DETAILED ACTION
This is the Office action based on the 17921789 application filed October 27, 2022, and in response to applicant’s argument/remark filed on August 12, 2025. Claims 19-20 and 22-31 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103:
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 19-20 and 22-31 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sumida et al. (U.S. PGPub. No. 20120280363), hereinafter “Sumida”.
--Claims 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 31: Sumida teaches a method of making a semiconductor device, comprising:providing a base substrate 11, the base substrate may be made of sapphire ([0055]);forming a mask 12 on the base substrate 11, the mask has a plurality of openings (Fig. 1A, [0056]);growing a plurality of GaN-based layers 13 on the mask 12 and on the base substrate 11 by using ELO method ([0005-0006]), the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 has a wider top portion on the mask 12 and a narrower bottom portion attached to the base substrate 11 (Fig. 1B, [0056]), the bottom portion is in 1-100 plane in the vertical direction (abstract, [0013-0014, 0063-0073]);forming a plurality of electrodes 14 on the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 (Fig. 18A, [0131]);removing the mask 12, leaving the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 attached to the base substrate 11 and hollow portions underneath the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 (Fig. 18B, [0132]);bonding a top substrate 16 onto an upper surface of the GaN-based layers 13 (Fig. 19, [0133]);peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11 by applying a mechanical force and stimulating a portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together (Fig. 21, [0135]) along a 11-20 direction of the GaN ([0063-0073]). Sumida further teaches that the bottom portion of the GaN-based layers 13 has a higher density of dislocations than the top portion ([0081, 0096, 0148, 0166]; Fig. 12A-B, 13A-B, 16A-B). In an embodiment Sumida teaches that the peeling off may be effectively performed by using a laser lift-off technique when the area to be peeled off is small, wherein laser beam of 266-nm wavelength is irradiated the bottom portion of the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 causing thermal decomposition at the interface of the bottom portion and the base substrate and generates nitrogen ([0144]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, when the area to be peeled off is small, to use a laser lift-off method to peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11, wherein the lift-off comprises stimulating the bottom portion that joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together by irradiating the bottom portion with the laser beam of 266-nm wavelength and applying the mechanical force, because Sumida teaches that peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11 by applying a mechanical force and stimulating a portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together, and that the stimulating may be achieved by irradiating by using the laser when the area to be peeled off is small. It is noted that the applying the mechanical force would generate a stress that separates the top substrate and the GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11.--Claim 25: Since Sumida teaches that the density of the dislocation threads in the bottom portion is higher than in the top portion, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to find the optimal density of the dislocation threads in the top portion, such as 1/5 or less with respect to the bottom portion , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.--Claims 26, 29, 30: Sumida teaches the peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11 by applying a mechanical force and stimulating a portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together (Fig. 21, [0135]) along a 11-20 direction of the GaN ([0063-0073]), as explained above. Sumida further teaches that the base substrate 11 may comprises GaN layer formed on a C-plane sapphire layer ([0070, 0073]). Since the GaN-based layer is grown on the GaN layer by ELO method, the GaN-based layer crystal orientation aligns with the GaN layer.
Claims 19-20 and 22-31 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sumida in view of Youtsey et al. (U.S. PGPub. No. 20190088495), hereinafter “Youtsey”.
--Claims 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 31: Sumida teaches a method of making a GaN-based LED semiconductor device ([0002]), comprising:providing a base substrate 11, the base substrate may be made of sapphire ([0055]);forming a mask 12 on the base substrate 11, the mask has a plurality of openings (Fig. 1A, [0056]);epitaxially growing a plurality of GaN-based layers 13 on the mask 12 and on the base substrate 11 by using ELO method ([0005-0006]), the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 has a wider top portion on the mask 12 and a narrower bottom portion attached to the base substrate 11 (Fig. 1B, [0056]), the bottom portion is in 1-100 plane in the vertical direction (abstract, [0013-0014, 0063-0073]);forming a plurality of electrodes 14 on the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 (Fig. 18A, [0131]);removing the mask 12, leaving the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 attached to the base substrate 11 and hollow portions underneath the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 (Fig. 18B, [0132]);peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11 by applying a mechanical force and stimulating a portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together (Fig. 21, [0135]) along a 11-20 direction of the GaN ([0063-0073]) Sumida further teaches that the bottom portion of the GaN-based layers 13 has a higher density of dislocations than the top portion ([0081, 0096, 0148, 0166]; Fig. 12A-B, 13A-B, 16A-B). In an embodiment Sumida teaches that the peeling off is conventionally performed by using a laser lift-off technique when the area to be peeled off is small, wherein laser beam of 266-nm wavelength is irradiated the bottom portion of the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 through the sapphire substrate causing thermal decomposition at the interface of the bottom portion and the base substrate and generates nitrogen. Since the area to be peeled off is small (Fig. 20-21), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to use a laser lift-off method to peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11, wherein the lift-off comprises stimulating the bottom portion that joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together by irradiating the bottom portion with the laser beam of 266-nm wavelength and applying the mechanical force, because Sumida teaches that peeling off the plurality of GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11 by applying a mechanical force and stimulating a portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together, and that the stimulating may be achieved by irradiating by using the laser when the area to be peeled off is small. Sumida teaches that there may be various problems, such as cracking on the GaN layer, when using the laser lift-off method ([0144]).
Youtsey, also directed to making a GaN-based LED semiconductor device, teaches that laser lift-off method that vaporizes the interface between GaN layer and a sapphire substrate may cause cracking in the epitaxial material ([0003-0004]), and teaches to remedy the problem by forming an etch stop layer and a release layer between the GaN layer and the sapphire substrate to form a stack, then exposing the stack to a photoenhanced lateral wet etch environment to laterally etch the release layer to separate the GaN layer and the sapphire substrate ([0005-0006, 0009]), wherein exposing the stack to the photoenhanced lateral wet etch environment comprises immersing the stack in an etching solution, such as KOH, ([0112]) while applying a UV light source through the sapphire layer to impinge photons on the release layer to increase the etch rate of the release layer ([0099-0100, 0116], Fig. 4), wherein the UV light source may comprise a laser ([0107]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to separating the GaN-based layer 13 from the sapphire substrate by exposing the stack to a photoenhanced lateral wet etch environment to separate the GaN layer and the sapphire substrate, wherein exposing the stack to the photoenhanced lateral wet etch environment comprises immersing the stack in an etching solution, such as KOH, while applying a UV light source through the sapphire layer to impinge photons on the portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together, wherein the UV light source may comprise a laser in the invention of Sumida because Sumida teaches that there may be various problems, such as cracking on the GaN layer when using the laser lift-off method and Youtsey teaches that such problem may be remedied by using the method above. It is noted that the applying the mechanical force would generate a stress that separates the top substrate and the GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11.--Claims 25: Since Sumida teaches that the density of the dislocation threads in the bottom portion is higher than in the top portion, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to find the optimal density of the dislocation threads in the top portion, such as 1/5 or less with respect to the bottom portion , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.--Claims 26, 29, 30: Sumida further teaches that the base substrate 11 may comprises GaN layer formed on a C-plane sapphire layer ([0070, 0073]). Since the GaN-based layer is grown on the GaN layer by ELO method, the GaN-based layer crystal orientation aligns with the GaN layer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 12, 2025 have been fully considered as follows:--Regarding Applicant’s argument that Sumida does not disclose or suggest bonding a support substrate on an upper surface of the first semiconductor part, this arguments is not persuasive. Sumida clearly teaches bonding a top substrate 16 onto an upper surface of the GaN-based layers 13 in paragraph [0133], and as shown in Fig. 19.--Regarding Applicant’s argument that Sumida does not disclose or suggest the feature “wherein the breaking is performed by a stress, and the stress is generated by a relative separation of the underlying substrate and the support substrate”, this arguments is not persuasive. Sumida clearly teaches applying a mechanical force and stimulating a portion of the bottom portion of the joins base substrate 11 and the GaN-based layers 13 together (Fig. 21, [0135]) along a 11-20 direction of the GaN ([0063-0073]). It is noted that the applying the mechanical force would generate a stress that separates the top substrate and the GaN-based layers 13 from the base substrate 11.--As explained in the previous Office action, a second ground of rejection based on Sumida in view of Youtsey is introduced in the previous Office action, and maintained in the current Office action.
Conclusion
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS PHAM whose telephone number is (571) 270-7670 and fax number is (571) 270-8670. The examiner can normally be reached on MTWThF9to6 PST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Allen can be reached on (571) 270-3176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOMAS T PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713