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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, filed 07/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s)13-21 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as detailed below.
Applicant’s arguments, see Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, filed 07/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 22-28 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as detailed below.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagasawa et al. (US 2002/0072249) [Hereinafter Nagasawa] & Nakahira (JP2011151057A) [Hereinafter Nakahira].
Regarding claim 13, Nagasawa teaches A method of forming a silicon carbide-containing film on a substrate, the method comprising:
heating the substrate [fig. 3-1, substrate, para 72 “…on the surface of the substrate that has been heated to not less than 900.degree. C.”];
supplying a carbon precursor gas containing an organic compound having an unsaturated carbon bond to the heated substrate [fig. 3-3, carbon source gas, para 75; wherein exemplary gases such as C2H2 (acetylene or ethyne) & C2H4 (ethylene or ethene) contain an unsaturated carbon compound];
supplying a silicon precursor gas containing a silicon compound to the heated substrate [fig. 3, silicon source gas, para 75];
laminating, on the substrate, a silicon carbide-containing layer to be turned into the silicon carbide-containing film by allowing the organic compound having the unsaturated carbon bond to thermally react with the silicon compound [fig. 3, “silicon epitaxial growth layer reacts with carbon source forming silicon carbide layer”];
and supplying plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer [para 87, wherein the seed crystal is a silicon carbide layer as noted in para 89].
Nagasawa fails to explicitly disclose supplying plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer to promote elimination of unnecessary functional groups and bonding between dangling bonds.
While Nagasawa does note decomposition of carbon by the plasma wherein the dangling bonds are eliminated by forming new bonds to form diamond on the seed crystal [para 87].
Nakahira teaches in para 96 the use of supplying plasma to a silicon carbide thin film to eliminate Si-H bonds by plasma treatment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to supply plasma to the silicon carbide containing layer to promote elimination of unnecessary functional groups and bonding between dangling bonds which results in removal of contaminates ensuring a pristine surface for subsequent processing or bonding; improving adhesion and durability by removing contaminants/defects for long-term durability of the material and performance of SiC-based devices/structures.
Claim(s) 14-15 & 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagasawa & Nakahira as applied to claim 13 and further in view of Weidman et al. (US 2012/0122302) [Hereinafter Weidman].
Regarding claim 14, Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The method of Claim 13,
wherein the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate is carried out by repeating multiple times the supplying the carbon precursor gas and the supplying the silicon precursor gas in an alternate manner [Nagasawa, fig. 1, condition 1 & 2, para 53-54].
Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose wherein the silicon carbide-containing film is formed by repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer in an alternate manner.
However, Weidman teaches in para 12 repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize plasma for removing the hydrogen atoms and repeating the gas phase silicon carbide exposure to achieve desired layer thickness of the silicon carbide layer as taught by Wideman.
Regarding claim 15, Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The method of Claim 13,
wherein the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate is carried out by performing the supplying the carbon precursor gas and the supplying the silicon precursor gas in a parallel manner [Nagasawa, fig. 1, condition 1, para 53; wherein the carbon gas and silicon gas is supplied in parallel during time period “tc1”].
Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose and the silicon carbide-containing film is formed by repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer in an alternate manner.
However, Wideman teaches in para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize plasma for removing the hydrogen atoms and repeating the gas phase silicon carbide exposure to achieve desired layer thickness of the silicon carbide layer as taught by Wideman.
Regarding claim 20, Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The method of Claim 13.
While Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches supplying plasma to a silicon carbide layer.
Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose wherein the plasma is obtained by exciting one plasma forming gas selected from
a hydrogen gas, an ammonia gas, a nitrogen gas, an oxygen gas, a noble gas,
or a mixed gas of at least one of the hydrogen gas, the ammonia gas, the nitrogen gas, and the oxygen gas and the noble gas.
However, Wideman teaches wherein the plasma is obtained by exciting one plasma forming gas selected from
a hydrogen gas, an ammonia gas, a nitrogen gas, an oxygen gas, a noble gas [para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition. Para 8 teaches plasma containing nitrogen],
or a mixed gas of at least one of the hydrogen gas, the ammonia gas, the nitrogen gas, and the oxygen gas and the noble gas [para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the plasma to comprise a hydrogen, noble gas, and/or nitrogen to effectively clean silicon carbide surface by removing contaminants.
Regarding claim 21, Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The method of Claim 13,
While Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches heating the substrate.
Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose wherein the substrate is heated at a temperature in a range of less than 500 degrees C.
