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 Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 12, line 1, the limitation of “The Group” should be corrected into “A Group”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimizu (US 2018/0204916).
Regarding claim 1, Shimizu discloses, in at least figure 11 and related text, a Group III-V compound semiconductor device, comprising:
a Group III-V compound substrate (10/12, [46], [48]); and
a passivation structure (29/33, [112], [117]) disposed on a surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (10/12, [46], [48]) and including a scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (29, [112]) and a scandium-oxygen-containing layer (33, [117]) sequentially stacked in that order in a direction away (vertical direction, figure) from said surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (10/12, [46], [48]).
Regarding claim 5, Shimizu discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 1 as described above.
Shimizu further discloses, in at least figure 11 and related text, said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (29, [112], [113]) has a thickness in said direction less than or equal to a thickness of said scandium-oxygen-containing layer in said direction (33, [117], [118]).
Regarding claim 20, Shimizu discloses, in at least figure 11 and related text, A passivation structure (29/33, [112], [117]) in a Group III-V compound semiconductor device ([109]) adapted to be disposed on a surface of a Group III-V compound substrate (10/12, [46], [48]) of said Group III-V compound semiconductor device ([109]), comprising a scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (29, [112]) and a scandium-oxygen-containing layer (33, [117]) sequentially stacked in that order in a direction (vertical direction, figure) away from said surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (10/12, [46], [48]).
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 12-13, 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shih (US 2020/0075778).
Regarding claim 1, Shih discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, a Group III-V compound semiconductor device, comprising:
a Group III-V compound substrate (170, [86]); and
a passivation structure (180/190/190-1, [90], [94]) disposed on a surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (170, [86]) and including a scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) and a scandium-oxygen-containing layer (190/190-1, [90]) sequentially stacked in that order in a direction (vertical direction, figure) away from said surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (170, [86]).
Regarding claim 2, Shih discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 1 as described above.
Shih further discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) is an Al1-xScxN layer, where 0<x≤1.
Regarding claim 5, Shih discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 1 as described above.
Shih further discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) has a thickness in said direction (vertical direction, figure) less than or equal to a thickness of said scandium-oxygen-containing layer (190/190-1, [90]) in said direction (vertical direction, figure).
Regarding claim 12, Shih discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, the Group III-V compound semiconductor device, comprising:
a Group III-V compound substrate (170/110/120/130/140, [60], [63], [73], [74], [86]),
a passivation structure (180/190/190-1, [90], [94]) disposed on a surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (170/110/120/130/140, [60], [63], [73], [74], [86]) and including a scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) and a scandium-oxygen-containing layer (190/190-1, [90]) sequentially stacked in that order in a direction (vertical direction, figure) away from said surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (170/110/120/130/140, [60], [63], [73], [74], [86]); and
electrodes (150/150-1, [81]) disposed on said Group III-V compound substrate (170/110/120/130/140, [60], [63], [73], [74], [86]), said passivation structure (180/190/190-1, [90], [94]) covering said electrodes (150/150-1, [81]) and part of said surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (170/110/120/130/140, [60], [63], [73], [74], [86]) disposed between said electrodes (150/150-1, [81]).
Regarding claim 13, Shih discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 12 as described above.
Shih further discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) is an Al1-xScxN layer, where 0<x≤1.
Regarding claim 15, Shih discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 12 as described above.
Shih further discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) has a thickness in said direction (vertical direction, figure) less than or equal to a thickness of said scandium-oxygen-containing layer (190/190-1, [90]) in said direction (vertical direction, figure).
Regarding claim 20, Shih discloses, in at least figure 1E and related text, a passivation structure (180/190/190-1, [90], [94]) in a Group III-V compound semiconductor device (100e, [17]) adapted to be disposed on a surface of a Group III-V compound substrate (170, [86]) of said Group III-V compound semiconductor device (100e, [17]), comprising a scandium-nitrogen-containing layer (180, [94]) and a scandium-oxygen-containing layer (190/190-1, [90]) sequentially stacked in that order in a direction (vertical direction, figure) away from said surface of said Group III-V compound substrate (170, [86]).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu (US 2018/0204916) in view of Wong (US 2015/0028345).
Regarding claim 3, Shimizu discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 1 as described above.
Shimizu does not explicitly disclose said scandium-oxygen-containing layer is an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2.
Wong teaches, in at least figure 1A and related text, the device comprising said scandium-oxygen-containing layer (120, [30]) is an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2, for the purpose of providing enhancement mode high electron mobility transistor (E-HEMT) in a metal insulator semiconductor field effect transistor (MISFET) structure with a metal diffusion barrier thereby increasing conductivity between source and drain electrode as a positive voltage is applied to a gate ([12]).
Shimizu and Wong are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Shimizu with the specified features of Wong because they are from the same field of endeavor.
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 structure disclosed in Shimizu to have said scandium-oxygen-containing layer being an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2, as taught by Wong, for the purpose of providing enhancement mode high electron mobility transistor (E-HEMT) in a metal insulator semiconductor field effect transistor (MISFET) structure with a metal diffusion barrier thereby increasing conductivity between source and drain electrode as a positive voltage is applied to a gate ([12], Wong).
Claim(s) 3 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shih (US 2020/0075778) in view of Wong (US 2015/0028345).
Regarding claim 3, Shih discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 1 as described above.
Shih does not explicitly disclose said scandium-oxygen-containing layer is an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2.
Wong teaches, in at least figure 1A and related text, the device comprising said scandium-oxygen-containing layer (120, [30]) is an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2, for the purpose of providing enhancement mode high electron mobility transistor (E-HEMT) in a metal insulator semiconductor field effect transistor (MISFET) structure with a metal diffusion barrier thereby increasing conductivity between source and drain electrode as a positive voltage is applied to a gate ([12]).
Shih and Wong are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Shih with the specified features of Wong because they are from the same field of endeavor.
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 structure disclosed in Shih to have said scandium-oxygen-containing layer being an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2, as taught by Wong, for the purpose of providing enhancement mode high electron mobility transistor (E-HEMT) in a metal insulator semiconductor field effect transistor (MISFET) structure with a metal diffusion barrier thereby increasing conductivity between source and drain electrode as a positive voltage is applied to a gate ([12], Wong).
Regarding claim 14, Shih discloses the Group III-V compound semiconductor device as claimed in claim 12 as described above.
Shih does not explicitly disclose said scandium-oxygen-containing layer is an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2.
Wong teaches, in at least figure 1A and related text, the device comprising said scandium-oxygen-containing layer (120, [30]) is an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2, for the purpose of providing enhancement mode high electron mobility transistor (E-HEMT) in a metal insulator semiconductor field effect transistor (MISFET) structure with a metal diffusion barrier thereby increasing conductivity between source and drain electrode as a positive voltage is applied to a gate ([12]).
Shih and Wong are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Shih with the specified features of Wong because they are from the same field of endeavor.
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 structure disclosed in Shih to have said scandium-oxygen-containing layer being an AlySc2-yO3 layer, where 0≤y<2, as taught by Wong, for the purpose of providing enhancement mode high electron mobility transistor (E-HEMT) in a metal insulator semiconductor field effect transistor (MISFET) structure with a metal diffusion barrier thereby increasing conductivity between source and drain electrode as a positive voltage is applied to a gate ([12], Wong).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 4 that recite "said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer is an AlzSc3-zN3 layer, where 0<z<3" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 4.
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 6 that recite "said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer contains aluminum, and has an aluminum content increasing in said direction and a scandium content decreasing in said direction" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 6.
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 7 that recite "said scandium-oxygen-containing layer contains aluminum, and has an aluminum content decreasing in said direction and a scandium content increasing in said direction" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 7.
Claims 8-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 8 that recite "said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer includes a plurality of scandium-nitrogen-containing sublayers stacked in said direction" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 8.
Claims 10-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 10 that recite "said scandium-oxygen-containing layer includes a plurality of scandium-oxygen-containing sublayers stacked in said direction" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 10.
Claims 16-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 12 and 16 that recite "said scandium-nitrogen-containing layer includes a plurality of scandium-nitrogen-containing sublayers stacked in said direction" in combination with other elements of the base claims 12 and 16.
Claims 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 12 and 18 that recite "said scandium-oxygen-containing layer includes a plurality of scandium-oxygen-containing sublayers stacked in said direction" in combination with other elements of the base claims 12 and 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONG-HO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM to 5PM.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at 571-272-1670. 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.
/TONG-HO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811