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 § 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, 3-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taguchi (US 2019/0127230 A1) in view of Jonschker (WO 2022226471 A1).
Claims 1, 5-6, 10, 12:
Taguchi teaches a method for manufacturing a cationic modified silica dispersion [0001] for use as an abrasive in CMP [0002]. The initial silica dispersion is either alkaline or made to be alkaline [0023; 0032], has a net negative charge (i.e., negative zeta potential) [0031], and is reacted with APTES [0040] at elevated temperature [0051]. This process inherently produces a surface-modified colloidal silica with a net negative surface charge. Thereafter, the surface charge is reversed through pH adjustment by acid addition during the measurement process [0065] where the zeta potential has become positive when adjusted to pH 3 or 4 (Table 1).
Taguchi does not teach reversing the surface charge by ion exchange resin.
However, Jonschker teaches a method for producing a cationic modified silica dispersion for use as an abrasive in CMP [0002] where it can be preferable that the pH of the dispersion is acidic and this is accomplished by, for example, passing the colloidal silica dispersion through an ion exchange resin or by addition of a suitable acid [0093]. This step can be performed before or after surface modification (Id.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to practice the method of Taguchi and substitute the acid addition with ion exchange resin treatment because Jonschker establishes this is a suitable alternative for the pH adjustment of a modified silica dispersion.
Claims 3-4:
The pH is between 7-10 (Taguchi [0032]).
Claims 7-9:
Prior to modification, the APTES can include a solvent other than water [0049]. From the perspective of convenience and recycling, it would have been obvious to use ethanol [0034].
Claim 11:
The amount of APTES added during modification is identified as a critical aspect and is preferably at most 20% by mass of the silica particles [0050].
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taguchi (US 2019/0127230 A1) in view of Jonschker (WO 2022226471 A1) in view of Torncrona (US 2021/0002139 A1).
Previously cited prior art is discussed above but does not teach a SAC exchange resin comprising sulfonic acid groups. However, Torncrona teaches a method for charge reversing a silica sol whereby the silica sol is passed through a strong acid cation exchange resin having sulfonic acid groups [0046]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the strong acid cation exchange resin having sulfonic acid groups of Torncrona as the ion exchange resin because Torncrona establishes that it is suitable for the purpose of reducing the pH of a silica sol.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX A ROLLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-5355. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6:30.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 5712721234. 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.
/ALEX A ROLLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights