 0.5% by mass or more, and still more preferably 1% by mass or more in terms of oxalic acid. At the same time, it is preferably 10% by mass or less, more preferably 7% by mass or less, and still more preferably 5% by mass or less. Especially, it is preferably 0.1-10% by mass, more preferably 0.5-7% by mass, and still more preferably 1-5% by mass. The water used in the present invention is preferably water that has been removed of metal ions (i.e., deionized water), organic impurities, particles and the like by distillation, an ion-exchange treatment, a filter treatment, various adsorption treatments or the like. In particular, it is pure water, preferably ultrapure water. In addition, the concentration of water is preferably 10% by mass or more, more preferably 20% by mass or more, and still more preferably 30% by mass or more. See column 6, lines 10-69. Specifically, Shigeta et al teach a composition wherein as component A, 14.3 g of 70% nitric acid (Wako Pure Chemical Industries) and 84.0 g of pure water were placed into a 100 ml polypropylene container. As component B, 1.7 g of oxalic acid (Wako Pure Chemical Industries) was further added. The resultant was agitated to thoroughly mix the components, thereby preparing an etching liquid (total weight of 100.0 g). The amount of nitric acid in the resulting etching liquid was 10% by mass while the amount of oxalic acid was 1.7% by mass. Additionally, pH value was −0.1. See Example 1. Specifically, Shigeta et al disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of Shigeta et al anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigeta et al (US 9,824,899).
Shigeta et al are relied upon as set forth above. However, Shigeta et al do not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing the specific amount of oxalic acid in addition to the other requisite components of the composition as recited by the instant claims.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to formulate a composition containing the specific amount of oxalic acid in addition to the other requisite components of the composition as recited by the instant claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of Shigeta et al suggest a composition containing the specific amount of oxalic acid in addition to the other requisite components of the composition as recited by the instant claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Remaining references cited but not relied upon are considered to be cumulative to or less pertinent than those relied upon or discussed above.
Applicant is reminded that any evidence to be presented in accordance with 37 CFR 1.131 or 1.132 should be submitted before final rejection in order to be considered timely.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY R DEL COTTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1312. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:00pm, EST.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/G.R.D/April 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights