DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant's election with traverse of Group 2, claims 23-32 in the reply filed on 2/2/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that no search burden is present because subject matter is related. This is not found persuasive because being related subject matter when different types of invention are present does not mean that a search burden is not present as different searches strategies and references are required.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 13-22 are withdrawn from prosecution.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/18/2023, 6/6/2024, 2/6/2025, 7/11/2025 and 12/23/2025 were filed timely. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 23-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US 2017/0288055 A1) to Aktas et al. (hereinafter Aktas) in view of the teachings of (US 2020/0350410 A1) to Lin et al. (hereinafter Lin) in further view of (JP H08291232 A) to Kotaka et al. (hereinafter Kotaka).
Aktas is directed toward a method of producing a nitride ceramic for a semiconductor. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0024] that the core can be a nitride, such as aluminum nitride or gallium nitride. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0006] that the core is a polycrystalline ceramic core. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0041] that the core is encapsulated by an adhesion layer. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0058] that a single crystal is joined to the bonding layer forming a planarization layer. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0059] that the planarization layer is milled to 1.5 microns, which reads on Applicants range of 0.5 to 3 microns. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0033] that layer is formed by epitaxial growth. Atkas discloses at paragraph [0082] that a silicon oxynitride layer may be present over the core that may be 500 angstroms thick (0.05 microns) that reads on Applicants range of 0.05 to 1.5 microns.
Lin is directed toward a method of producing a nitride ceramic for a semiconductor. Aktas and Lin are both directed toward a method of producing a nitride ceramic for a semiconductor and therefore are analogous art. Lin teaches at paragraph [0005] that a ceramic core having a first adhesion layer that includes a silicon oxynitride.
Kotaka is directed toward a method of producing a nitride ceramic for a semiconductor. Aktas and Kotaka are both directed toward a method of producing a nitride ceramic for a semiconductor and therefore are analogous art. Kotaka teaches in the Abstract that a carbon generation source is used to form a carbon layer from a mixture of hydrocarbon and ammonia gasses. Kotaka teaches that the encapsulating layer is forms a layer that reads on Applicants formulas.
It would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the filing of Aktas in view of the teachings of Lin and Kotaka to form a prime facie case of obviousness for claims 23-32.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY D WASHVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3262. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
8. 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.
9. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-272-1302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
10. 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.
/JEFFREY D WASHVILLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights