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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 10 to 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Evelyn et al (2013/0323490).
The D’Evelyn et al reference teaches a group III metal nitride free standing crystal and method of growing, note, entire reference. The D’Evelyn et al reference teaches a wurtzite structure and a growth direction of [0001] claim 20. The orientation of a dislocation density of the major face of the grown crystal of less than 1*10⁴ cm² claim 4, and the presence of at least one dopant, for example O and H, at a concentration of 1*10¹⁶ cm³ to 1x10²¹ cm³ , note claims . At least 50% of the dislocations are expected to having an orientation within 30 degrees of the growth direction. The product further is a crystal which has at least four sets of bands, wherein each set of bands includes a first sub- band and a second sub-band, the first sub-band having a concentration of at least one impurity selected from H, O, Li, Na, K, F, CI, Br, and I that is higher, by a factor between about 1.05 and about 100, than a concentration of the same impurity within the second sub-band; and each of the at least four sets of bands have at least portions that are substantially parallel, a thickness of each of the at least four sets of bands in the growth direction being between about 0.1 micrometer and about 500 micrometers. The process for forming a gallium nitride boule or wafer, comprising: forming a single crystalline layer at least one millimeter thick on a surface of at least one seed crystal, wherein forming the single crystalline layer comprises: heating a sealable container to a temperature above about 200°C, wherein an interior region of the sealable container comprises the at least one seed crystal, a polycrystalline group III metal nitride nutrient material, a mineralizer material, and ammonia, a first region of the interior region comprises the polycrystalline GaN nutrient, a second region of the interior region comprises the at least one seed crystal, and the heating of the sealable container causes a pressure within interior region of the sealable container to be above 50 MPa; and sequentially adjusting a temperature difference between the first region and the second region, wherein the temperature difference has a magnitude between about 1 degree Celsius and about 100 degrees Celsius, for example 5°C , note examples. The sole difference between the instant claims and the prior art is the size of the crystal. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the D’Evelyn et al reference to have a maximum edge to edge first surface in order to have a larger crystal surface to employ in further processing, note similar manufacturing steps.
With regards to claims 7 and 13, the D’Evelyn et al reference teaches the orientation being within 10 degrees of the (0001) plane, note claims.
With regards to claim 10, the D’Evelyn et al reference teaches the more than 8 bands claim 8.
With regards to claim 11, the D’Evelyn et al reference teaches the sub bands with differing concentrations, note, para 0065.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Evelyn et al (2013/0323490).
The D’Evelyn et al reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the third surface. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the D’Evelyn et al reference to have the third surface have similar impurities as the first in order to have a uniform crystal, noting the reference teaches a 3 dimensional crystal.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Evelyn et al (2013/0323490).
The D’Evelyn et al reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the band thickness. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the D’Evelyn et al reference to have a band thickness in order to have the impurities in one level of the crystal.
Claims 3, 6 and 14 to 20 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.
The prior art does not teach nor render obvious the instantly claimed invention. The prior art does not teach the oxygen depth and amounts. Plus, the cooling heating cycle of the claims.
Examiner’s Remarks
The remaining references are merely cited of interest as showing the state of the art in free standing nitride crystal growth.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT M KUNEMUND whose telephone number is (571)272-1464. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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.
RMK
/ROBERT M KUNEMUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights