DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the filing of the present application on 8/1/2023.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1 – 8 and 16 – 20 pertain to a semiconductor device, and claims 9 – 15 pertain to a method of manufacturing. Presently, claims 9 – 15 appear to link both sets of claims. If Applicant choses to amend the method claims such that (1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)), then those method claims will be withdrawn because Applicant will receive this action on the merits for the originally presented invention. Please see 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 16, the claims include that the substrate is “elongated along a first direction and a second direction”. Regarding shape, the term “elongated” is generally used to describe elements longer on one axis than the other. For example, ovals and rectangles are elongated. In view of the specification, especially Figures 2 – 3 showing a square, it appears the term is used to mean extending. Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. For the sake of examination, it was assumed that “a semiconductor substrate extending along a first direction and a second direction” was intended to be claimed. All other claims depend on claims 1, 9, or 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1 – 2, 6, 8 – 10, 14, and 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhou et al. (CN 113097168 A, machine translation provided, where paragraph notation appears after the text – ex. Paragraph n0007 is for the text above the instance of “[n0007]”).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou et al. teaches an apparatus, comprising (Figures 2 and 6B): a semiconductor substrate 210 (Paragraph n0041) extending along a first direction and a second direction, the first direction parallel to a width of the semiconductor substrate 210 and the second direction parallel to a depth of the semiconductor substrate 210;
one or more layers 201/220/230 (Paragraph n0044 – n0045) formed above the semiconductor substrate 210 with respect to a third direction parallel to a height of the semiconductor substrate 210, wherein at least a region of the one or more layers comprises circuitry 201/230; and
a passivation layer 240 formed above the one or more layers with respect to the third direction, the passivation layer 240 comprising a plurality of cavities 240a that each extend through the passivation layer 240, wherein the plurality of cavities 240a and the circuitry are non-overlapping with respect to the first direction and the second direction.
Regarding claim 2, Zhou et al. teaches that the one or more layers comprise: an insulating layer 220 formed between the circuitry 201/230 (at least portions) and the passivation layer 240, wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities 240a exposes a surface of the insulating layer 220 (Figures 2 and 6B).
Regarding claim 6, Zhou et al. teaches that the semiconductor substrate 210 comprises a silicon carbide material (Paragraph n0041).
Regarding claim 8, Zhou et al. teaches that the circuitry comprises transistor circuitry (Paragraph n0042 – n0044).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Zhou et al. teaches a method, comprising (Figures 2 and 6B): forming a semiconductor substrate 210 (Paragraph n0041) extending along a first direction and a second direction, the first direction parallel to a width of the semiconductor substrate 210 and the second direction parallel to a depth of the semiconductor substrate;
forming one or more layers 201/220/230 (Paragraph n0043 – n0045) above the semiconductor substrate 210 with respect to a third direction parallel to a height of the semiconductor substrate 210, wherein at least a region of the one or more layers comprises circuitry 201/230; and
forming a passivation layer 240 above the one or more layers 201/220/230 with respect to the third direction, the passivation layer 240 comprising a plurality of cavities 240a (Paragraph n0051) that each extend through the passivation layer 240, wherein the plurality of cavities 240a and the circuitry 201/230 are non-overlapping with respect to the first direction and the second direction.
Regarding claims 10 and 17, Zhou et al. teaches that forming the one or more layers 201/220/230 comprises: forming an insulating layer 220 between the circuitry 201/220 (at least portions) and the passivation layer 240, wherein each cavity 240a of the plurality of cavities exposes a surface of the insulating layer 220 (see Figure 2 and 6B).
Regarding claim 14, Zhou et al. teaches that forming the semiconductor substrate 210 comprises: forming the semiconductor substrate 210 using a silicon carbide material (Paragraph n0042).
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 3 – 4, 11 – 12 and 18 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (CN 113097168 A) in view of Lichtenwalner et al. (US 2022/0262909).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Zhou et al. does not show that each cavity of the plurality of cavities is formed in a shape of an elliptical cylinder comprising a height axis parallel to the third direction, wherein a ratio between a major axis and a minor axis of each elliptical cylinder is 3 to 1. Lichtenwalner et al. shows (Figure 17, Paragraph 0063) that a strain reducing cavity can be in a shape of an elliptical cylinder comprising a height axis parallel to a third direction, wherein a ratio between a major axis and a minor axis of each elliptical cylinder is 3 to 1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cavities of Zhou et al. such that they are formed in a shape of an elliptical cylinder comprising a height axis parallel to the third direction, wherein a ratio between a major axis and a minor axis of each elliptical cylinder is 3 to 1, in the manner taught by Lichtenwalner et al., since this shape was also shown to reduce strain. Also, the limitation of these claims, absent any criticality, is only considered to be an obvious modification of the circular cylinder of Zhou et al. as the courts have held that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is within the level of skill in the art as the particular shape claimed by Applicant is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that a person having ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide using routine experimentation based on its suitability for the intended use of the invention (please see In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976)).
Regarding claims 11 – 12 and 18 – 19, Zhou et al. does not show forming each cavity of the plurality of cavities comprises: forming a cavity in a shape of an elliptical cylinder comprising a height axis parallel to the third direction, wherein a ratio between a major axis and a minor axis of each elliptical cylinder is 3 to 1. Lichtenwalner et al. shows (Figure 17, Paragraph 0063) that a strain reducing cavity can be formed in a shape of an elliptical cylinder comprising a height axis parallel to a third direction, wherein a ratio between a major axis and a minor axis of each elliptical cylinder is 3 to 1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cavities of Zhou et al. such that they are formed in a shape of an elliptical cylinder comprising a height axis parallel to the third direction, wherein a ratio between a major axis and a minor axis of each elliptical cylinder is 3 to 1, in the manner taught by Lichtenwalner et al., since this shape was also shown to reduce strain. Also, the limitation of these claims, absent any criticality, is only considered to be an obvious modification of the circular cylinder of Zhou et al. as the courts have held that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is within the level of skill in the art as the particular shape claimed by Applicant is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that a person having ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide using routine experimentation based on its suitability for the intended use of the invention (please see In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976)).
Claims 5, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (CN 113097168 A) in view of Sota et al. (US 6,285,086).
Regarding claims 5, 13, and 20, Zhou et al. appears to show that the plurality of cavities are arranged in a rectangular pattern (Figure 6B) does not show that the plurality of cavities are arranged comprising uniform spacing between each cavity of the plurality of cavities. Sota et al. shows (Figure 4) that a plurality of cavities 9 are arranged in a rectangular pattern comprising uniform spacing between each cavity 9 of the plurality of cavities 9. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cavities of Zhou et al. such that they are arranged comprising uniform spacing between each cavity of the plurality of cavities since a uniform spacing may be easier to design than non-uniform spacing. Furthermore, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86, USPQ 70, 1950).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (CN 113097168 A) in view of Wada et al. (US 2016/0181372).
Regarding claim 7, Zhou et al. teaches that the one or more layers comprise (Figures 2 and 6B, Paragraphs n0043 – n0046): a contact pad 201 formed in contact with the semiconductor substrate 210; a metal layer 230 formed at least partially in contact with the contact pad 201; and a silicon nitride layer 220 formed at least partially in contact with the metal layer 230.
Zhou et al. teaches that the contact pad 201 is made of metal (n0043) and does not teach that the contact pad is a silicon carbide layer. Wada et al. teaches that contact pads 84 (Paragraph 0053) can be formed of silicon carbide. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contact pad of Zhou et al. such that it is a silicon carbide layer in the manner taught by Wada et al. since doing so may bypass the step of metal deposition within a trench in the surface of the substrate. Please note that Zhou et al. teaches that the substrate can be silicon carbide and comprise devices such as MOSFETs and high-voltage transistors (Paragraph n0042).
Regarding claim 15, Zhou et al. teaches that forming the one or more layers comprises (Figures 2 and 6B, Paragraphs n0043 - n0046): forming a contact pad 201 in contact with the semiconductor substrate 210; forming a metal layer 230 at least partially in contact with the contact pad 201; and forming a silicon nitride layer 220 at least partially in contact with the metal layer 230.
Zhou et al. teaches that the contact pad 201 is made of metal (n0043) and does not teach that the contact pad is a silicon carbide layer. Wada et al. teaches that contact pads 84 (Paragraph 0053) can be formed of silicon carbide. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contact pad of Zhou et al. such that it is a silicon carbide layer in the manner taught by Wada et al. since doing so may bypass the step of metal deposition within a trench in the surface of the substrate. Please note that Zhou et al. teaches that the substrate can be silicon carbide and comprise devices such as MOSFETs and high-voltage transistors (Paragraph n0042).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUN MI KIM KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1431. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM MST.
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, Steven Gauthier can be reached at (571) 270-0373. 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.
/SUN MI KIM KING/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813