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 .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-9 and 13-20 in the reply filed on July 1, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 10-12 and 21-23 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 13 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Penta et al. (US20190092973).
Regarding claim 1, Penta discloses a polishing composition (abstract) comprising: an abrasive comprising cationic particles (paragraph 0036); a SiN polishing rate suppressor (aspartic acid, Examples 1-1 to 1-3, Table 3); and water (paragraph 0054), wherein the composition has a pH of less than 5 (Examples 1-1 to 1-3, Table 3).
Regarding claim 2, Penta discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate suppressor comprises an acidic amino acid (aspartic acid, Examples 1-1 to 1-3, Table 3).
Regarding claim 3, Penta discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate suppressor comprises aspartic acid (Examples 1-1 to 1-3, Table 3).
Regarding claim 6, Penta discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate suppressor is present at a concentration of 0.1 wt. %, relative to the total weight of the composition (Example 1-3, Table 3).
Regarding claim 7, Penta discloses wherein the composition further comprises a pH adjuster comprising nitric acid (paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 13, Penta discloses a polishing composition (abstract) comprising: an abrasive comprising cationic particles (paragraph 0036); a SiN polishing rate enhancer (KOH, Table 4); and water (paragraph 0054), wherein the composition has a pH of less than or equal to 5 (Table 4).
Regarding claim 17, Penta discloses wherein the SiN enhancer is present at a concentration of 0.0056 wt. %, relative to the total weight of the composition (1mM KOH, Table 4).
Regarding claim 18, Penta discloses wherein the composition further comprises a pH adjuster comprising nitric acid (paragraph 0058).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-6, 8-9 and 13-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kim et al. (US20220177727).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a polishing composition (abstract) comprising: an abrasive comprising cationic particles (abrasive particles having positive charges, paragraph 0038); a SiN polishing rate suppressor (aspartic acid, paragraph 0058); and water (paragraph 0022), wherein the composition has a pH from 3 to 7(paragraph 0065), which overlaps with the range recited in the instant claim. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate suppressor comprises an acidic amino acid (aspartic acid, paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate suppressor comprises aspartic acid (paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses wherein the cationic particles comprise zirconia particles (paragraph 0039).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses wherein the cationic particles are colloidal zirconia particles (paragraph 0039).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate suppressor is present at a concentration of 0.001 wt. % to 1 wt. %, relative to the total weight of the composition (paragraph 0059).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses wherein the composition comprises colloidal zirconia particles (paragraph 0039), an acidic amino acid (aspartic acid, paragraph 0058), and nitric acid (paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses wherein the composition further comprises N,N-dimethyldodecylamineoxide (lauryldimethylamine oxide, paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses a polishing composition (abstract) comprising: an abrasive comprising cationic particles (abrasive particles having positive charges, paragraph 0038); a SiN polishing rate enhancer (citric acid, paragraph 0060); and water (paragraph 0022), wherein the composition has a pH from 3 to 7(paragraph 0065), which overlaps with the range recited in the instant claim. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I)..
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses wherein the SiN polishing rate enhancer comprises an acid having two or more carboxylic acid groups and one or more hydroxy groups (citric acid, paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses wherein the cationic particles comprise zirconia particles (paragraph 0039).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses wherein the cationic particles are colloidal zirconia particles (paragraph 0039).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses wherein the SiN enhancer is present at a concentration of greater than 0.001 wt. % and 1 wt. % or less, relative to the total weight of the composition (paragraph 0062).
Regarding claim 19, Kim discloses wherein the composition comprises colloidal zirconia particles (paragraph 0039), an acid having two or more carboxylic acid groups and one or more hydroxy groups (citric acid, paragraph 0060), and nitric acid (paragraph 0059).
Regarding claim 20, Kim discloses wherein the composition further comprises N,N-dimethyldodecylamineoxide (lauryldimethylamine oxide, paragraph 0058).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIONG-PING LU whose telephone number is (571) 270-1135. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am – 5:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua L Allen, can be reached at telephone number (571)270-3176. 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 for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JIONG-PING LU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights