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 .
Claim Status
Applicants’ June 20, 2026 response to the April 22, 2026 Non-Final Rejection is acknowledged. Claims 30-56 are pending, claim 30 is independent. Any rejections and/or objections, made in the previous Office Action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 30-56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 30, there is no written description support for “SiC layer of epitaxy that is non-single crystal to the SiC substrate”. Polycrystalline is more narrow than “non-single crystal”, which may include amorphous or other multi-phase structures, and as such “non-single crystal” is not supported by the application as filed.
Regarding claims 31-35, 38-39, 41-47 and 50-56, these claims are each rejected for their respective dependencies on claim 30.
Regarding claim 36, there is no written description support for the “surface polished off-axis identical to the off-axis surface” (substantially equivalent is not synonymous with “identical”). Further, claim 36 is rejected for its incorporation of the above due to its dependence on claim 30.
Regarding claim 37, claim 37 is rejected for its incorporation of the above due to its dependencies on claims 30 and 36.
Regarding claim 40, there is no written description support for the ”a width of each pillar” (surface area is not necessarily equivalent to width). Further, claim 40 is rejected for its incorporation of the above due to its dependence on claim 30.
Regarding claim 48, there is no written description support for “power transistors” broadly. Further, claim 48 is rejected for its incorporation of the above due to its dependence on claim 30.
Regarding claim 49, there is no written description support for the handle being coupled to a device (just a substrate). Further, claim 49 is rejected for its incorporation of the above due to its dependence on claim 30.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 30-56 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art to the instant claims is Ravi et al. (US-20220189761-A1), hereinafter Ravi (of record). Ravi teaches a substrate of SiC wafer (SiC substrate) that is coated with a mask material with patterned trenches formed in the substrate by etching, Fig. 2 A shows these patterned trenches form pillars in the substrate (Fig. 2 A; [0011]; [0020]; mask on the pillars of the substrate), and forming a uniform single crystal layer over the patterned trenches ([0011]), by epitaxial lateral overgrowth ([0021]) that is SiC ([0043]); and this is a low defect layer ([0042]), the bottom portion of the epitaxial layer is considered the SiC layer of applicant. Examiner notes no differentiation is explicitly claimed between and “a layer of 3C (Cubic) SiC and “a SiC layer”; i.e. the 3C SiC layer may also be epitaxially grown and the SiC layer of epitaxy may also be cubic. Ravi does teach alone, or in combination with the prior art that the mask layer remains (with SiC on it), nor the SiC layer is cubic., nor a layer of 3C (cubic) SiC overlying the layer of carbon or tantalum carbide, wherein the layer of 3C (Cubic) SiC comprises the SiC layer of epitaxy that is non-single crystal to the SiC substrate.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ amendments and related arguments, filed June 20, 2026, with respect to claim rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of April 22, 2026 have been withdrawn. However, in light of the amendments, 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections are made above.
For these reasons, and for those reasons as advanced in the rejections above, the present claims are not found to distinguish over the prior art and this action is made FINAL.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 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 KATHERINE CHRISTY whose telephone number is (303)297-4363. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7am-4pm MT.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/KATHERINE A CHRISTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights