DETAILED ACTION
1. Applicant’s communication filed on 4/6/26 has been carefully considered by the examiner. The arguments advanced therein are persuasive with respect to the rejections of record and those rejections are accordingly withdrawn. In view of a further search, however, a new rejection is set forth further below.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 6, 10, 11, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (2014/0106483) in view of PAWLOWICZ et al. (20160282287).
With regard to claim 1, LEE et al. disclose a method for forming an ohmic contact of a GaN-based electronic device (for example, see figs. 2 – 4), comprising:
(A) irradiating (for example, see paragraph [0039], fig. 4) an ion beam (an ion beam from the laser as shown in fig. 4) on a GaN-based electronic device (the device as shown in fig. 4) to form an ion region (an ion region is formed inside the mask 300) in a part of an inside of the GaN-based electronic device (the device as shown in fig. 4);
(B) forming an electrode layer (140) on a portion of a surface of the GaN-based electronic device (the device as shown in fig. 4), corresponding to the ion region (the ion region is formed inside the mask 300); and
(C) thermally treating (for example, see paragraphs [0025], [0060], [0061], an annealing process, is a heat treatment process, functioning as thermally treating) the GaN-based electronic device (the device as shown in fig. 4) on which the electrode layer (140) is formed.
PNG
media_image1.png
352
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
LEE et al. do not clearly disclose the ion beam derived from a metal.
However, PAWLOWICZ et al. disclose the ion beam derived from a metal (Gallium) (for example, see paragraph [0036], fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
438
690
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the LEE et al.’s device to include a step of method having the ion beam derived from a metal as taught by PAWLOWICZ et al. in order to enable perfecting of the electrode contact for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 2, LEE et al. disclose the GaN-based electronic device includes an AlGaN/GaN-based heterojunction electronic device (for example, see paragraphs [0036], [0038], [0050]).
With regard to claim 6, LEE et al. disclose before irradiating the ion beam in the step (A), patterning a portion (referred to as “A” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 4 below; wherein the mask 300 forming on the periphery of the device; for example, see paragraph [0056]) of the GaN-based electronic device to which the ion beam is irradiated.
PNG
media_image3.png
444
575
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 10, LEE et al. disclose forming nitride (nitride from the nitride semiconductor layer 130) derived from nitrogen atom(N) contained in the GaN-based electronic device in the ion region. (the laser irradiation diffuses nitrogen (N) from the second nitride semiconductor layer 130 of the GaN-based electronic device; for example, see paragraph [0057]).
With regard to claim 11, LEE et al. disclose the nitride (130) formed by the thermal treatment in the step (C) is in contact with the electrode layer (140).
With regard to claim 13, LEE et al. disclose before the thermal treatment in the step (C), removing the patterned region (the region A of the semiconductor layer 130 is removed, for forming the ohmic electrode 140, functioning as the patterned region).
With regard to claim 14, LEE et al. disclose an ohmic contact (140) of a GaN-based electronic device (as shown in fig. 5) manufactured by the method for forming the ohmic contact (140) of the GaN-based electronic device (as shown in figs. 2 – 4).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (2014/0106483) in view of PAWLOWICZ et al. (20160282287) and further in view of KOZO et al. (JP 2018129339 A).
With regard to claim 4, LEE et al. do not clearly disclose the metal includes titanium.
However, Pavio discloses a region 62 made of the metal includes titanium (for example, see translation of the first embodiment, and fig. 3).
PNG
media_image4.png
411
502
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the LEE et al.’s device to have the metal includes titanium as taught by KOZO et al. in order to allow a larger current to flow and in which a reliable nitride semiconductor is used for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (2014/0106483) in view of PAWLOWICZ et al. (20160282287) and further in view of Kobashi et al. (2010/0219350).
With regard to claim 5, LEE et al. do not clearly disclose the beam is irradiated with energy of 15 to 20 keV.
However, Kobashi et al. disclose the beam is irradiated with energy of 15 keV (for example, see paragraph [0101]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the LEE et al.’s device to include a step of method having the beam is irradiated with energy of 15 keV as taught by Kobashi et al. in order to enhance a doping efficiency of the semiconductor device for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (2014/0106483) in view of PAWLOWICZ et al. (20160282287) and further in view of Nakata et al. (10038086).
With regard to claim 7, LEE et al. do not clearly disclose the patterning is performed by a photolithography method.
However, Nakata et al. disclose the patterning (8, 9), for forming electrodes, is performed by a photolithography method (for example, see column 5, lines 11, 12, fig. 5).
PNG
media_image5.png
491
510
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the LEE et al.’s device to include a step of method having the patterning is performed by a photolithography method as taught by Nakata et al. in order to enhance a conductivity efficiency of the electrodes for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 8,9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (2014/0106483) in view of PAWLOWICZ et al. (20160282287) and further in view of Kwak et al. (9171946).
With regard to claim 8, LEE et al. do not clearly disclose the electrode layer includes an electrode material having a work function smaller than that of a GaN-based material.
However, Kwak et al. disclose the electrode layer (1017) includes an electrode material having a work function smaller than that of a GaN-based material (1011). (for example, see column 16, lines 34 - 36, fig. 16).
PNG
media_image6.png
426
658
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the LEE et al.’s device to include a step of method having the electrode layer includes an electrode material having a work function smaller than that of a GaN-based material as taught by Kwak et al. in order to enhance high-speed signal transmission due to high electron mobility for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 9, Nakata et al. disclose the electrode material (1017) made of nickel (for example, see column 16, lines 59, 60).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (2014/0106483) in view of PAWLOWICZ et al. (20160282287) and further in view of Iucolano et al. (12154967).
With regard to claim 12, LEE et al. do not clearly disclose the thermal treatment is performed at a temperature of less than 800° C.
However, Iucolano et al. disclose the thermal treatment is performed at a temperature of about 650° C. (for example, see column 4, lines 65 – 67 and column 5, lines 1, 2, fig. 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the LEE et al.’s device to include a step of method having the thermal treatment is performed at a temperature of about 650° C as taught by Iucolano et al. in order to enable perfecting of the ohmic contact for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN N TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 272 - 1923. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davienne Monbleau can be reached on (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 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.
/TAN N TRAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights