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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 7/10/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 20240049506 by Lee et al., hereinafter Lee.
Claim 1: Lee discloses a method for manufacturing a deposition mask, the method comprising:
depositing a seed metal layer on a front surface of a silicon substrate (0111, related to barrier film, see also 40 at Figure 5 and accompanying text, 0067, 0076-0077);
forming a first photoresist pattern defining a plurality of first openings on the seed metal layer (0079, Figure 6 and accompanying text, “A photoresist may be formed using a printing method”);
growing a plating layer in the plurality of first openings of the first photoresist pattern (see 0081, “Since the insulating portion M1 has the insulating properties and thus a plated film is not formed on a region that corresponds to the insulating portion M1, the mask pattern P of the mask 20 may be constructed on the corresponding region.”);
forming a mask membrane by removing the first photoresist pattern and leaving the plating layer (0101, the insulating portion . . . may be removed, see Figure 9-11, Figure 11 illustrates the photoresist is removed);
depositing a protection layer on a front surface of the seed metal layer to cover a front surface of the mask membrane; (0115, “The temporary adhering portion 85 may allow the mask 20/the support 30″ to be temporarily adhered to one surface of the template 80 and supported on the template 80 until the thickness of the support 30″ is reduced (see FIG. 14), 00116-00119)
forming a second photoresist pattern defining a plurality of cell opening corresponding to a plurality of unit masks, respectively, on a back surface of the silicon substrate (0099, 0124-0125, M3, Figure 16 and accompanying text);
exposing the seed metal layer by etching the back surface of the silicon substrate using the second photoresist pattern as a mask (0125, Figure 16 and accompanying text, “A portion exposed on the lower surface of the support 30′ that is not covered by the insulating portion . . . may be subjected to etching EC2”);
exposing a back surface of the mask membrane by etching the seed metal layer using the second photoresist pattern as a mask (0111, exposing metal mask membrane via etching will result in the etching the deposited barrier film or film 40 on the support, see Figure 16, 00126, “The portion of the connection portion 40 other than the portions that corresponds to the edge portion 31 and the grid portions 33 and 35 of the support 30 may be subjected to etching EC2 simultaneously or sequentially with the etching EC2 of the support 30.”); and
removing the protection layer (0136, “a process of separating the template 80 from the mask 20 (or the mask-support assembly 100) may be further performed”).
Claim 2-4: Lee discloses the barrier layer, i.e. seed metal layer, includes a TiN, Ti/TiN, WTi, and thus meets the broadly drafted claim requirements (0111).
Claim 5: Lee discloses the mask membrane comprises a mask grid formed by the plating layer, wherein a mask opening is defined between adjacently disposed mask grids to correspond to an area where the first photoresist pattern is removed (Figure 17, 0080 related to pattern using photoresist and multiple exposure method, i.e. removal, 0081 related to electroforming and forming where photoresist is not located).
Claim 6: Lee discloses a cross-section of the mask grid has a reverse tapered shape having a width increasing as being away from the back surface of the mask membrane toward the front surface of the mask membrane (0056).
Claim 7: Lee discloses the mask opening has a width decreasing from the back surface of the mask membrane to the front surface of the mask membrane (Figure 20, 0056).
Claim 8: Lee discloses an opening of the mask has a first width at the back surface of the mask membrane and a second width smaller than the first width at the front surface of the mask membrane (Figure 20, 0056).
Claims 9-10: Lee discloses the plating layer includes tungsten (W) or copper (Cu) (see 0053 “the mask 20 may include a material available for electroforming, such as nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), gold (Au), silver (Ag), aluminum (Al), cobalt (Co), titanium (Ti), chromium (Cr), tungsten (W), molybdenum (Mo), or the like.).
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 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.
Claim(s) 2-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
Claim 2-4: While the examiner maintains the position as set forth above related to the seed layer as instantly claimed, the examiner notes that Lee explicitly discloses embodiments to include a barrier layer and therefore it would have been obvious to include the barrier layer in the process to reap the benefits of its inclusion as specifically articulated by Lee (see 0111, prevent components of the plated film from permeating uncontrollably into the silicon).
Claim 5-8: While the examiner maintains the position as set forth above related to the dimensions and shape of the mask grid and mask opening, Lee discloses the shape of such is a design choice to achieve the desired mask pattern (0056, 0132) and therefore it would have been obvious to have determined the shape of the mask grid and grid opening through design choice to provide the desired mask pattern, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size and/or shape of a component. A change of size and/or shape is generally recognized as being within the ordinary level of skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2nd 669, 149 USPQ 1966.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is cited on the attached PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID P TUROCY whose telephone number is (571)272-2940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Tues, Thurs, and Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/DAVID P TUROCY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights