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 1-14 and 16-20 are pending. Claim 15 has been canceled. Note that, Applicant’s amendment and arguments filed May 18, 2026, have been entered.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on May 18, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on May 18, 2026.
Objections/Rejections Withdrawn
The following objections/rejections as set forth in the Office action mailed 2/19/26 have been withdrawn:
None.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 1-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamada et al (US2017/0275498) in view of Das et al (US2020/0255770).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, Tamada et al teach a polishing composition used for polishing an object of polishing having a layer containing a high mobility material with higher carrier mobility than that of Si, the polishing composition comprising: abrasive grains; and at least one salt compound selected from the group consisting of a salt of a monovalent acid, a salt of a divalent acid, a salt of a trivalent acid, and a halide salt. wherein the polishing composition has an electrical conductivity of 1 mS/cm or higher, and a content of hydrogen peroxide of less than 0.1% by mass. See claim 1. The polishing composition has a pH of from 2.5 to 12. See claim 6. The pH can be adjusted by adding an appropriate amount of a pH adjusting agent. The pH adjusting agent that is used as necessary in order to adjust the pH of the polishing composition to a desired value, may be any of an acid or an alkali, and may be any one of inorganic and organic compounds. See para. 48.
It is preferable that the polishing composition of the present invention includes an oxidizing agent containing a halogen atom. When the polishing composition includes an oxidizing agent containing a halogen atom, the polishing speed for a layer containing a high mobility material is further increased. See para. 54. Suitable oxidizing agents include periodic acid, sodium periodate, etc. See para. 55. The lower limit of the content of the oxidizing agent containing a halogen atom in the polishing composition of the present invention is preferably 0.01% by mass (0.1 g/kg) or more, and more preferably 0.05% by mass (0.5 g/kg) or more. As the content of the oxidizing agent containing a halogen atom becomes larger, the polishing speed generated by the polishing composition is increased. Furthermore, the upper limit of the content of the oxidizing agent containing a halogen atom in the polishing composition of the present invention is preferably 10% by mass or less (100 g/kg), and more preferably 5% by mass (50 g/kg) or less. See para. 57. The polishing composition may also include a water-soluble polymer. Specific examples of the watersoluble polymer include, for example, a polystyrene sulfonic acid salt, a polyisoprene sulfonic acid salt, a polyacrylic acid salt, polymaleic acid, polyitaconic acid, polyvinyl acetate, polyvinyl alcohol, polyglycerin, polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), a copolymer of isoprenesulfonic acid and acrylic acid, a polyvinylpyrrolidone-polyacrylic acid copolymer, a polyvinylpyrrolidone-vinyl acetate copolymer, a salt of naphthalenesulfonic acid-formalin condensate, a diallylamine hydrochloride-sulfur dioxide copolymer, carboxymethyl cellulose, a salt of carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, pullulan, chitosan, and chitosan salts. In a case in which a water-soluble polymer is added to the polishing composition, surface roughness of an object of polishing after being polished using the polishing composition is further decreased. These water-soluble polymers may be used singly or as mixtures of two or more kinds thereof. Furthermore, the water-soluble polymers described above have a function as polish inhibitors particularly for Poly-Si. The content of the water-soluble polymer in the polishing composition is preferably 0.0001 g/L or more, and preferably 0.001 g/L or more and 10 g/L or less. See paras. 76-81. Note that, the Examiner asserts that many of the polymers as taught by Tamada et al would fall within the broad scope of a “resin containing a nitrogen atom” as recited by instant claim 1. In the polishing composition of the present invention, a dispersing medium or solvent intended for dispersing or dissolving various components is usually used. Examples of the dispersing medium or solvent include organic solvents and water; however, among them, it is preferable that the dispersing medium or solvent includes water. See para. 50.
Tamada et al do not teach the use of a quaternary ammonium salt or a composition containing a periodic acid, a quaternary ammonium salt, a resin containing a nitrogen atom, a solvent, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by the instant claims.
Das et al are relied upon as set forth below.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a quaternary ammonium salt such as tetramethylammonium hydroxide in the composition taught by Tamada et al, with a reasonable expectation of success, because Das et al teach the use of tetramethylammonium hydroxide as a pH adjuster in a similar composition and further, Tamada et al teach the use of pH adjusters in general.
