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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed (see MPEP § 606.01).
This may result in slightly longer titles, but the loss in brevity of title will be more than offset by the gain in its informative value in indexing, classifying, searching, etc.
The following title is suggested: “SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE HAVING A METAL OXIDE AN METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE.”
If Applicant does not agree with the suggested title above, Applicant must provide a new title that clearly reflects the invention to which the claims are directed.
Response to Amendment
In view of applicant’s amendments and arguments filed on January 26, 2026, the rejections of claims 2-6 under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 as stated in the Office Action mailed on November 3, 2025 have been withdrawn.
However, the nonstatutory double patenting rejections of claims 7-9 are still maintained. See below for the nonstatutory double patenting rejections.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 7-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 5, 6 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,600,489 (hereinafter “Pat-489”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Pat-489 discloses all the claimed limitations. See rejections below.
Regarding Claim 7, Pat-489 discloses a method for manufacturing a metal oxide, comprising: a first step of introducing a precursor (see claim 1); a second step of performing a first evacuation after the introduction of the precursor (see claim 1); a third step of introducing an oxidizer after the first evacuation (see claim 1); and a fourth step of performing a second evacuation after the introduction of the oxidizer (see claim 1), wherein the precursor contains chlorine (see claim 10), and wherein the metal oxide comprises a crystal structure in which a c-axis of a crystal is aligned perpendicularly to a deposition surface (see claim 5).
Regarding Claim 8, Pat-489 discloses wherein two or more kinds of oxidizers are used as the oxidizer (see claim 6).
Regarding Claim 9, Pat-489 discloses wherein the precursor comprises at least one of indium, gallium, and zinc (see claim 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 12-17 are allowed, and claims 7-11 will be allowed after overcoming the nonstatutory double patenting rejections, as shown above.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 2 recites a third step of introducing an oxidizer in a plasma state after the first evacuation, wherein in the third step, a microwave is applied to the oxidizer so that the oxidizer is excited in the plasma state.
Claims 7 and 12 recite the precursor contains chlorine.
These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claims 3-6, 8-11 and 13-17 variously depend from claim 2, 7 or 12, so they are allowed or will be allowed for the same reason.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHEUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5977. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5:30 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, DAVIENNE MONBLEAU can be reached at (571)272-1945. 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.
/CHEUNG LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 February 7, 2026