DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Koyama et al. (WO 2015/182469).
Note: citations refer to the machine translation of WO ‘469 mailed 4/6/2026.
Regarding claims 1 and 6:
Koyama discloses a composition for temporary bonding comprising a bismaleimide (BMI) resin and a release component comprising radical polymeric monomers or oligomers with silicon atoms, particularly siloxanes [abstract; 0001; 0043; 0082-0084; 0128]. The composition further comprises a thermal initiator and solvents [0080-0081]. Optionally, crosslinking components that are activatable via light (photoinitiator) can be used [0049]. The cured film has a mass loss rate of less than 1% by mass at 400°C when the temperature is raised from 25°C to 10°C/min [0013]. The film is easily peeled even after undergoing a high-temperature process [0017].
Although Koyama is silent with regard to the weight loss at a temperature of at least 300°C for 1 hour and a releasable property after exposure to at least 300°C for 1 hour, the examiner submits the prior art composition would inherently possess these properties because the composition otherwise comprises the same materials as presently claimed. Alternatively, given that Koyama teaches a low mass loss and releasability after exposure to high temperatures is desirable, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to vary the mass loss at high temperature exposures, including over percentages within the claimed range after exposure to at least 300°C for 1 hour, and further vary the temperature at which the bonding film remains releasable, including at least 300°C for 1 hour, to provide a film having the ability to resist high temperatures as suggested by the reference, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2:
Koyama teaches the use of “at least one” BMI resin, i.e., the reference implicitly discloses a mixture of two or more resins [0043].
Regarding claim 3:
Koyama teaches the siloxanes comprise (meth)acrylate groups [0128-0140].
Regarding claim 4:
Koyama teaches BMI resin having a structure according to the present Structure 1, wherein R is a divalent group comprising a linear hydrocarbon group, an aromatic ring, etc. [0043-0047].
Regarding claim 7:
Although Koyama is silent with regard to the weight loss at a temperature of at least 350°C for 1 hour and a releasable property after exposure to at least 350°C for 1 hour, the examiner submits the prior art composition would inherently possess these properties because the composition otherwise comprises the same materials as presently claimed. Alternatively, given that Koyama teaches a low mass loss and releasability after exposure to high temperatures is desirable, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to vary the mass loss at high temperature exposures, including over percentages within the claimed range after exposure to at least 350°C for 1 hour, and further vary the temperature at which the bonding film remains releasable, including at least 350°C for 1 hour, to provide a film having the ability to resist high temperatures as suggested by the reference, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koyama et al. (WO 2015/182469) in view of Litke et al. (US 2018/0355231).
Regarding claim 5:
Koyama discloses a temporary bonding film as explained above.
Koyama is silent with regard to a BMI resin wherein R comprises an oligomeric group comprising polyimide groups as presently claimed.
Such resins were known in the art to have utility. For example, Litke discloses curable temporary (debondable) adhesives for use in high temperature applications [abstract; 0001; 0021]. The adhesives comprise A) BMI resin, B) an ethylenically unsaturated comonomer, and C) a photoinitiator [0011-0015]. Suitable BMI resins include those wherein a group corresponding to presently claimed group R comprises an oligomeric group comprising polyimide groups [0053-0054].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to known BMI resins, including those comprising polyimide groups as taught by Litke, to provide an adhesive having high temperature resistance as known in the art.
Claim(s) 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koyama et al. (WO 2015/182469) in view of Noda et al. (US 7,534,498).
Regarding claim 8:
Koyama discloses a temporary bonding film as explained in the rejections of present claim 1 and its dependents, which rejections are incorporated herein by reference. The film is for use in the manufacture of semiconductor devices, including a laminate comprising a device substrate and the film [0166-0168].
Koyama is silent with regard to a laminate comprising a substrate, a joining layer, a photothermal conversion layer, and a light transmitting support as presently claimed.
Such laminates were known in the art to have utility. For example, Noda discloses a laminated body comprising a substrate, a joining layer, a photothermal conversion layer, and a light transmitting support for use in semiconductor manufacturing (abstract; 1:8+; 1:55+; 17:4+). The photothermal conversion layer comprises a light absorbing agent and a heat decomposable material (5:5+).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the bonding film taught by Koyama as the joining layer of Noda to provide a laminate that is suitable for use in the manufacture of semiconductor devices to provide such devices as suggested by the references.
Regarding claims 9-10:
Noda teaches the substrate is brittle, including a silicon wafer (4:11+)
Regarding claim 11-14:
Noda teaches the light absorbing agent includes carbon black (5:20+). Noda also teaches the use of a transparent filler (6:35+). The amount of both is 5-70 vol% relative to the layer (6:63+). The amount is greater than 80 vol% relative to the filler volume concentration (7:21+).
Regarding claim 15:
Noda teaches a glass support (4:17+).
Regarding claims 16-18:
Noda teaches additional intermediate layers, including a multilayer optical film (11:28+).
Regarding claim 19:
Koyama in view of Noda discloses a laminate as previously explained. Noda further teaches a method of making the laminate comprising i) coating a precursor solution of the photothermal conversion layer onto the light transmitting support, ii) drying and curing the coating, iii) coating the (uncured) joining layer onto the photothermal conversion layer or the substrate, and iv) attaching the substrate to the photothermal conversion layer via the joining layer under a vacuum (reduced pressure) (12:34+).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the bonding film taught by Koyama as the joining layer of Noda to provide a laminate that is suitable for use in the manufacture of semiconductor devices to provide such devices as suggested by the references.
Regarding claim 20:
Although Koyama is silent with regard to a releasable property after exposure to at least 350°C for 1 hour, the examiner submits the prior art composition would inherently possess these properties because the composition otherwise comprises the same materials as presently claimed. Alternatively, given that Koyama teaches a releasability after exposure to high temperatures is desirable, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to vary the temperature at which the bonding film remains releasable, including at least 350°C for 1 hour, to provide a film having the ability to resist high temperatures as suggested by the reference, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC 112(b), Applicant’s arguments overcome the rejections, which have been withdrawn. Applicant has clarified the meaning of “beneath” such that claim 8 requires a structure of substrate/joining layer/photothermal conversion layer/light transmitting support as described on page 8 of Remarks. Applicant has also clarified claim 8 requires a cured composition as described on page 8 or Remarks.
Applicant argues “the adhesive composition [of Koyama] is not a bis-maleimide resin it is a heterocyclic resin crosslinked with a maleimide resin. Compositionally the adhesives are completely different.” (p11).
This is unpersuasive because Applicant fails to point out how Koyama does not meet the claimed requirements. Compositionally, claim 1 requires “A curable bonding composition comprising: at least one free radically polymerizable bis-maleimide resin; at least one polymerizable siloxane-based release agent; and an optional thermal or ultraviolet free radical initiator”. Applicant acknowledges Koyama teaches the maleimide resin is a bismaleimide (BMI) resin (Remarks, p10). While Koyama may further teach additional components (e.g., a heterocyclic resin), such components are not excluded from the claimed curable bonding composition, which uses inclusive language. Furthermore, the fact Koyama describes its BMI resin as a crosslinking agent does not distinguish it from a “free radically polymerizable bis-maleimide resin” as claimed.
Applicant argues Koyama does not disclose a curable siloxane-based release agent mixed with the BMI resin (p11). Applicant argues Koyama instead teaches distinct adhesive regions and release regions and so does not provide a single composition containing the BMI and a release agent (p11). In particular, Applicant points to Koyama’s paragraph [0165] for its disclosure of a kit comprising a temporary adhesive composition and a release composition (p11).
While the examiner agrees Koyama additionally discloses a kit comprising two compositions, this argument is unpersuasive because Koyama’s temporary adhesive composition contains both the BMI resin and the release agent (i.e., a single composition as claimed) as identified in the rejection of record. After setting forth that the temporary adhesive composition would be described in [0077], Koyama subsequently teaches in [0082] that “it is preferable to include release components for temporary bonding. By containing a release component, when a temporary bonding composition is applied in a membrane form, a temporary adhesive film can be formed in which the release component is unevenly distributed on the surface layer and the release area is unevenly distributed on the surface layer of the adhesive area.” The same paragraph further states release agents containing silicon atoms are preferred, and subsequent paragraphs describe acceptable materials, and paragraph [0128] further teaches siloxanes are preferred materials. As further emphasis that Koyama teaches this is contained in a single composition, at [0150] the reference states: “The content of the release component is 0.01~10% by mass, 0.05~5% by mass is preferable and 0.1~1% by mass is particularly preferable for the total solid content (excluding solvents) of the temporary bonding composition.” Additionally, Koyama’s description of the release composition begins at [0159] and subsequently teaches at [0160] that the release components used in the release composition “are the same as those described in the section on release components of the temporary bonding composition above,” which still further confirms the use of release components in the temporary bonding composition.
In view of the above, the examiner maintains the rejections of record.
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 JOHN D FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11-8PM 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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/JOHN D FREEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights