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 .
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 8, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Brian et al. (US 20160032038A1).
With respect to claims 1, 7, 8 Brian describes a composition comprising a polymer containing at least one nitrogen-containing cationic group and at least one phosphorous-containing cationic group; for example poly(styrene-co-4-vinylbenzeneR8 sulfonate-co-vinylbenzylmethylimidazolium chloride-co-vinylbenzylmethylmorpholinium chloride-co-vinylbenzyltriphenyl phosphonium chloride-co-divinylbenzene (claim 14), which includes monomers of vinylbenzyltriphenyl phosphonium chloride having structure
PNG
media_image1.png
493
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(please also see Millipore Sigma cited below for the structure) or claimed second cationic monomer having cyclic group of claim 8; and monomers of vinylbenzylmethylimidazolium chloride having the structure
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(please also see PubChem for its structure), or claimed first cationic monomer with linear group of claim 8.
With respect to claim 2, both compounds have the end polymerizable groups containing C=C.
With respect to claim 3, the both compounds have Cl- as the anionic counterions.
With respect to claim 4, the limitations starts with “can be” are interpreted as optional and not necessary parts of the claim. The monomers of vinylbenzylmethylimidazolium chloride would also contain one with a cross linkable structure of claim 4 with the Sp3 denotes a spacer group or a single bond and the end polymerizable groups containing C=C.
With respect to claims 10 and 48, the composition contains the above polymer would also provide claimed a chemical mechanical planarization composition since it contains the same polymer as that of the claimed invention and claim 10 and 48 composition require only the polymer or copolymer.
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.
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) 5, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brian as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Cao et al. (US 2018/0236135A1).
With respect to claims 5 and 9, even though Brian doesn’t describe prepare the polycationic polymer or copolymer by the methods of free radical polymerization, reversible addition-fragmentation chain-transfer polymerization (RAFT), nitroxide-mediated polymerization (NMP), atomic transfer reaction polymerization (ATRP), ring opening polymerization (ROMP) and polycondensation reaction. However, these methods are known to polymerize monomers to produce polymerization product as shown here by Cao (para 153). It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use any known polymerization method including those shown by Cao to produce polycationic polymer or copolymer because Brian teaches to use any known polymerization processes (para 179) and using known method without changes in their respective functions, in the case using polymerization methods disclosed by Cao to make polymers, which would provide polymers for Brian’s composition with expected results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is 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.
With respect to claim 6, Brian doesn’t teach that the polycationic polymer or copolymer is poly(vinyl- 3-ethyl-1 H-imidazol-3-ium-co-tributyl-(4-vinylbenzyl)-phosphonium) bromide chloride having the structure
PNG
media_image3.png
188
248
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
Claims 11, 15, 22, 23, 27, 34, 35, 36, 40, 47 are allowed because Brian, even though describes a composition containing the polymer containing at least one nitrogen-containing cationic group and at least one phosphorous-containing cationic group; Brian doesn’t teach the composition, a method of using the composition to polish tungsten, and a system comprising the composition. The composition comprises 0.01 wt.% to 30 wt.% or 0.01 wt.% to 10 wt.% of an abrasive selected from the group consisting of inorganic oxide particles, metal oxide-coated inorganic oxide particles, organic polymer particles, metal oxide-coated organic polymer particles, and combinations thereof; 0.00001 wt.% to 5.0 wt.%, or 0.0005 wt.% to 1.0 wt.% of an activator; 0.01 wt.% to 30 wt.%, or 0.5 wt.% to 10 wt.% of an oxidizing agent; 0.00001 wt.% to 1.0 wt.%, or 0.00025 wt.% to 0.1 wt.% of an additive comprising the polycationic polymer or copolymer according to any one of claim 1 claims 1 to 9; water; and optionally at least one of less than 1.0 wt.%, or less than 0.5 wt.% of a corrosion inhibitor; 0.001 wt.% to 2.0 wt. %, or 0.01 wt.% to 1.0 wt. % of a dishing reducing agent; 0.0001 to 5 wt.%, or 0.0005 to 1 wt.% of a stabilizer; a pH adjusting agent.;and pH of the chemical mechanical planarization composition is between 1 and 14, or 1.5 and 4.
Claims are allowed because Brian, even though describes a composition containing the polymer containing at least one nitrogen-containing cationic group and at least one phosphorous-containing cationic group; Brian doesn’t teach the composition comprises.
Millipore Sigma cited for the structure of vinylbenzylmethylimidazolium chloride.
PubChem is cited for the structure of vinylbenzylmethylimidazolium chloride.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUY VU NGUYEN DEO whose telephone number is (571)272-1462. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 M-F.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-272-3176. 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.
/DUY VU N DEO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713 6/10/2026
Prosecution Insights