Ex Parte Koo et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 28, 2016

13201961 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 28, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
13/201,961 08/17/2011 NamilKoo
4372 7590 09/30/2016
ARENT FOX LLP
1717 K Street, NW
WASHINGTON, DC 20006-5344
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
108910-00268 4694
EXAMINER
OCHYLSKI, RY AN M
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1743
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/30/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
patentdocket@arentfox.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE
THE PA TENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte NAMIL KOO, 1
Ulrich Plachetka, and Christian Moonnann
Appeal2015-003851
Application 13/201,961
Technology Center 1700
Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, MARK NAGUMO, and
JEFFREY R. SNAY, Administrative Patent Judges.
NAGUMO, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Namil Koo, Ulrich Plachetka, and Christian Moormann ("Koo")
timely appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Rejection2 of
claims 1-14, which are all of the pending claims. We have jurisdiction.
35 U.S.C. § 6. We affirm.
1 The real party in interest is identified as Solvay Solexis S.P.A. (Appeal
Brief, filed 29 September 2014 ("Br."), 2.)
2 Office action mailed 28 January 2014 ("Final Rejection"; cited as "FR"),
as modified by the Advisory Action (8 August 2014) entering formal
amendments to claim 1 filed 28 July 2014.
Appeal2015-003851
Application 13/201,961
A. Introduction3
OPINION
The subject matter on appeal relates to processes of imprint
nanolithography using shaped soft elastomeric moulds as imprinting forms.
Prior art methods using perfluoropolyether-based moulds are said to have
"certain sagging and deformation problems in moulds having recesses or
protrusions of sizes below 100 nm (e.g. 50 nm)" (Spec. 2 [0008].) These
problems are said to be ameliorated by providing perfluoropolyoxyalkylene
chains ("RI') having a molecular weight in the range of 1000 to 3500.
(Id. at 3 [0012].) Moreover, as an imprint medium for the soft moulds, a
UV-curable (pre )polymer compositions (P) comprising Si02 or Zr02
nanoparticles is preferred. (Id. at 12 [0059] and [0061].) The claimed
processes comprise forming the soft mould (steps (a)-( c) ), followed by
imprinting and curing the prepolymer composition (P), and processing the
cured object to obtain the desired article, recited in steps (d) and (e).
Claim 1 is representative and reads:
A method for replicating a pattern, said method comprising:
(a) providing a patterned template, wherein said patterned
template comprises
a patterned template surface having a plurality of
recessed or protruded areas formed therein, and wherein
the plurality of recessed or protruded areas have sizes
less than 50 nm;
3 Application 13/201,961, Nanolithography process, filed 17 August 2011,
as the national stage under 35 U.S.C. § 371 of PCT/EP2010/051880,
filed 16 February 2010, claiming the benefit of an application filed in the
EPO on 19 February 2009. We refer to the '"961 Specification," which we
cite as "Spec."
2
Appeal2015-003851
Application 13/201,961
(b) contacting a volume of a curable pertluoropolyether
composition (composition (C)) with said patterned
template surface, said composition comprising:
- at least one functional perfluoropolyether compound
(compound (E) ), said compound (E) comprising a
(per)fluoropolyoxyalkylene chain (chain (Rf)), wherein
the molecular weight of said chain Rf is more
than 1000 and less than 3500; and
at least two unsaturated moieties; and
- at least one photoinitiator;
( c) submitting to UV radiations said composition (C) to
yield a mold comprising a patterned mold surface, and
separating said mold from said patterned template;
( d) contacting said patterned mold surface with a
(pre )polymer composition (composition (P));
(e) processing said composition (P) to yield an article
having a patterned surface, and
separating said article from said mold,
wherein said composition (P) comprises an inorganic
filler having an average particle size of less than 1 µm,
wherein said composition (P) comprises Si02 and/or
Zr02 particles having average sizes comprised
between 1 and 15 nm.
(Claims App., Br. 17; some indentation, paragraphing, and emphasis added.)
3
Appeal2015-003851
Application 13/201,961
The Examiner maintains the following grounds of rejection4 :
A. Claims 1-6 and 8-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
in view of the combined teachings of Petrucci-Samija5 and
Wang. 6
Al. Claims 7 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in
view of the combined teachings of Petrucci-Samija, Wang,
and Watts. 7
B. Discussion
Findings of fact throughout this Opinion are supported by a
preponderance of the evidence of record.
Koo urges (Br. 12-14) that the general disclosure in Wang of
prepolymer compositions containing silica nanoparticles suitable for use in
imprint nanolithography conducted with rigid nickel-based embossing tools
is insufficient to establish that it would have been prima facie obviousness to
use such prepolymer compositions as the imprinted media for the soft
imprint nanolithographic printing forms described by Petrucci-Samija. Such
teachings by Wang, in Koo's view, actually teach away from use with the
soft imprint moulds taught by Petrucci-Samija.
4 Examiner's Answer mailed 12 December 2014 ("Ans.").
5 Maria Petrucci-Samija et al., Printing form precursor and process for
preparing a stamp from the precursor, U.S. Patent Application Publication
2008/0000373 Al (2008).
6 Zhikai Wang, Curable halogenated compositions, U.S. Patent Application
Publication 2003/0050358 Al (2003).
7 Michael P.C. Watts et al., Low viscosity high resolution patterning
material, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2003/0235787 Al (2003).
4
Appeal2015-003851
Application 13/201,961
These arguments are not persuasive of harmful error in the appealed
rejections.
We find that Koo does not challenge the Examiner's findings that
Petrucci-Samija teaches or suggests process steps corresponding to steps (a)
through ( c ), or the Examiner's findings that Wang teaches a prepolymer
composition corresponding to the composition (P) recited in steps ( d)
and ( e ). We find further that Petrucci-Samija describes the soft imprinting
device as being suitable for imprint lithography. (Petrucci-Samija 7 [0064].)
Koo does not, however, direct our attention to any credible evidence of
record that the artisan would have regarded the utility of the imprinting
composition taught by Wang for rigid imprinting devices would have
indicated that those compositions would not be suitable for the soft
imprinting devices taught by Petrucci-Samija. The '961 Specification does
not indicate that any particular problems arise regarding the prepolymer
composition for soft-imprint nano-lithography. Indeed, the Specification
teaches that "[t]he selection of the (pre)polymer composition is not
particularly limited and will be selected taking into account the particular
processing technique to be used." (Spec. 9 [0041].)
A prima facie case of obviousness does not require certainty;
a reasonable expectation of success suffices. Koo has not come forward
with credible evidence and argument that the Examiner erred in concluding
that the artisan, armed with the teachings of Petrucci-Samija regarding
general utility of the soft imprinting device (Petrucci-Samija 7 [0064]) and
the teachings of Wang regarding the imprinting composition (adhesion to the
substrate before curing, release from the substrate after curing
(Wang 6 [0046]), low surface energy, low volume shrinkage upon cure for
5
Appeal2015-003851
Application 13/201,961
precise surface-relief transfer (id. at [0047])) would have had a reasonable
expectation of imprinting Wang's prepolymer compositions with the soft
nano-lithography moulds described by Petrucci-Samija.
Koo does not raise substantively distinct arguments for any dependent
claims, including separately rejected claims 7 and 14.
C. Order
It is ORDERED that the rejection of claims 1-14 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § l.136(a).
AFFIRMED
6