DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Remarks filed on 06/18/2026.
Currently, claims 1, 23-29, and 35-49 are pending in the application.
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 .
Response to Amendments
Applicant's arguments and amendments, see pp. 11-12 of Applicant’s Remarks filed 06/18/2026 and amendments to independent claim 1overcome the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 23-29, and 35-47under 35 U.S.C. 103. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of unclear claim language and new matter (see 35 U.S.C. 112 Rejections below).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 260.
The drawings are objected to because ¶¶ [0078]-[0079] make reference to a first electrically conductive layer 220 under the AlN buffer corresponding to the AlN BAW structure. However, 220 is depicted as the bottom contact of the AlN SIW in Figs. 1A-1C. Further, ¶ [0079] references a second electrically conductive layer 243 of the AlN BAW structure which is disposed on the side of the AlN buffer opposite to the substrate, which is contrary to the drawings submitted on 07/31/2024.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection(s) to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 49 is objected to because of the following informality:
In claim 49, “epi-deposited only a second side” should read “epi-deposited only on a second side”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Independent claim 49 recites the limitation “a first electrically conductive layer contacting only a first side of a first portion of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer; the first electrically conductive layer being one of formed embedded in a volume removed from the substrate or formed on a surface of the not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer where the surface would have been previously adjacent to the substrate”. As shown in Figs. 1A-1C of the instant application, the bottom contact of structure (c) does not contact only a first side of a first portion of the AlN buffer layer, but also contacts sidewalls of the SiC substrate. Further, there is no mention in the original disclosure of the bottom contact of structure (c) contacting only a bottom surface of the AlN buffer and not the sidewalls of the SiC substrate. Therefore, this limitation is not supported by the original description and constitutes new matter to the original disclosure.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 23-29, and 35-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 49 recite the limitation “not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer”. It is unclear what “not intentionally doped” means because it is impossible to ascertain the intentionality of doping in the context of a device claim. Therefore, the claim has an indefinite scope. For the purpose of examination, this limitation will be read as: “undoped AlN buffer layer “.
Claims 23-29 and 35-48 are also rejected under 112(b) as they depend on base claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “where the surface would have been previously adjacent to the substrate, the substrate having been removed in that region to expose the surface”. This limitation is unclear and confusing because it is unclear as to whether or not a structure that is not present was previously present in the context of a final device. Therefore, the claim has an indefinite scope. For the purpose of examination, this limitation will be read as the surface being adjacent to the substrate.
Claims 23-29 and 35-48 are also rejected under 112(b) as they depend on base claim 1.
Claim 49 recites the limitation “the first electrically conductive layer being one of formed embedded in a volume removed from the substrate or formed on a surface of the not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer where the surface would have been previously adjacent to the substrate”. This limitation pertains to manufacturing steps of the component of claim 49 and is therefore unclear in the context of a device claim. Therefore, the claim has an indefinite scope. For the purpose of examination, this limitation will be read as the first electrically conductive layer being embedded in the substrate or is on a surface of the AlN buffer layer adjacent to the substrate.
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 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.
Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over SHEALY et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0067486) in view of GOKHALE et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0091746 A1) and further in view of BADER et al. (“Gate-Recessed E-mode p-Channel HFET With High On-Current Based on GaN/AlN 2D Hole Gas”) and further in view of GIBB et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0312027).
Regarding independent claim 49, Shealy teaches a semiconductor component comprising (Fig. 1): one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer (Fig. 1, 120, ¶ [0021]) epitaxially deposited (¶¶ [0004] & [0021]) on a substrate (Fig. 1, 110, ¶ [0020]); a structure-comprising: a structure (c) comprising: a first electrically conductive layer (Fig. 1, 130, ¶ [0019]) contacting only a first side of a first portion of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer (Fig. 1, 130 contacts only a bottom surface of 120); the first electrically conductive layer being one of formed embedded in a volume removed from the substrate or formed on a surface of the not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer where the surface would have been previously adjacent to the substrate (Fig. 1, 130 is on a surface of 120 adjacent to 110, see 112(b) rejection above); and a second electrically conductive layer a second electrically conductive layer epi-deposited only on a second side of the first portion of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer opposite to the first electrically conductive layer (Fig. 1, 140, ¶ [0019]) only on a second side of the first portion of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer opposite to the first electrically conductive layer, wherein a thickness of the structure (c) is selected to obtain a predetermined center frequency of a filter (¶¶ [0008] & [0021]).