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 a periodic acid, a quaternary ammonium salt, a resin containing a nitrogen atom, a solvent, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of Tamada et al in view of Das et al suggest a composition containing a periodic acid, a quaternary ammonium salt, a resin containing a nitrogen atom, a solvent, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 1-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Das et al (US2020/0255770).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, Das et al teach a composition, comprising, consisting of, or consisting essentially of a composition as set forth herein. In one embodiment, the invention provides a composition having a pH of about 1 to about 6, comprising: (a) a cerium-oxygen bond breaking compound; (b) a pH adjustor; [0014] (c) at least one cleaning agent; (d) a ceria complexing compound selected from tartaric acid, acetyl acetone, glutamic acid, adipic acid, betaine, amino tris(methylenephosphonic) acid and nitrilo triacetic acid; and (e) water. See paras. 11-16. The cerium oxygen bond breaking compound can be any conventional compound utilized for effectively breaking the cerium oxygen chemical bond. Such compounds include oxidizing agents, reducing agents, and nucleophilic compounds. See para. 17. As used herein, "oxidizing agents" correspond to compounds that oxidize exposed metal(s) resulting in corrosion of the metal or oxide formation on the metal. Oxidizing agents include but are not limited to periodate, persulfate, etc. Suitable pH adjustors include tetraethylammonium hydroxide, etc. As noted above, the composition comprises at least one cleaning agent. Said cleaning agents are chosen from at least one of (i) one or more water miscible solvent(s), and/or (ii) one or more one polymer(s), and/or citric acid.
Polymers, when present, include, but are not limited to, methacrylic acid homopolymer and copolymers with, for example, acrylamidomethylpropane sulfonic acid and maleic acid; maleic acid/vinyl ether copolymer; poly (vinylpyrrolidone)/vinyl acetate; homopolymers such as phosphonated polyethyleneglycol oligomers, poly(acrylic acid) (PAA), poly(acrylamide), poly(vinyl acetate), poly (ethylene glycol) (PEG), polypropylene glycol) (PPG), poly (styrene sulfonic acid), poly(vinyl sulfonic acid), poly(vinyl phosphonic acid), poly(vinyl phosphoric acid), poly(ethyleneimine), poly(propyleneimine), polyallylamine, polyethylene oxide (PEO), polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP), PPGPEG-PPG block copolymers, PEG-PPG-PEG block copolymers, poly(vinyl alcohol), poly(hydroxyethyl)acrylate, poly(hydroxyethyl)methacrylate, hydroxyethyl cellulose, methylhydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, methylhydroxypropyl cellulose, xanthan gum, potassium alginate, pectin, carboxymethylcellulose, glucosamine, poly(diallyldimethylammonium) chloride, PEGylated (i.e., polyethyleneglycol-ated) methacrylate/acrylate copolymers, poly MADQuat and copolymers thereof, dimethylaminomethacrylate polymers and compolymers thereof, trimethylammonium methylmethacrylate polymers and copolymers thereof, and combinations thereof. The copolymers above may be random or block copolymers. When present, the amount of polymer(s) in the composition is in a range from about 0.0001 weight % to about 5 weight %, based on the total weight of the composition. See para. 26.
Das et al do not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing a periodic acid, a quaternary ammonium salt, a resin containing a nitrogen atom, a solvent, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent 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 a periodic acid, a quaternary ammonium salt, a resin containing a nitrogen atom, a solvent, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of Das et al suggest a composition containing a periodic acid, a quaternary ammonium salt, a resin containing a nitrogen atom, a solvent, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamada et al (US2017/0275498) in view of Das et al (US2020/0255770); or Das et al (US2020/0255770) as applied to claims 1-9 and 11-14 above, and further in view of WO2020/100924. Note that, Kashiwagi et al (US2022/0002881) is a 371 application of WO2020/100924 and has been used as an English language translation of WO2020/100924.
Tamada et al and Das et al are relied upon as set forth above. However, neither reference teaches the use of orthoperiodic acid in addition to the other requisite components of the composition as recited by the instant claims.
Kashigawa et al (i.e., WO2020/100924) teach a remover composition which can sufficiently remove ruthenium (Ru) remaining on substrates and can be inhibited from evolving RuO gas. The remover composition, which is for removing ruthenium remaining on substrates, has a pH at 25° C. of 8 or higher and includes one or more pH buffer ingredients. See Abstract. The oxidizing agent used in the remover composition of the present invention is not particularly limited and a periodic acid or a salt thereof is preferred. The periodic acid or a salt thereof includes, for example, an ortho-periodic acid, a sodium ortho-periodate, meta-periodic acid and a sodium meta-periodate, etc. See paras. 19-23.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use orthoperiodic acid in the composition taught by Das et al or Tamada et al, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because Kashigawa et al teach the equivalence of orthoperiodic acid to periodic acid or periodate salts as oxidizing agents in a similar composition and further Tamada et al or Das et al teach the use of periodic acids and salts as oxidizing agents.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the rejection of the instant claims under 35 USC 103 using Das et al, Applicant states that Das et al do not disclose the pH range of 6.1 or more as recited by the instant claims. In response, note that, the Examiner asserts that Das et al clearly teach that the compositions have a pH of about 1 to about 6, wherein “about” 6 would clearly suggest compositions having a pH of 6.1, 6.2, etc., as recited by the instant claims. Thus, the teachings of Das et al are sufficient to render the claimed invention obvious under 35 USC 103.
With respect to the rejection of the instant claims under 35 USC 103 using Tamada et al in view of Das et al, Applicant states that Tamada et al require that abrasive grains are required in the composition while instant claim 1 now recites that the composition does not substantially contain insoluble particles. In response, note that, the Examiner asserts that while Tamada et al teaches the use of abrasive grains, Tamada et al clearly teach that the lower limit of the amount of abrasive grains is 0.005% by weight, wherein this amount would fall within the scope of “the composition does not substantially contain insoluble particles” as recited by the instant claims. Note that, the term “does not substantially contain insoluble particles” is clearly defined in para. 897 of the instant specification, which permits for the inclusion of a specific amounts of insoluble particles.
Additionally, the Examiner asserts that Das et al is analogous prior art relative to the claimed invention and Tamada et al and that one of ordinary skill in the art clearly would have looked to the teachings of Das et al to cure the deficiencies of Tamada et al. Das et al is a secondary reference relied upon for its teaching of a quaternary ammonium salt. The Examiner asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art clearly would have been motivated to use a quaternary ammonium salt such as tetramethylammonium hydroxide in the composition taught by Tamada et al, with a reasonable expectation of success, because Das et al teach the use of tetramethylammonium hydroxide as a pH adjuster in a similar composition and further, Tamada et al teach the use of pH adjusters in general. Thus, the Examiner asserts that the teachings of Tamada et al in view of Das et al are sufficient to render the claimed invention obvious under 35 USC 103.
With respect to the rejection of instant claim 10 under 35 USC 103 using Tamada et al in view of Das et al; or Das et al, further in view of WO2020/100924 (i.e., Kashiwagi et al), Applicant states that the teachings of Tamada et al in view of Das et al; or Das et al are not sufficient to suggest the claimed invention and that the teachings of Kashiwagi et al are not sufficient to remedy the deficiencies of Tamada et al in view of Das et al; or Das et al. In response, note that, the teachings of Tamada et al in view of Das et al; or Das et al are sufficient to suggest the claimed invention for the reasons set forth above. Kashiwagi et al is a secondary reference relied upon for its teaching of orthoperiodic acid. The Examiner asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art clearly would have been motivated to use orthoperiodic acid in the composition taught by Das et al or Tamada et al, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because Kashigawa et al teach the equivalence of orthoperiodic acid to periodic acid or periodate salts as oxidizing agents in a similar composition and further Tamada et al or Das et al teach the use of periodic acids and salts as oxidizing agents. Thus, the Examiner asserts that the teachings of Tamada et al in view of Das et al; or Das et al, further in view of WO2020/100924 (i.e., Kashiwagi et al), are sufficient to render the claimed invention obvious under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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/July 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights