DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Amendment filed February 27, 2026.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim 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, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. While Applicants originally disclosed specific thicknesses of the sapphire substrate and the first alumina layer when it comes to their relative thicknesses, Applicants did not originally disclose that “a thickness of the sapphire substrate layer is less than a thickness of the first alumina layer” in a general relationship as recited in the new claim 21, because the new claim 21 can be directed to, for example, a thickness of the sapphire substrate layer of 1 nm, 1 micron or 10 microns, and a thickness of the first alumina layer of 1.01 nm, 1.01 micron or 10.1 microns, respectively, which Applicants did not originally disclose.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4 and 6-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allibert et al. (US 2010/0148322) in view of Faure et al. (US 2006/0076559)
Regarding claim 1, Allibert et al. disclose a composite substrate (Fig. 1E), comprising: a support substrate layer (Cact; active layer) ([0005]); a first alumina layer (Oxy) ([0029]) disposed on the support substrate layer, because (a) the preposition “on” does not necessarily suggest “above” or “over”, and (b) when the composite substrate shown in Fig. 1E of Allibert et al. is viewed upside down, the first alumina layer Oxy would be disposed over the support substrate layer Cact; a substrate layer (Sup) disposed on the first alumina layer; and a second alumina layer (Cpr) ([0029]) disposed on a side, away from the first alumina layer (Oxy), of the support substrate layer (Cact).
Allibert et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that the substrate layer Sup is a sapphire substrate layer.
Faure et al. disclose a composite substrate (Fig. 2 or 4), comprising: a support substrate layer (first or support substrate 1 in Fig. 2 or 4); a first alumina layer (31, 32 or composite layer of 31 and 32) ([0094]) disposed on the support substrate layer; and a sapphire substrate layer (2 in Fig. 2 or 23 in Fig. 4) ([0081]) disposed on the first alumina layer.
Since both Allibert et al. and Faure et al. teach a composite substrate having a similar stacked structure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the substrate layer Sup disclosed by Allibert et al. can be a sapphire substrate layer, because (a) when the substrate layer Sup is formed of sapphire, the composite substrate would be a semiconductor-on-sapphire (SOS) or silicon-on-sapphire (SOS) substrate, which has been well-known in semiconductor research and semiconductor industry, and which can be employed in manufacturing a field effect transistor since the electrically insulating substrate would not influence the channel region of the field effect transistor, which in turn would improve performance of the field effect transistor, and (b) it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Allibert et al. in view of Faure et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that the first alumina layer is amorphous alumina (claim 3), and the first alumina layer and the second alumina layer are amorphous alumina (claim 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention that the first alumina layer Oxy and the second alumina Cpr can be amorphous alumina, because (a) Faure et al. disclose in paragraph [0094] that “As an example, the bond enhancing layers 31 and 32 can be formed from amorphous or polycrystalline silicon or from alumina (Al2O3), (b) therefore, when amorphous silicon can be employed as the bond enhancing layer material, amorphous alumina can also employed as bonding enhancing layer materials, (c) amorphous alumina has been one of the well-known aluminas since alumina can be either polycrystalline or amorphous with a single crystalline Al2O3 being referred to as sapphire, (d) the amorphous alumina can be employed to improve bonding between the support substrate layer Cact and the sapphire substrate layer Sup disclosed by Allibert et al., and (e) it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 6, Allibert et al. in view of Faure et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that a thickness of the second alumina layer (Cpr) is less than a thickness of the first alumina layer (Oxy).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a thickness of the second alumina layer (Cpr) can be less than a thickness of the first alumina layer (Oxy), because (a) the thickness of the first and second alumina should be controlled and optimized individually and independently, depending on the applications of the claimed composite substrate, and (b) the thickness of the first alumina layer Oxy can be greater than the thickness of the second alumina layer Cpr since the first alumina layer Oxy can function as a buffer layer between the support substrate layer Cact and the sapphire substrate layer Sup, and thus a thicker first alumina layer Oxy would be able to better protect the support substrate layer during the semiconductor manufacturing processes or from the ambient.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Allibert et al. further disclose for the composite substrate according to claim 1 that the support substrate layer (Cact; active layer) ([0005]) is a silicon substrate or a ceramic substrate ([0035]) (claim 7), wherein the ceramic substrate (silicon carbide (SiC)) is one of an aluminum nitride ceramic substrate, an alumina ceramic substrate, a silicon carbide ceramic substrate, a boron nitride substrate, a zirconia ceramic substrate, a magnesium oxide ceramic substrate, a silicon nitride ceramic substrate and a beryllium oxide ceramic substrate (claim 8).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Allibert et al. in view of Faure et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that a total thickness of the sapphire substrate layer and the first alumina layer is greater than 1 µm (claim 9), and a thickness of the sapphire substrate layer is less than 500 nm (claim 10).
Faure et al. further disclose in paragraph [0094] that “They may be identical in nature or different, and they have thickness in the range from a few tens of nanometers to about 1 micrometer (1 µm)” describing the bond enhancing layers 31/32, which can be formed from alumina.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the claimed invention that a total thickness of the sapphire substrate layer and the first alumina layer can be greater than 1 µm, and a thickness of the sapphire substrate layer can be less than 500 nm, because (a) when each of the bond enhancing layers 31/32 of Faure et al. is more than 0.5 µm thick, or when at least one of the bond enhancing layers 31/32 of Faure et al. is about 1 µm thick, each of which belongs to the thickness ranges of the bond enhancing layers 31/32 disclosed by Faure et al. and thus would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the total thickness of the sapphire substrate layer and the first alumina layer would be greater than 1 µm regardless of the thickness of the sapphire substrate layer, (b) the total thickness of the sapphire substrate layer and the first alumina layer should be controlled and optimized to control an overall device thickness formed on the composite substrate or on a processed composite substrate, (c) the thickness of the sapphire substrate layer 2/23 of Faure et al., especially the thickness of the sapphire substrate layer 23 of Faure et al., should be selected and optimized for subsequent manufacturing processes, (d) the thickness of the sapphire substrate layer should be controlled and optimized to control an overall device thickness formed on the sapphire substrate layer, and (e) the claims are prima facie obvious without showing that the claimed ranges of the thickness achieve unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1935, 1937 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also In re Huang, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (claimed ranges of a result effective variable, which do not overlap the prior art ranges, are unpatentable unless they produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely in degree from the results of the prior art). See also In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA) (discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art) and In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955) (selection of optimum ranges within prior art general conditions is obvious).
Regarding claim 11, Allibert et al. further disclose for the composite substrate according to claim 1 that the sapphire substrate layer (Sup) is a planar sapphire substrate or a patterned sapphire substrate, because the top and bottom surfaces of the sapphire substrate layer Sup are planar.
Regarding claim 12, Allibert et al. in view of Faure et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that a diameter of the support substrate layer is greater than or equal to 2 inches and less than or equal to 12 inches.
Faure et al. further disclose in paragraph [0035] that “The preferred surface area of the layer grown covers an area having a diameter of at least about 20 mm, and more preferably at least about 30 or 40 mm.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the diameter of the support substrate layer can be greater than or equal to 2 inches and less than or equal to 12 inches, because (a) when the growth area disclosed by Faure et al. corresponds to a diameter between about 20 mm and about 30 mm, which would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the diameter of the support substrate layer disclosed by Faure et al. would have the claimed diameter, and (b) the diameter of the support substrate layer should be controlled and optimized to manufacture a desired number of semiconductor elements on the composite substrate, while reducing or optimizing the manufacturing cost.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 27, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue that “Although Allibert discloses the protective layer Cpr, it does not disclose that the protective layer Cpr is an alumina layer” on page 7 of the REMARKS filed February 27, 2026. This argument is not persuasive, because (a) Allibert et al. disclose in paragraph [0029] that “The method can include the first insulating layer, the second insulating layer, or both layers comprising a high permittivity dielectric material that is formed or deposited on the support substrate, the source substrate, or both substrates, respectively (emphasis added)”, and that “The high permittivity dielectric material can comprise one or more of hafnium dioxide (HfO2), yttrium oxide (Y2O3), strontium and titanium trioxide (SrTiO3), alumina (Al2O3), zirconium dioxide (ZrO2), tantalum pentoxide (Ta2O5), titanium dioxide (TiO2), their nitrides and their silicides (emphasis added)”, (b) the claimed support substrate layer, which is the active layer Cact, is formed from the source substrate Sou in Fig. 1 of Allibert et al., and (c) therefore, for the first and second insulating layer comprising the high permittivity dielectric material mentioned in paragraph [0029] of Allibert et al. to be formed or deposited on both the support substrate Sup and the source substrate Sou or active layer Cact shown in Fig. 1E of Allibert et al., the protective layer Cpr should be either the first insulating layer or the second insulating layer that can comprise alumina as disclosed in paragraph [0029] of Allibert et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liaw et al. (US 8,008,682)
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 JAY C KIM whose telephone number is (571) 270-1620. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at (571) 270-1435. 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.
/JAY C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
/J. K./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815 May 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights