DETAILED ACTION
General Remarks
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 Amendment
The Amendment filed on 03/06/2026 has been entered. Claims 5 and 6 are canceled by
Applicant. Claims 1-4 and 7-12 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments "Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment" with the
"Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject" filed on 03/06/2026, the Applicant’s amendment related to: “…introducing an ammonia gas… …for 5 to 15 mins…”, have been fully considered, however, the arguments are not persuasives and some of them are moot because do not apply to new ground of rejections with a reference of the record, Nitridation of Sapphire as a Precursor to GaN Growth: Structure and Chemistry, 2018, Crystal Growth & Design 18, 9, 4978–4986 to Yaddanapudi. The Yaddanapudi’s invention discloses a method of introducing an ammonia gas for 1 minute for nitridation, therefore, the predetermined time is a result effective variable. It has been held that is not inventive to discover the optimum range of 5 to 15 mins by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05 II), being used in the current rejection, see detail below. In addition, the Applicant’s disclosure does not indicate that this specific range (for 5 to 15 mins) is critical for the invention (“…the predetermined time may be about 10 minutes. However, the present invention is not limited thereto” in [0012], Applicant’s Specification).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (30A; Fig 2B; [0128]) = (element 30A; Figure No. 2B; Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preble et al. (US 20070141823 A1, hereinafter Preble, of the record), in view of Chou et al. (US 20200234944 A1, hereinafter Chou, of the record) and further in view of Yaddanapudi et al. (Nitridation of Sapphire as a Precursor to GaN Growth: Structure and Chemistry, 2018, Crystal Growth & Design 18, 9, 4978–4986 hereinafter Yaddanapudi, of the record).
Re: Independent Claim 1, Preble discloses a method for preparing a semiconductor layer, comprising the following steps:
providing a substrate (404 a substrate made of sapphire and other suitable single-crystal substrates in [0057], Fig. 4, without layer 408, wherein the single-crystalline GaN layer 412 is grown directly on the substrate 404 in [0083]);
depositing a plurality of semiconductor films (412/418 and 420 a first semiconductor layer formed by 412/418 in [0059, 0061] and a second semiconductor layer formed by 420 in [0057], Fig. 4-Annotated) on the surface of the substrate (404) to form a semiconductor substrate (400 a GaN crystal structure in [0056], formed by 404, 412/418 and 420, Fig. 4); and
cooling (during the cooling process, the sapphire substrate completely delaminated from the GaN/sapphire bi-layer, thereby forming a freestanding GaN substrate in [0104]) the semiconductor substrate (400) at a cooling rate ([0063]) to separate ([0104]) the plurality of semiconductor films (412/418 and 420) from the substrate (404) to obtain a semiconductor layer (412/418 and 420), wherein the cooling rate ranges from 10 °C/min to 50 °C/min (a cooling rate of 10 °C/min in [0063]),
wherein the plurality of semiconductor films (412/418 and 420) comprise a first semiconductor film (412/418 a first semiconductor layer formed by 412/418 in [0059, 0061], Fig. 4-Annotated) and a second semiconductor film (420 a second semiconductor layer formed by 420 in [0057], Fig. 4-Annotated), the first semiconductor film (412/418) is formed at a first temperature (starting a first growth 412 as a 3D growth mode at 900 °C in [0086] and continuing with the transitional layer 418 at 920 °C in [0089], having an average temperature of 910 °C), the second semiconductor film (420) is formed at a second temperature (420 formed at a temperature of 950 °C in [0091]), the first temperature (910 °C) is lower than the second temperature (950 °C), and the first semiconductor film (412/418) is disposed between (Fig. 4-Annotated) the substrate (404) and the second semiconductor film (420).
PNG
media_image1.png
520
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Preble’s Figure 4-Annotated.
Preble does not expressly disclose wherein the substrate is a mica substrate and introducing an ammonia gas to ammoniate a surface of the mica substrate for 5 to 15 mins.
However, in the same manufacturing of semiconductor device field of endeavor, Chou discloses a method to fabricate gallium nitride (depositing a GaN film on the mica substrate in [0010]) on mica substrate ([0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the Chou’s feature of using a mica substrate to fabricate gallium nitride to the method of Preble to form a flexible substrate whose flexibility is applied to various applications (abstract, Chou).
Preble modified by Chou does not disclose introducing an ammonia gas to ammoniate a surface of the mica substrate for 5 to 15 mins.
However, in the same manufacturing of semiconductor device field of endeavor, Yaddanapudi discloses a method to fabricate gallium nitride (depositing GaN films on sapphire substrate in abstract) introducing an ammonia gas for a predetermined time to ammoniate a surface of the substrate (nitridation process to the substrate with ammonia gas for 1 minute, results in a nitride layer in which oxygen has been partially replaced by nitrogen in abstract, Pag. 4979, Col. 3, lines 17-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the Yaddanapudi’s method of introducing an ammonia gas to ammoniate a surface of the substrate for a predetermined time to the combination of Preble and Chou to provide a wetting layer which is closer in terms of structure and chemistry to the overlayer (abstract, Yaddanapudi).
Still, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi does not expressly disclose introducing an ammonia gas to ammoniate a surface of the mica substrate for 5 to 15 mins.
However, the Applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed
“range for 5 to 15 mins” is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e. the invention would not work without the specific claimed range of 5 to 15 mins). Also, the applicant has not shown that the claimed “difference of the range of 5 to 15 mins” produces a result that was new or unexpected enough to patentably distinguish the claimed invention over the cited prior art. At meantime, Yaddanapudi discloses “introducing an ammonia gas for 1 minute” in Pag. 4979, Col. 3, lines 17-20, therefore, the range of 5 to 15 mins is a result effective variable. It has been held that is not inventive to discover the optimum range for 5 to 15 mins by routine experimentation (In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), MPEP 2144.05 II). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the range of 5 to 15 mins to the rest of the claimed invention to improve the quality of the gallium nitride layer (Yaddanapudi, abstract).
The Combination of Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi results in introducing an ammonia gas to ammoniate a surface of the mica substrate for 5 to 15 mins.
Regarding Claim 2, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first semiconductor film (412/418, Preble) and the second semiconductor film (420, Preble) respectively are a GaN film or a GaAs film (made of GaN in [0018, 0019], Fig. 4-Annotated, Preble).
Regarding Claim 3, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first semiconductor film (412/418, Preble) and the second semiconductor film (420, Preble) respectively are a GaN film (made of GaN in [0018, 0019], Fig. 4-Annotated, Preble).
Regarding Claim 4, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 3,
Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi does not expressly disclose wherein the first temperature ranges from 500 °C to 700 °C, and the second temperature ranges from 850 °C to 1000 °C.
However, in the same manufacturing of semiconductor device field of endeavor, Chou discloses wherein the first temperature (the temperature of the first stage is 600 °C to form the first GaN layer in [0011]) ranges from 500 °C to 700 °C (600° C in [0011]), and the second temperature (the temperature of the second stage is 950° C to form the second GaN layer in [0011]) ranges from 850 °C to 1000 °C (950° C in [0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the Chou’s feature the first temperature ranges from 500 °C to 700 °C, and the second temperature ranges from 850 °C to 1000 °C to Preble’s method to improve the quality of the gallium nitride layer.
Regarding Claim 7, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1,
Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi does not expressly disclose wherein a thickness of the plurality of semiconductor films is 10% to 1500% of a thickness of the mica substrate.
However, in the same manufacturing of semiconductor device field of endeavor, Chou discloses wherein a thickness of the plurality of semiconductor films (16 a GaN film formed by two stages process including two GaN layers, in [0011, 0025], Preble) is 10% to 1500% (the thickness of the semiconductor film is 1%-50% of the thickness of the mica substrate in [0025], Preble) of a thickness of the mica substrate (10 a mica substrate in [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the Chou’s feature wherein a thickness of the plurality of semiconductor films is 10% to 1500% of a thickness of the mica substrate to Preble’s method to improve the quality of the gallium nitride layer.
Regarding Claim 8, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the cooling rate ranges from 10 °C/min to 30 °C/min (a cooling rate of 10 °C/min in [0063], Preble).
Regarding Claim 9, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first semiconductor film and the second semiconductor film are respectively formed by hydride vapor phase epitaxy (HVPE) (412/418 and 420 are formed by HVPE in [0079], Preble).
Regarding Claim 11, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1,
Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi does not disclose wherein a thickness of the first semiconductor film is 400 nm.
However, the Applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed
“thickness of the first semiconductor film of 400 nm” is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e. the invention would not work without the specific claimed thickness of the first semiconductor film of 400 nm). Also, the applicant has not shown that the claimed “difference of thickness of the first semiconductor film” produces a result that was new or unexpected enough to patentably distinguish the claimed invention over the cited prior art. At meantime, Preble discloses “a thickness of the first semiconductor film of 6µm”, therefore, the thickness is a result effective variable. It has been held that is not inventive to discover the optimum thickness of the first semiconductor film by routine experimentation (In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), MPEP 2144.05 II).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the thickness of the first semiconductor film of 400nm to the rest of the claimed invention to prevent microcracking of GaN during the growth ([0060], Preble).
Regarding Claim 12, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1,
Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi does not disclose wherein a thickness of the second semiconductor film is 300 µm.
However, the Applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed
“thickness of the second semiconductor film of 300 µm” is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e. the invention would not work without the specific claimed thickness of the second semiconductor film of 300 µm). Also, the applicant has not shown that the claimed “difference of thickness of the second semiconductor film” produces a result that was new or unexpected enough to patentably distinguish the claimed invention over the cited prior art. At meantime, Preble discloses “a thickness of the second semiconductor film of 500µm”, therefore, the thickness is a result effective variable. It has been held that is not inventive to discover the optimum thickness of the second semiconductor film by routine experimentation (In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), MPEP 2144.05 II).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the thickness of the thickness of the second semiconductor film of 500µm to the rest of the claimed invention to prevent microcracking of GaN during the growth ([0060], Preble).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preble, in view of Chou, in view of Yaddanapudi and further in view of Yang et al. (US 20240138266 A1, hereinafter Yang, of the record).
Regarding Claim 10, Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi discloses the method of claim 1,
Preble modified by Chou and Yaddanapudi does not expressly disclose wherein further comprising a step of cleaning the mica substrate after the step of separating the plurality of semiconductor films from the mica substrate.
However, in the same manufacturing of semiconductor device field of endeavor, Yang discloses wherein further comprising a step of cleaning the mica substrate after the step of separating a BCZT thin film from the mica substrate (the mica substrate can is recovered and reused, then, in order to reuse the mica substrate, it must be cleaned. in [0053, 0085], Yang).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the Yang’s feature wherein further comprising a step of cleaning the mica substrate after the step of separating a BCZT thin film from the mica substrate to the combined method of Preble, Chou and Yaddanapudi to facilitate low-cost production of the thin film structure and hence the associated device (e.g., flexible electronic devices) ([0085], Yang).
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 SANDRA M RODRIGUEZ VILLANUEVA whose telephone number is (571)272-1936. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00am-5:00pm (EST).
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571) 272-2339. 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.
/SANDRA MILENA RODRIGUEZ VILLANUEVA/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights