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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-28, in the reply filed on 10/23/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the inventions have unity of invention because the claims are “closely related and directed to the same inventive concept and do not impose an undue burden on examination”. This is not found persuasive because burden on examination is not a factor in a unity of invention analysis (as opposed to US based restriction practice under 35 U.S.C. § 121).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 11-17, and 22-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pezeshki et al. (US 11,513,285 B2) in view of Shi et al. (US 10,274,687 B1) and Eom et al. (US 2018/0337238 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pezeshki discloses a device (Fig. 5A) comprising:
a silicon substrate (561);
a silicon dioxide layer (559) formed on the silicon substrate;
a first contact layer (553) on which is built a heterostructure (combination of quantum well structure 555 and second contact layer 551).
Shi differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of first and second contact layers comprising doped silicon with first and second contact layers of doped GaN. However, using doped silicon for contact layers and the corresponding function of providing electrical contact to a quantum well structure was known in the art (Col. 7, Lines 16-25 of Shi). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to have substituted the known composition of doped silicon as taught by Shi for contact layer composition of Pezeshki and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (see MPEP § 2143(I)(B)).
Pezeshki also differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of a quantum well made from alternating functional layers of transition metal oxides (TMOs) with a quantum well made from alternating functional layers of GaN and InGaN. However, alternating functional layers of transition metal oxides and the corresponding function of forming a quantum well structure was known in the art (¶ 0027 of Eom). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to have substituted the known configuration of alternating layers of transition metal oxides as taught by Eom for quantum well structure of Pezeshki and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (see MPEP § 2143(I)(B)).
Regarding claim 2, Eom further discloses that the TMOs include strontium titanate (¶ 0027).
Regarding claim 11, as the heterostructure created from the alternating functional layers of TMOs and silicon is consistent with the composition of the claimed heterostructure, it will inherently create an electro-optic modulator (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 12, in the device of the combination, the heterostructure is a hybrid silicon-TMO waveguide (“waveguide”, Abstract of Pezeshki).
Regarding claim 13, as the device of the combination is consistent with that of the Applicant, it will inherently support a transverse magnetic optical mode (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 14, creating the alternating functional layer by atomic layer deposition of molecular beam epitaxy relates to how the device was made and does not distinguish over the structure of the prior art (MPEP 2113).
Regarding claim 15, the doped silicon layer is a heavily doped silicon layer (Col. 7, Line 48 of Shi).
Regarding claim 16, Shi further discloses the inclusion of a lightly doped silicon layer (“intrinsic silicon buffer layer” (Col. 7, Line 45). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to include this lightly doped silicon layer for the benefit of mitigating diffusion of the dopants into the quantum well structure.
Regarding claim 17, Pezeshki discloses a device (Fig. 5A) comprising:
a silicon substrate (561);
a silicon dioxide layer (559) formed on the silicon substrate;
a first contact layer (553); and
a heterostructure (quantum well structure 555).
Shi differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of a first contact layers comprising doped silicon with a first contact layers of doped GaN. However, using doped silicon for contact layers and the corresponding function of providing electrical contact to a quantum well structure was known in the art (Col. 7, Lines 16-25 of Shi). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to have substituted the known composition of doped silicon as taught by Shi for contact layer composition of Pezeshki and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (see MPEP § 2143(I)(B)).
Pezeshki also differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of a quantum well made from alternating functional layers of transition metal oxides (TMOs) comprising strontium titanate and lanthanum aluminate with a quantum well made from alternating functional layers of GaN and InGaN. However, alternating functional layers of transition metal oxides comprising strontium titanate and lanthanum aluminate and the corresponding function of forming a quantum well structure was known in the art (¶ 0027 of Eom). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to have substituted the known configuration of alternating layers of transition metal oxides comprising strontium titanate and lanthanum aluminate as taught by Eom for quantum well structure of Pezeshki and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (see MPEP § 2143(I)(B)).
Regarding claim 22, as the composition of the quantum well in the device of the combination is consistent with that disclosed by Applicant, it will inherently confine electrons or holes in a dimension perpendicular to a surface of the heterostructure (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 23, as the composition of the quantum well in the device of the combination is consistent with that disclosed by Applicant, it will inherently have a depth of two to three electron volts (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 24, as the composition of the quantum well in the device of the combination is consistent with that disclosed by Applicant, it will inherently have energy levels with a separation sufficient to enable light photon absorption or emission (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 25, as the device of the combination is consistent with that of the Applicant, it will inherently support a transverse magnetic optical mode (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 26, the doped silicon layer is a heavily doped silicon layer (Col. 7, Line 48 of Shi).
Regarding claim 27, Shi further discloses the inclusion of a lightly doped silicon layer (“intrinsic silicon buffer layer” (Col. 7, Line 45). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to include this lightly doped silicon layer for the benefit of mitigating diffusion of the dopants into the quantum well structure.
Regarding claim 28, as the device of the combination is consistent with that of the Applicant, the thin film TMO heterostructure will inherently provide quantum-confined Stark effect in intersubband absorption for electro- optic operation (MPEP 2112).
Claim(s) 3-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pezeshki, Shi, and Eom as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shiogai et al. (Improvement of electron mobility in La:BaSnO3 thin films by insertion of an atomically flat insulating (Sr,Ba)SnO3 buffer layer, AIP Advances, June 7, 2016).
Regarding claim 3, Eom further discloses that the quantum well is created from perovskite oxides as for the quantum well layers (¶ 0027). Eom does not disclose that the quantum well structure includes perovskite barrier layers.
Shiogai, in the same field of endeavor, discloses inserting a perovskite oxide (“BaSnO3 on (Sr,Ba)SnO3 bilayer buffer”, Abstract) as a barrier layer in a quantum well structure comprising strontium titanate (Abstract). There was a benefit to using barrier layers as such in that is reduces dislocations and improves surface smoothness (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to insert a perovskite oxide barrier layer in the quantum well structure of Eom for this benefit.
Regarding claim 4, as the barrier layers of Shiogai comprise comprise wide band gap, high dielectric constant materials (barium stannate, Abstract, which is a wide band gap, high dielectric constant material as discussed by Applicant).
Regarding claims 5-7, the quantum well layers comprise low effective mass semiconducting oxides of barium stannate (Abstract of Shiogai).
Regarding claim 8, as the composition of the quantum well in the device of the combination is consistent with that disclosed by Applicant, it will inherently confine electrons or holes in a dimension perpendicular to a surface of the heterostructure (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 9, as the composition of the quantum well in the device of the combination is consistent with that disclosed by Applicant, it will inherently have a depth of two to three electron volts (MPEP 2112).
Regarding claim 10, as the composition of the quantum well in the device of the combination is consistent with that disclosed by Applicant, it will inherently have energy levels with a separation sufficient to enable light photon absorption or emission (MPEP 2112).
Claim(s) 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pezeshki, Shi, and Eom as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Shiogai et al. (Improvement of electron mobility in La:BaSnO3 thin films by insertion of an atomically flat insulating (Sr,Ba)SnO3 buffer layer, AIP Advances, June 7, 2016).
Regarding claim 18, Eom does not disclose that the quantum well structure includes barrier layers of wide band gap, high dielectric constant materials.
Shiogai, in the same field of endeavor, discloses inserting a wide band gap, high dielectric constant perovskite oxide (“BaSnO3 on (Sr,Ba)SnO3 bilayer buffer”, Abstract) as a barrier layer in a quantum well structure comprising strontium titanate (Abstract). There was a benefit to using barrier layers as such in that is reduces dislocations and improves surface smoothness (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to insert a perovskite oxide barrier layer in the quantum well structure of Eom for this benefit.
Regarding claims 19-21, Eom does not disclose that the quantum well structure includes barrier layers of wide band gap, high dielectric constant materials.
Shiogai, in the same field of endeavor, discloses inserting a wide band gap, high dielectric constant perovskite oxide (“BaSnO3 on (Sr,Ba)SnO3 bilayer buffer”, Abstract) as a barrier layer in a quantum well structure comprising strontium titanate (Abstract). There was a benefit to using barrier layers as such in that is reduces dislocations and improves surface smoothness (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to insert a perovskite oxide barrier layer in the quantum well structure of Eom for this benefit. In the resulting configuration, the quantum well layers comprise low effective mass semiconducting oxides of barium stannate (Abstract of Shiogai).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A CULBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-4893. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at (571) 270-1435. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A CULBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 2815