However, Wideman teaches wherein the substrate is heated at a temperature in a range of less than 500 degrees C. [Wideman, para 76, “the chamber or substrate heating to less than a temperature of about 600 degrees centigrade, such as about 400 degrees centigrade or less, for example, from the range of from about 200 degrees centigrade to about 400 degrees centigrade”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to heat the substrate to 600 degrees or less as taught by Wideman which overlaps the claimed invention range. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
Claim(s) 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagasawa, Nakahira, & Weidman as applied to claims 14-15 & 20-21 and further in view of Watanabe et al. (WO2019009183A1) [Hereinafter Watanabe].
Regarding claim 16, Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teaches The method of Claim 14,
wherein, in the repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer [Wideman, para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.” ].
While Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teach the process may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.
Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman fails to explicitly disclose a thickness of the silicon carbide-containing layer formed in the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate at one time is 1 nm or less.
However, Watanabe teaches, “Although the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 is not particularly limited, it is preferably 1 nm or more and 100 nm or less…By setting the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 within the above range, the seed layer has a necessary and sufficient thickness.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the silicon carbide layer to have a necessary and sufficient thickness of 1nm, which overlaps the claimed invention range. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05)
Regarding claim 17, Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman/Watanabe teaches The method of Claim 16,
wherein the plasma is obtained by exciting one plasma forming gas selected from
a hydrogen gas, an ammonia gas, a nitrogen gas, an oxygen gas, a noble gas [Wideman, para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition. Para 8 teaches plasma containing nitrogen],
or a mixed gas of at least one of the hydrogen gas, the ammonia gas, the nitrogen gas, and the oxygen gas and the noble gas [Wideman, para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition.].
Regarding claim 18, Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman/Watanabe teaches The method of Claim 17,
wherein the substrate is heated at a temperature in a range of less than 500 degrees C [Wideman, para 76, “the chamber or substrate heating to less than a temperature of about 600 degrees centigrade, such as about 400 degrees centigrade or less, for example, from the range of from about 200 degrees centigrade to about 400 degrees centigrade”].
Regarding claim 19, Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teaches The method of Claim 15,
wherein, in the repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer [Wideman, para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.” ].
While Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teach the process may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.
Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman fails to explicitly disclose a thickness of the silicon carbide-containing layer formed in the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate at one time is 1 nm or less.
However, Watanabe teaches, “Although the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 is not particularly limited, it is preferably 1 nm or more and 100 nm or less…By setting the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 within the above range, the seed layer has a necessary and sufficient thickness.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the silicon carbide layer to have a necessary and sufficient thickness of 1nm, which overlaps the claimed invention range. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05)
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakinishi et al. (JP2007027633A) [Hereinafter Sakinishi], Nagasawa, & Nakahira.
Regarding claim 22, Sakinishi teaches An apparatus for forming a silicon carbide-containing film on a substrate, comprising:
a processing container [fig. 4, film formation chamber 200, “the film formation chamber 200 in which the SOI substrate 100 is installed”] configured to accommodate the substrate [fig. 4, substrate 100];
a heater configured to heat the substrate accommodated in the processing container [fig. 4, carbon plate 410, “the surface of the substrate 100 is heated with radiant heat generated from the carbon plate 410.”];
a carbon precursor supplier configured to supply a carbon precursor gas containing an organic compound to the processing container [fig. 4, “The gas supply means 300 includes…a hydrocarbon gas supply unit 320 for supplying hydrocarbon gas G2,”];
a silicon precursor supplier configured to supply a silicon precursor gas containing a silicon compound to the processing container [fig. 4, “The gas supply means 300 includes…a silane gas supply unit 350 for supplying a silane gas G5.”];
a plasma forming part configured to form plasma inside the processing container by exciting a gas for plasma [wherein the carbon source (G2) provided inside the formation chamber (200) may be made into plasma “Alternatively, when the carbon source gas is made into plasma, the carbon plate 410 may be heated by the heat of the plasma”];
and a controller [fig. 2, control unit 500, “a control unit 500 for controlling the gas supply means 300 and the infrared irradiation means 400.”],
wherein the controller is configured to execute steps of:
heating the substrate accommodated in the processing container [“the carbon plate 410 is heated with infrared rays from an infrared lamp 400, and the surface of the substrate 100 is heated with radiant heat generated from the carbon plate 410” wherein fig. 4 depicts the carbon plate (410) and substrate (100) within the film formation chamber (200)];
supplying the carbon precursor gas containing the organic compound to the heated substrate inside the processing container [fig. 4, “The gas supply means 300 includes…a hydrocarbon gas supply unit 320 for supplying hydrocarbon gas G2,” wherein “a control unit 500 for controlling the gas supply means 300”];
supplying the silicon precursor gas containing the silicon compound to the heated substrate inside the processing container (200) [fig. 4, “The gas supply means 300 includes…a silane gas supply unit 350 for supplying a silane gas G5.” wherein “a control unit 500 for controlling the gas supply means 300”];
laminating, on the substrate, a silicon carbide-containing layer [fig. 3B, single crystal silicon carbide thin film 140, “locally transform the surface silicon layer 130 into a single crystal silicon carbide thin film 140.”] to be turned into the silicon carbide-containing film by allowing the organic compound having the unsaturated carbon bond to thermally react with the silicon compound [fig. 3E, silicon carbide film 140 & silicon carbide film 160, “In this manner, the silane-based gas G5 decomposes and reacts on the single crystal silicon carbide thin film 140, whereby a further single crystal silicon carbide thin film 160 is formed on the single crystal silicon carbide thin film 140…In this manner, a buried insulating layer type single crystal silicon carbide substrate having single crystal silicon carbide thin films 140 and 160 is manufactured.”];
and forming the plasma inside the processing container and supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer [fig. 3C where carbon gas (G2) in plasma form is applied to the silicon carbide-containing layer (140) as the first step (hydrogen gas G1 + carbon gas G2) is maintained for another 30 minutes, “After the first step, the same condition as that of the first step is maintained for another 30 minutes, thereby depositing a carbon thin film 150 on the single crystal silicon carbide thin film 140 (second step, see FIG. 3C).”].
Sakinishi fails to explicitly disclose a carbon precursor gas containing an organic compound having an unsaturated carbon bond
However, Nagasawa teaches [fig. 3-3, carbon source gas, para 75]; wherein exemplary gases such as C2H2 (acetylene or ethyne) & C2H4 (ethylene or ethene) contain an unsaturated carbon compound.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize carbon precursor gas having an unsaturated carbon compound for enhanced film quality with reduced defects and enabling lower deposition temperatures.
Sakinishi/Nagasawa fails to explicitly disclose supplying plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer to promote elimination of unnecessary functional groups and bonding between dangling bonds.
While Nagasawa does note decomposition of carbon by the plasma wherein the dangling bonds are eliminated by forming new bonds to form diamond on the seed crystal [para 87].
Nakahira teaches in para 96 the use of supplying plasma to a silicon carbide thin film to eliminate Si-H bonds by plasma treatment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to supply plasma to the silicon carbide containing layer to promote elimination of unnecessary functional groups and bonding between dangling bonds which results in removal of contaminates ensuring a pristine surface for subsequent processing or bonding; improving adhesion and durability by removing contaminants/defects for long-term durability of the material and performance of SiC-based devices/structures.
Claim(s) 23-24 & 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakinishi, Nagasawa, & Nakahira as applied to claim 22 and further in view of Weidman.
Regarding claim 23, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The apparatus of Claim 22, wherein the controller is configured to execute:
in the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate,
repeating multiple times the step of supplying the carbon precursor gas and the step of supplying the silicon precursor gas in an alternate manner [Nagasawa, fig. 1, condition 1 & 2, para 53-54].
Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose forming the silicon carbide-containing film by repeating multiple times the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the step of supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer in an alternate manner.
However, Weidman teaches in para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize plasma for removing the hydrogen atoms and repeating the gas phase silicon carbide exposure to achieve desired layer thickness of the silicon carbide layer.
Regarding claim 24, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The apparatus of Claim 22, wherein the controller is configured to execute:
in the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate, the step of supplying the carbon precursor gas and the step of supplying the silicon precursor gas in a parallel manner [Nagasawa, fig. 1, condition 1, para 53; wherein the carbon gas and silicon gas is supplied in parallel during time period “tc1”].
Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose forming the silicon carbide-containing film by repeating multiple times the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the step of supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer in an alternate manner.
However, Wideman teaches in para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize plasma for removing the hydrogen atoms and repeating the gas phase silicon carbide exposure to achieve desired layer thickness of the silicon carbide layer.
Regarding claim 29, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The apparatus of Claim 22.
Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose wherein the plasma is obtained by exciting one plasma forming gas selected from
a hydrogen gas, an ammonia gas, a nitrogen gas, an oxygen gas, a noble gas
or a mixed gas of at least one of the hydrogen gas, the ammonia gas, the nitrogen gas, and the oxygen gas and the noble gas.
However, Wideman teaches wherein the plasma is obtained by exciting one plasma forming gas selected from
a hydrogen gas, an ammonia gas, a nitrogen gas, an oxygen gas, a noble gas [Wideman, para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition. Para 8 teaches plasma containing nitrogen],
or a mixed gas of at least one of the hydrogen gas, the ammonia gas, the nitrogen gas, and the oxygen gas and the noble gas [Wideman, para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize exemplary gases for plasma as taught by Wideman for precise film deposition and etching control. Furthermore, noble gases are cost effective.
Regarding claim 30, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches The apparatus of Claim 22.
While Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira teaches the substrate is heated at a temperature [Sakanishi, fig. 3A, SOI substrate 100, “A substrate having a layer of single crystal silicon carbide on its surface can be obtained by heating the surface of a single crystal silicon substrate”].
Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira fails to explicitly disclose wherein the substrate is heated at a temperature in a range of less than 500 degrees C.
However, Wideman teaches para 76, “the chamber or substrate heating to less than a temperature of about 600 degrees centigrade, such as about 400 degrees centigrade or less, for example, from the range of from about 200 degrees centigrade to about 400 degrees centigrade”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the substrate is heated at a temperature of 600 degrees or less to improve uniformity in the formation of silicon carbide films. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05)
Claim(s) 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakinishi, Nagasawa, Nakahira, & Weidman as applied to claim 23-24 and further in view of Watanabe.
Regarding claim 25, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teaches The apparatus of Claim 23,
wherein, in the repeating multiple times the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the step of supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer [Wideman, para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.” ],
a thickness of the silicon carbide-containing layer formed in the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate at one time is 1 nm or less.
While Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teach the process may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.
Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman fails to explicitly disclose a thickness of the silicon carbide-containing layer formed in the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate at one time is 1 nm or less.
However, Watanabe teaches, “Although the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 is not particularly limited, it is preferably 1 nm or more and 100 nm or less…By setting the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 within the above range, the seed layer has a necessary and sufficient thickness.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the silicon carbide layer to have a necessary and sufficient thickness of 1nm, which overlaps the claimed invention range. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05)
Regarding claim 26, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman/ Watanabe teaches The apparatus of Claim 25, wherein the plasma is obtained by exciting one plasma forming gas selected from
a hydrogen gas, an ammonia gas, a nitrogen gas, an oxygen gas, a noble gas [Wideman, para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition. Para 8 teaches plasma containing nitrogen],
or a mixed gas of at least one of the hydrogen gas, the ammonia gas, the nitrogen gas, and the oxygen gas and the noble gas [Wideman, para 7 teaches the use of He, Ar, and/or H2 for plasma composition.].
Regarding claim 27, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman/ Watanabe teaches The apparatus of Claim 26, wherein the substrate is heated at a temperature in a range of less than 500 degrees C [Wideman, para 76, “the chamber or substrate heating to less than a temperature of about 600 degrees centigrade, such as about 400 degrees centigrade or less, for example, from the range of from about 200 degrees centigrade to about 400 degrees centigrade”]. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05)
Regarding claim 28, Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teaches The apparatus of Claim 24,
wherein, in the repeating multiple times the step of laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate and the step of supplying the plasma to the silicon carbide-containing layer [Wideman, para 12 wherein teaches repeating multiple times the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on a base plate surface (substrate), wherein “plasma may be effective for removing hydrogen atoms. Again, typical gases suitable include, but are not limited to, hydrogen gas, inert gases (e.g., He, Ar, etc.) and mixtures thereof. If further additional silicon carbide layers are desired, gas phase silicon carbide may be purged and the plasma treatment and silicon carbide exposure steps may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.”].
While Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman teach the process may be repeated until the desired layer thickness is obtained.
Sakinishi/Nagasawa/Nakahira/Wideman fails to explicitly disclose a thickness of the silicon carbide-containing layer formed in the laminating the silicon carbide-containing layer on the substrate at one time is 1 nm or less.
However, Watanabe teaches, “Although the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 is not particularly limited, it is preferably 1 nm or more and 100 nm or less…By setting the thickness of the silicon carbide underlayer 3 within the above range, the seed layer has a necessary and sufficient thickness.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the silicon carbide layer to have a necessary and sufficient thickness of 1nm, which overlaps the claimed invention range. Moreover, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP 2144.05)
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELIX B ANDREWS whose telephone number is (703)756-1074. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, William Partridge can be reached at 571-270-1402. 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.
/FELIX B ANDREWS/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812