Ex Parte LI et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 26, 2018

13821769 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 26, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
13/821,769 03/08/2013 YuzhuoLi
22850 7590 06/28/2018
OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P.
1940 DUKE STREET
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314
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.
413141US99PCT 5601
EXAMINER
PHAM, THOMAS T
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1713
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/28/2018 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@oblon.com
oblonpat@oblon.com
tfarrell@oblon.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte YUZHUO LI, SHY AM SUND AR VENKA TARAMAN, and
HARVEY WAYNE PINDER
Appeal2017-005873
Application 13/821, 7 69 1
Technology Center 1700
Before MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, JEFFREY B. ROBERTSON, and
SHELDON M. McGEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
1 The real party in interest is BASF SE of Ludwigshafen, Germany. App. Br.
2.
Appeal2017-005873
Application 13/821, 7 69
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 the final rejection of 1 and
4--21. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
Appellants' invention is directed to process for polishing substrates
for manufacturing electrical, mechanical and optical devices, the said
substrates containing silicon oxide dielectric films and polysilicon and/or
silicon nitride films. (Spec. 1 :4--6; claim 1 ).
Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A process for chemically mechanically polishing a substrate
comprising a silicon oxide dielectric film and a polysilicon
film, the process comprising:
( 1) contacting the substrate with an aqueous polishing
composition,
(2) polishing the substrate at a temperature and for a time
sufficient to remove the silicon oxide dielectric film and expose
a polysilicon film, to obtain a polished substrate, wherein a
silicon oxide-to-polysilicon selectivity is >50; and
(3) removing the polished substrate from contact with the
aqueous polishing composition,
wherein the aqueous polishing composition comprises the
following components (A), (B) and (C):
(A) abrasive particles which comprise ceria;
(B) at least one water-soluble or water-dispersible polymer
selected from the group consisting of a linear alkylene oxide
homopolymer, a branched alkylene oxide homopolymer, a
linear alkylene oxide copolymer of at least two alkylene oxides,
and a branched alkylene oxide copolymer of at least two
alkylene oxides; and
(C) at least one water-soluble or water-dispersible polymer
selected from the group consisting of
(cl) a linear aliphatic poly(N-vinylamide) homopolymer, a
branched aliphatic poly(N-vinylamide) homopolymer, a linear
cycloaliphatic poly(N-vinylamide) homopolymer, a branched
cycloaliphatic poly(N-vinylamide) homopolymer, a linear
2
Appeal2017-005873
Application 13/821, 7 69
aliphatic poly(N-vinylamide) copolymer, a branched aliphatic
poly(N-vinylamide) copolymer, a linear cycloaliphatic poly(N-
vinylamide) copolymer, a branched cycloaliphatic poly(N-
vinylamide) copolymer,
( c2) a homopolymer of an acrylamide monomer, a
copolymer of an acrylamide monomer and at least one
monomer selected from the group consisting of vinyl esters and
ethers, acrylic and methacrylic esters, allylic esters and ethers,
olefins which may be substituted by halogen atoms or nitrile
groups, and styrenic monomers, and
( c3) a cationic polymeric flocculant, wherein
the acrylamide has formula I:
H2C=C(-R)-C(=O)-N(-R1)(-R2) (I), or
formula II:
H2C=C(-R)-C(=O)-R3 (II),
R is a hydrogen atom, a fluorine atom, a chlorine atom, a
nitrile group, or a residue comprising at least one moiety
selected from the group consisting of a substituted aliphatic
moiety comprising 1 to 6 carbon atoms, an unsubstituted
aliphatic moiety comprising 1 to 6 carbon atoms, a substituted
cycloaliphatic moiety comprising 3 to 10 carbon atoms, an
unsubstituted cycloaliphatic moiety comprising 3 to 10 carbon
atoms, a substituted aromatic moiety comprising 6 to 10 carbon
atoms, and an unsubstituted aromatic moiety comprising 6 to 10
carbon atoms;
R 1 and R2 are each independently a hydrogen atom or a
residue comprising at least one moiety selected from the group
consisting of a substituted aliphatic moiety comprising 1 to 20
carbon atoms, an unsubstituted aliphatic moiety comprising 1 to
20 carbon atoms, a substituted cycloaliphatic moiety
comprising 3 to 10 carbon atoms, an unsubstituted
cycloaliphatic moiety comprising 3 to 10 carbon atoms, a
substituted aromatic moiety comprising 6 to 10 carbon atoms,
and an unsubstituted aromatic moiety comprising 6 to 10
carbon atoms;
R3 is a substituted or unsubstituted, saturated heterocyclic
ring comprising a nitrogen atom, wherein the heterocyclic ring
is linked to a carbon atom of a carbonyl moiety via a covalent
carbon nitrogen bond;
3
Appeal2017-005873
Application 13/821, 7 69
the homopolymers and copolymers have a weight
average molecular weight of less than 100,000 Dalton; and
the cationic polymeric flocculant has a weight average
molecular weight of less than 100,000 Dalton.
App. Br. 19--21 (Claims Appendix).
Appellants appeal the following rejections:
1. Claims 1, 4--10, 12-17 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Fukasawa '109 (US 2010/0210109 Al, published
August 19, 2010) in view ofFukasawa '786 (US 2009/0047786 Al,
published February 19, 2009) and Guo (US 2011/0230048 Al,
published September 22, 2011 ).
2. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Fukasawa '109 in view ofFukasawa '786, Guo, and Kubota (US
2005/0175811 Al, published August 11, 2005).
3. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Fukasawa '109 in view ofFukasawa '786, Guo and Ohmi (US
2011/0042725 Al, published February 24, 2011).
FINDINGS OF FACT & ANALYSIS
Appellants argue that none of the claims "exemplified by Claim 1,
permits the inclusion of a methacrylic acid and/or a polymer of methacrylic
acid and a monomer having an unsaturated double bond" (App. Br. 9).
Appellants contend that element ( c2) of the composition may recite one of
the monomers being methacrylic esters, but methacrylic esters are different
and distinct from methacrylic acids ofFukasawa '109 (App. Br. 9-10).
4
Appeal2017-005873
Application 13/821, 7 69
The Examiner finds that "although methacrylic acid polymer and
methacrylic acid salt polymer is not permitted as component C, there is no
provision in the claim that disallows them to be used in a component that is
not listed in the claim" (Ans. 6). Rather, the Examiner finds that Fukasawa
'109' s methacrylic acid copolymer may be another component of the
aqueous composition in the claim because claim 1 uses the open-ended
transitional word "comprising" (Ans. 6).
The Examiner, however, relies on Fukasawa '109' s teaching in
paragraph 53 to find that the N-vinylpyrrolidone would meet component (C)
(Final Act. 3-4). Paragraph 53 ofFukasawa '109 discloses vinylpyrrolidone
as a suitable unsaturated monomer that may be used in the copolymer
discussed in paragraph 48. Therefore, based upon the Examiner's finding
that methacrylic acid copolymers are not permitted as component (C), the
Examiner fails to show where Fukasawa '109 or any of the other applied
prior art teaches component (C) of the aqueous composition. The Examiner
does not adequately explain how the reliance on Fukasawa '109' s N-
vinylpyrrolidone as part of the monomer meshes with Fukasawa '109' s
teaching that the vinylpyrrolidone is part of a methacrylic acid copolymer,
particularly where the Examiner finds that component (C) excludes
methacrylic acid copolymers. The Examiner's position that methacrylic
acid copolymer is allowed by the transitional phrase "comprising" does not
adequately account for component (C) recited in the claims as exemplified
by claim 1.
On this record, we are constrained to reverse the Examiner as failing
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. Rejections (2) and (3) of the
dependent claims are also reversed for the same reason.
5
Appeal2017-005873
Application 13/821, 7 69
DECISION
The Examiner's decision is reversed.
ORDER
REVERSED
6