However, Shealy does not explicitly teach a second electrically conductive layer epi-deposited;
at least one other structure of: a structure (a) comprising: a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material epitaxially grown on a second portion of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer; and comprising a 2D hole gas at a heterojunction between the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a difference between a normal component of a polarization of the second epi-deposited layer of the second Group III nitride material and the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer is negative; and, wherein there is an energy band offset between valence bands of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second Group III nitride material, wherein an energy bandgap of the second Group III nitride material is smaller than an energy bandgap of AlNI; or a structure (b) comprising: a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material epitaxially grown on the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer; and comprising a 2D hole gas at a heterojunction between the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a difference between a normal component of a polarization of the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material and the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer is negative, wherein there is an energy band offset between valence bands of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the Group III nitride material, and wherein an energy bandgap of the second epi-layer of the Group III nitride material is smaller than an energy bandgap of AlN; and the structure (b) further comprising a third Group III-N barrier layer deposited over a portion of the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a thickness of the third Group III-N barrier layer and a composition and a thickness of a third Group III-N material are selected to form a two dimensional electron gas (2DEG) at a heterojunction between the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material and the third Group III-N barrier layer.
However, Gokhale is a pertinent art that teaches the second electrically conductive layer (Fig. 9A, 905, ¶ [0088]) is an epi-deposited layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify at least Shealy’s top electrode to be an epitaxially grown TMN layer according to the teaching of Gokhale (Fig. 9A) in order to improve acoustic performance and reduce system loss (Gokhale ¶ [0041]).
However, Shealy modified by Gokhale does not explicitly teach
at least one other structure of: a structure (a) comprising: a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material epitaxially grown on a second portion of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer; and comprising a 2D hole gas at a heterojunction between the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a difference between a normal component of a polarization of the second epi-deposited layer of the second Group III nitride material and the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer is negative; and, wherein there is an energy band offset between valence bands of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second Group III nitride material, wherein an energy bandgap of the second Group III nitride material is smaller than an energy bandgap of AlNI; or a structure (b) comprising: a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material epitaxially grown on the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer; and comprising a 2D hole gas at a heterojunction between the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a difference between a normal component of a polarization of the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material and the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer is negative, wherein there is an energy band offset between valence bands of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the Group III nitride material, and wherein an energy bandgap of the second epi-layer of the Group III nitride material is smaller than an energy bandgap of AlN; and the structure (b) further comprising a third Group III-N barrier layer deposited over a portion of the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a thickness of the third Group III-N barrier layer and a composition and a thickness of a third Group III-N material are selected to form a two dimensional electron gas (2DEG) at a heterojunction between the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material and the third Group III-N barrier layer.
However, Bader is a pertinent art that teaches a structure (a) comprising: a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material (Fig. 1b, 5 nm GaN channel, II. Experimental Results and Modeling) epitaxially grown on a not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer (II. Experimental Results and Modelling teaches GaN/AlN heterostructures obtained with Molecular Beam Epitaxy. There is no mention of the AlN in Fig. 1b being intentionally doped); and comprising a 2D hole gas (2DHG forms between AlN and GaN channel in Figure 1b) at a heterojunction between the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second epi-layer of the second Group III nitride material, wherein a difference between a normal component of a polarization of the second epi-deposited layer of the second Group III nitride material and the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer is negative (the polarization difference between AlN and GaN is negative); and, wherein there is an energy band offset between valence bands of the one not intentionally doped AlN buffer layer and the second Group III nitride material (see Ev at 2DHG in Fig. 1a), wherein an energy bandgap of the second Group III nitride material is smaller than an energy bandgap of AlN (see Ev and Ec at 2DHG in Fig. 1a) (the Examiner notes that Bader teaches at least one option required by the claim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to integrate Shealy’s BAW filter with Bader’s HFET according to the teaching of Bader (Figs. 1A-1B) in order to use the high sheet conductance and wide bandgaps of Bader’s Gan/AlN structure in a monolithic device (Bader III. Conclusions and Benchmarks).
However, Shealy modified by Gokhale modified by Bader does not explicitly teach a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material epitaxially grown on a second portion of the one not intentionally doped AIN buffer layer.
However, Gibb is a pertinent art that teaches a second epi-layer of a second Group III nitride material epitaxially grown on a second portion of the not intentionally doped AIN buffer layer (Both Shealy’s BAW filter and Bader’s HFET require an AlN layer. Gibb Fig. 15E, ¶¶ [0062]-[0067] teaches a filter and an active device on a single epitaxial AlN layer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bader’s device to be on a second portion of Shealy’s AlN layer according to the teaching of Gibb (Fig. 15E) in order to reduce integration cost (Gibb ¶ [0068])).
Cited Prior Art
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant.
Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RHYS P. SHEKER whose telephone number is (703)756-1348. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am to 5 pm.
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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached on 571-270-0373. 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.
/R.P.S./
Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights