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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to application No. 18379082 filed on 10/11/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. These IDS has been considered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-7, 10-11 in the reply filed on 2/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Allowable subject matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim (independent claim 1), but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art known to the Examiner is listed on the PTO 892 forms of record.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Takahide et al. (JP 2019192697 A).
With respect to dependent claim 7, the cited prior art does not anticipate or make obvious, inter alia, the step of: “wherein the forming of the N-polar nitride semiconductor layer comprises supplying a Group III element precursor in a pulse mode and continuously supplying a Group V element precursor”.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahide et al. (JP 2019192697 A).
Regarding independent claim 1, Takahide et al. teach a method of manufacturing a nitrogen (N)-face nitride semiconductor, the method comprising:
preparing a substrate (Fig. 6, element 601, specification discloses a bulk substrate); and
forming a nitrogen-polarization (N-polar) nitride semiconductor layer (Fig. 6, element 601, specification discloses “The second nitride-based film is formed on the N-polar surface of the first nitride-based thin film”) on the substrate, using a pulse growth mode (Figs. 2 -4 disclose pulse power unit and pulse growth mode),
wherein the forming of the N-polar nitride semiconductor layer comprises supplying a Group V element precursor (specification discloses nitrogen element), a Group III element precursor, or both in a pulse mode (Figs. 2-4) in a vapor deposition process (Specification discloses “As methods for crystal growth of nitride semiconductors, metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), and hydride vapor deposition (HVPE) are generally known”).
Regarding claim 3, Takahide et al. teach wherein the vapor deposition process comprises sputtering, vacuum evaporation, atomic layer deposition (ALD), thermal evaporation, metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), or hydride vapor phase epitaxy (HVPE) (Specification discloses “As methods for crystal growth of nitride semiconductors, metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), and hydride vapor deposition (HVPE) are generally known”).
Regarding claim 5, Takahide et al. teach wherein the pulse mode is performed with same or different pulse intervals (Figs. 2 &4).
Regarding claim 6, Takahide et al. teach wherein the pulse mode is a continuous pulse mode or a modulated pulse mode (Figs. 2 &4).
Regarding claim 11, Takahide et al. teach wherein the N-face nitride semiconductor comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of AlN (specification discloses AlN), GaAlN, GaN, GaNP, GaNAs, GaNSb, AlGaN, InGaN, BAlGaN, GaAlNP, GaAlNAs, InAlGaN, GaAlNSb, GaInNP, GaInNAs, GaInNSb, and a combination thereof.
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 of this title, 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahide et al. (JP 2019192697 A) in view of Quach et al. (US 2010/0111650).
Regarding claim 2, Takahide et al. teach wherein the substrate comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of silicon (specification discloses a bulk substrate), a silicon oxide, a silicon nitride, a silicon carbide, and a combination thereof.
Takahide et al. do not explicitly disclose the substrate has a size of about 1 inch or greater.
Before the effective filling date of the invention it was well known in the art to form a substrate with a size of about 1 inch or greater as shown by Quach et al. in paragraph 0032.
Claims 4, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahide et al. (JP 2019192697 A).
Regarding claim 4, Takahide et al. teach wherein the pulse mode has a gas flow sequence with a pulse modulation in which each of an ON period and an OFF period (Figs. 2-5 disclose ON and OFF period).
Takahide et al. teach do not explicitly disclose wherein the ON period and an OFF period is selected from a range of about 1 second to about 100 seconds.
Figs. 2 & 4 disclose ON and OFF time periods T1, T2, T3 with a range – specification discloses “For example, stepped power with a frequency of 1 kHz to 100 kHz, a time ratio in which no power is applied is 5% to less than 80%”. Accordingly, the time is an art recognized variable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the time and arrive at the claimed limitation. Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed time is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed time.
Regarding claim 10, Takahide et al. teach wherein the forming of the N-polar nitride semiconductor layer is performed at a temperature of about 1000° C. to about 1400° C. (specification discloses “The substrate temperature may be 25 ° C. or more and 1000 ° C. or less”. “In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05).
Takahide et al. teach do not explicitly disclose for about 10 seconds or greater.
Specification discloses “Therefore, a duty ratio of 0.1% or more and 30% or less is appropriate for the ratio of the time for applying power in the first pulse. In the step-like pulse, the second pulse has a small power enough to maintain the discharge of the nitrogen plasma, and this time is set to 0.005 kW / cm .sup.2 . Since this value depends on the structure of the apparatus, it may be changed so as to be a lower limit at which plasma can be maintained. Percentage of time .sub.T 2 for applying power to the period .sub.T 0 is less desirable 90% 20%. If it is too short, the concentration of nitrogen radicals cannot be maintained, and the defect density of the nitride film increases”. Accordingly, the time is an art recognized variable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the time and arrive at the claimed limitation. Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed time is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHED AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-3477. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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 on 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.
/SHAHED AHMED/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights