DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the amendment received September 29, 2025.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-6, 8-16, and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KANATANI et al (2005/0244739), HAGIWARA et al (6,071,667) and/or ONO et al (2015/0337116).
The claimed invention now recites.
PNG
media_image1.png
766
672
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
768
688
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
884
674
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
76
682
media_image4.png
Greyscale
KANATANI et al disclose polyimide precursors wherein X is disclosed to meet (A1) and (A3) with (A4) of formula (I), see Example 14, page 14, para. [0163], wherein the polymer blend of PSP-4 and PSP-5 are formulated with N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone and ethyl lactate solvents. PSP-4 and PSP-5 and Example 14 are defined below:
PNG
media_image5.png
154
420
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
875
418
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
320
414
media_image7.png
Greyscale
KANATANI et al lack the use of a diamine meeting formula (7), however equivalent diamines are found on page 5, para. [0052] shown below:
PNG
media_image8.png
291
409
media_image8.png
Greyscale
such as 3,3’-dihydroxy-4-4’-diaminobenzophenone and others in the box.
The solvents for the resin composition can be found in para [0120] on page 11 shown below such as γ-butyrolactone, dimethyl sulfoxide and N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone wherein these can be use alone or in a mixture.
HAGIWARA et al disclose polyimide precursors made from dianhydrides found in column 4, lines 15-50 shown below:
PNG
media_image9.png
686
462
media_image9.png
Greyscale
and diamines made from R2 from column 7, line 62 to column 8, line 53 shown below:
PNG
media_image10.png
122
443
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
1058
456
media_image11.png
Greyscale
ONO et al report a photosensitive resin composition comprising a photosensitive polyimide precursor meeting the recited polyamic acid of formula (18) by disclosing a hydroxyethyl methacrylate side group having two different dianhydrides and two different diamines, see Synthesis Example 7, Polymer IV from page 12, paragraph [0106].
The negative-type photosensitive composition is met by Example 15 from Table 1 on page 15 wherein the photosensitizer is an oxime ester (c2) found in paragraph [0143], see below:
ONO et al has been discussed above for the negative-type composition having the polyamic acid ester and acid generator in Table 1, Example 15.
With respect to condition (I), Applicants are directed to Synthesis Examples 1-3 in paragraphs [0099] to [0102] wherein the precursor ingredients for the polyimide precursor dianhydrides are synthesized. Synthesis Example 7 report the use of mixture of PMDA (Syn Ex. 1) and an ODPA (Syn. Ex. 3) the use of the dianhydrides alone or in mixture suggest to the skilled artisan that any mixture of the three dianhydrides would be suitable for use such as PMDA and BPDA.
ONO et al lacks the structures in claim 5 for formula (7), (9) and (10) in a working example, however para. [0023] and [0024] report dianhydrides which meet X1 and X2, see below wherein pyromellitic dianhydride can be use singly and para. [0024] report a second dianhydride precursor:
PNG
media_image12.png
117
431
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image13.png
119
452
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
271
437
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Likewise, the reference lacks a working example having a diamine of formula (7) of claim 6, however para. [0029] report equivalent diamines for the polyimide precursor, see below:
PNG
media_image15.png
141
460
media_image15.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image16.png
247
443
media_image16.png
Greyscale
The diamines can be use singly or in combination.
And the two solvents for the negative-type composition in claims 8 and 10 are found on page 10, paragraphs [0076] – [0077]. The N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone is used in the working example, however the claimed second dimethyl sulfoxide is missing in the example but is reported as equivalent and can be additive as disclosed paragraph [0076] and [0077]. ONO et al teach that those listed solvents may be use singly or in combination.
With respect to the claims 2-13 and 18, KANATANI et al disclose the components of (A1) – (A3) and A4 above.
With respect to claims 14-17, the solvents have been disclosed above in para. [0052].
With respect to the claims 19-25 are met by the disclosure in KANATANI et al for-oxime compounds, in para. [0103].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive resin composition for polyamic ester to use a blend of two dianhydride as disclosed in Example 14 of KANATANI et al or HAGIWARA et al above with one or two diamines and a mixture of solvents, such as γ-butyrolactone, dimethyl sulfoxide and N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone as reported above with the reasonable expectation of having a composition which is high in adhesion, high in chemical and heat resistance, excellent in storage stability and excellent in resolution as disclosed in ONO et al.
The general formula (18) has been addressed in the current Office action wherein ONO et al disclose that the dianhydrides used to synthesize the polyimide precursor can be used singly or in combination, thus addressing the two different repeating units recited for general formula (18) in claims 1 and 2, which were highlighted in the Remarks (X1 and X2 and Y1 and Y2 were addressed in the previous Office action).
In addition, the Office notes that R1 and R2 recite groups in the alternative such that they can be hydrogen, saturated aliphatic group having 1 to 30 carbon atoms, aromatic group, monovalent organic group represented by the following general formula (2) or general formula (3).
It noted that the solvents are disclosed in the art of ONO et al and are taught to be used singly or in combination.
With respect to the negative limitation amendment to exclude melamine resin, this scope is acknowledged, however the rejection stands as the ONO et al and HAGIWARA et al references do not require a melamine resin and the remaining presence of the KITATANI et al reference support the disclosed use of two dianhydrides and two diamines in a solvent blend as claimed.
Applicants are directed to column 6, line 64 – column 7, line 13 wherein the use of an additional diamine having a structure meeting claimed general formula (7) in amended claim 1 can be used as an additional precursor, see below:
PNG
media_image17.png
100
470
media_image17.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image18.png
234
412
media_image18.png
Greyscale
The structure of general formula (8) is met by the disclosure in column 4, lines 18-33 and column 6, line 17-31, wherein a benzophenone tetracarboxylic acid is reported as a dianhydride precursor, as well as a 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-bis-dicarboxyphenyl propane for the polyamic acid resin, see below:
PNG
media_image19.png
552
394
media_image19.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image20.png
230
362
media_image20.png
Greyscale
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 JOHN S CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-1329. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, IFP-Flex.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Huff, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
/John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
J. Chu
November 3, 2025