DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al (US 2012/0244684).
Regarding claim 1:
Suzuki teaches a silicon carbide wafer manufacturing apparatus (film forming apparatus, 300) [fig 5 & 0097] comprising: a reaction chamber forming portion (201) configured to form a reaction chamber (chamber) [fig 5 & 0040, 0096]; a reactant gas supply pipe (gas inlet, 204) communicated with the reaction chamber (201) [fig 5 & 0040, 0096]; a mounting unit (susceptor, 207) disposed in the reaction chamber (201) and on which the seed substrate (206) is to be mounted [fig 5 & 0042, 0096]; a rotating device (222/223) having a cylindrical portion (rotary drum, 223) on which the mounting unit (207) is disposed on one end side (see fig 5) [fig 5 & 0042, 0096]; and a heating device (208/35) [fig 5 & 0040, 0096, 0102], wherein the mounting unit (207) includes a susceptor portion (central portion of 207) having a mounting surface on which a rear surface of the seed substrate (206) is to be mounted, and a guide portion (peripheral portion of 207) disposed on the susceptor portion (central portion of 207) in a state of surrounding the seed substrate (see fig 5) [fig 5 & 0096].
The claim limitations “for step-flow growth of an epitaxial layer on a front surface of a seed substrate, the epitaxial layer being composed of silicon carbide, the seed substrate being composed of silicon carbide and having an off angle”, “configured to supply a reactant gas for growing the epitaxial layer to the reaction chamber”, “configured to rotate the mounting unit together with the seed substrate”, “configured to heat the seed substrate”, and “the mounting unit is configured such that a first interval between the seed substrate and the guide portion on an upstream side in a step-flow growth direction becomes narrower than a second interval between the seed substrate and the guide portion on a downstream side in the step-flow growth direction when the epitaxial layer is grown, and the guide portion is configured such that a temperature of the guide portion becomes lower than a temperature of the seed substrate when the epitaxial layer is grown” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding claim 2:
Suzuki teaches the heating device (208/35) includes a first heating device (208) configured to heat the rear surface of the seed substrate, and a second heating (35) device configured to heat the front surface of the seed substrate [fig 5 & 0040, 0096, 0102].
The claim limitations “wherein the guide portion has a higher emissivity than the seed substrate” do not impart any additional structure. Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
The claim limitations “the first heating device and the second heating device are configured to be driven in such a manner that a temperature of the rear surface becomes higher than a temperature of the front surface” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding claim 3:
Suzuki teaches the heating device (208/35) includes a first heating device (208) configured to heat the rear surface of the seed substrate, and a second heating (35) device configured to heat the front surface of the seed substrate [fig 5 & 0040, 0096, 0102].
The claim limitations “wherein the guide portion has a lower emissivity than the seed substrate” do not impart any additional structure. Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
The claim limitations “the first heating device and the second heating device are configured to be driven in such a manner that a temperature of the front surface becomes higher than a temperature of the rear surface” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding claim 4:
The claim limitations “wherein the susceptor portion is configured such that a center of the seed substrate is to be disposed upstream of a center of the susceptor portion in the step-flow growth direction when viewed in a normal direction to a plane direction of the mounting surface” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding claim 5:
Suzuki teaches the guide portion (peripheral portion of 207) has a cylindrical shape, has a portion whose thickness changes in a circumferential direction, and has a shape in which a position of a center of an internal space of the guide portion is different from a position of a center of the susceptor portion (central portion of 207) when viewed in a normal direction to a plane direction of the mounting surface of the susceptor portion (It is noted that portions are imaginary divisions of a whole and the portions of 207 may be defined as claimed) [fig 5 & 0096].
The claim limitations “the susceptor portion is configured such that a position of a center of the seed substrate coincides with the position of the center of the susceptor portion when viewed in the normal direction to the plane direction of the mounting surface” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ito et al (US 2015/0299898) and Suzuki et al (JPH0930893A) teach a mounting unit including a susceptor portion and a guide portion [fig 6 and 1, respectively].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN R KENDALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs 9-5 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, William F Kraig can be reached at (571)272-8660. 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.
/Benjamin Kendall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896