DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the amendment submitted June 4, 2026.
Bold text is new language to the Office Action.
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by HATAKEYAMA et al (2019/0113846) is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable HIRAYAMA et al (2016/0363860 A1).
The claimed invention now recites the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
840
656
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
38
460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
GOTO et al disclose the following polymers having the following structures:
(A)-1, (A)-2 , (A)-3 or (A)-7 from page 75 and 76:
PNG
media_image3.png
978
420
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
302
370
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Other polymers also disclose a radical-active functional group (A)-4 to (A)-8, (A)-11 and (A)-15.
The first linker group in claim 1 is met by the prior art wherein an acrylate monomer is disclosed below:
PNG
media_image5.png
158
296
media_image5.png
Greyscale
see the numbered boxed section of the monomer above :
1- meets the linker group.
2- meets the alkene group.
3- meets the acid labile group.
Claim 3 for the acid labile group being a C1- C20 linear, branched, or cyclic alkyl group is met by the cyclopentyl or cyclohexyl structure above.
Claim 5 is met by the monomer above wherein the monomer unit forming the backbone is selected from the following monomer unit from HIRAYAMA et al page 75 or 76:
PNG
media_image6.png
166
418
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein the radical-active functional group can be bonded to the methyl, ethyl or isopropyl groups above off the alicyclic rings.
Claims 2, 4, and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
None of the prior art references of record disclose the recites styrene-based monomer units with the unsaturated groups off the ring as recited in claim 2, the second radical-active functional group attached to the polymer backbone by the acid labile group of claim 4 or the units disclosed in claim 6.
Claims 7-20 are seen as allowable over the prior art of record.
None of the prior art references of record disclose the claimed method of claims 7 and 15 comprising the monomer units selected from the Markush list in those claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
GOTO et al (2020/0012189 A1) disclose copolymers wherein the following monomer units may be selected as a unit in the base polymer from page 9.
PNG
media_image7.png
144
144
media_image7.png
Greyscale
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 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, Keith Hendricks, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1401. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
J. Chu
August 4, 2026
Prosecution Insights