DETAILED ACTION 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. Information Disclosure Statement The references listed in the twenty (20) Information Disclosure Statements filed on dates from 28 Dec 2023 to 26 Feb 2026 have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449 or PTO/SB/08A and 08B forms). The twenty (20) Information Disclosure Statements submitted contain a total of 919 references (122 US patents, 275 US patent application publications, 65 foreign references, and 457 references of non-patent literature). The examiner has considered the references to the extent reasonably expected during normal examination time. If applicant considers there is a particular reference or teaching particularly relevant to the claimed invention it is requested from the applicant to provide a statement indicating such relevance and a clear identification of such reference. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 4 and 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. Claim 4 recites the limitation “ wherein the active layer includes a source, a drain, and a channel of the FET , while the contact layer includes a gate structure of the FET ”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the term “the FET” in the claim because claim 3, upon which claim 4 depends, did not introduce a FET, but rather a “ switch field-effect transistor (FET)”. Therefore, for consistency, claim 4 should be amended to refer to “the switch FET” in each of the two instances where “the FET” is mentioned; otherwise, it is unclear whether “the FET” refers to a new, separate item belonging to the general category of a field-effect transistor—or if “the FET” refers specifically to the switch field-effect transistor that was introduced previously in claim 3. Claim 20 recites the limitation “ wherein no silicon crystal exists between the first mold compound and the top surface of the active layer, wherein the silicon crystal has no nitrogen or oxygen content ”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the term “ the silicon crystal ” in the claim because neither claim 20 nor claim 1, upon which claim 20 depends, has introduced a silicon crystal. In fact, claim 20 specifically states that “ no silicon crystal exists” in a specific location within the RF device, but did not state that there was a silicon crystal located somewhere else within the RF device. For guidance in understanding the claim , the examiner looks to ¶[0041] , lines 16–19, on page 10 of the specification: “Notice that silicon crystal , which has no nitrogen or oxygen content , does not exist between the first mold compound 16 and the top surface of the active layer 24. Each of the device passivation layers 15 is formed of silicon composite .” Fig. 1 shows that the structures that are located between the first mold compound 16 and the top surface of the active layer 24 include the device passivation layers 15 -1 and 15-2 and the etch passivation film 48. The examiner understands the above quotation from ¶[0041] to mean that the device passivation layers 15 and the etch passivation film 48 do not comprise silicon arranged i n the form of a silicon crystal ( i.e. , pure silicon atoms arranged in a diamond cubic lattice which is a single crystal comprising a highly ordered, repeating three-dimensional lattice structure) . R ather, the device passivation layers 15 comprise a composite of silicon with non-silicon atoms such as nitrogen or oxygen ; rather than being arranged in the form of a silicon crystal, the silicon composite may not have a highly ordered, repeating three-dimensional lattice structure ( i.e. , the silicon composite may have an amorphous structure). This agrees with ¶[0062] of the specification, wh ere it is stated that the first device passivation layer 15-1 is formed of silicon dioxide ; and with ¶[0063] where it is stated that the second device passivation layer 15-2 is formed of silicon nitride . The examiner suggests that the following amendment to claim 20 would make the claim definite by making it clear that the last part of the claim is providing a definition for a silicon crystal as pure silicon, specifically not including silicon compounds such as silicon nitride or silicon dioxide, expressing the same idea as ¶[0041] of the specification: “ The RF device of claim 1 wherein no silicon that is in the form of a silicon crystal exists between the first mold compound and the top surface of the active layer , wherein a silicon crystal consists of pure silicon and has no nitrogen or oxygen content . ” Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. Claim 1 is allowed. The closest prior art of US 2020 / 0234978 A1 by Costa et al. (“Costa’978” hereinafter , from IDS 3 of 9 dated 28 Dec 2023 ) teaches most of the features of claim 1, including : A radio frequency (RF) device 10 (Fig. 1) comprising: a mold device die 12 comprising a device region 14 , a passivation film 48 , and a first mold compound 16 , wherein: the device region includes a front-end-of-line (FEOL) portion 20 and a back-end-of-line (BEOL) portion 22 underneath the FEOL portion 20 , wherein the FEOL portion 20 comprises an active layer 24 and isolation sections 44 , which surround the active layer 24 and extend vertically beyond a top surface of the active layer 24 to define an opening 46 within the isolation sections 44 and over the active layer 24 ; the passivation film 48 resides over the top surface of the active layer 24 and within the opening 46 , wherein the passivation film 48 ; and the first mold compound 16 resides over the passivation film 48 to fill the opening 46 ; and a multilayer redistribution structure 18 formed underneath the BEOL portion 22 of the mold device die 12 , wherein the multilayer redistribution structure 18 comprises a plurality of bump structures 58 , which are on a bottom surface of the multilayer redistribution structure 18 and electrically coupled to the FEOL portion 20 of the mold device die 12 . However, Costa’978 does not teach that t he passivation film 48 is an “ etch passivation film”, understood in view of the specification of the present application ( e.g. , see ¶[0008–0010] and ¶[0057–0060]) to refer to a passivation film 48 that is formed directly over the active layer 24 immediately after the complete removal by dry etching of a silicon germanium (SiGe) interfacial layer , wherein both the complete removal of the SiGe interfacial layer and the forming of the etch passivation film 48 utilize a same reactive chemistry combination, such that the etch passivation film 48 is formed as a direct result of the dry etching process . Additionally, Costa’978 does not teach that the passivation film 48 is formed of boron nitride and boron chloride ; rather, the passivation film 48 is formed of silicon di oxide (see ¶[0077] of Costa’978). The prior art of US 2018 / 0197803 A1 by Costa et al. (“Costa’803” hereinafter) shows in Fig. 1 a similar device 10 in which there is a silicon oxide dielectric layer 26 above the active layer 22 (“device layer 22”), analogous to the silicon oxide passivation film 48 of Costa’978; and a mold component 30, analogous to the first mold compound 16 of Costa‘978. The mold compound 30 includes a thermal additive 32 that is “ formed from a number of micro-level particulates utilizing materials such as boron nitride , aluminum nitride, silicon nitride, alumina, beryllium oxide, carbon nanotube, and metamaterials ” (Costa’803 ¶[0029]). As shown in Fig. 1, the thermal additive 32 is mixed in a bottom portion of the mold compound 30 ( adjacent to the dielectric layer 26 and above the active layer 22 ) to make a “thermally enhanced” mold compound 20 . However, boron chloride is not mentioned by Costa’803 as a possible material for the thermal additive 32. Furthermore, in the examiner’s view, it would not be obvious to move the boron nitride material of the thermal additive 32 from its location in the thermally enhanced mold compound 20 of Costa’803 to the passivation film 48 of Costa’978, thereby replacing the silicon dioxide passivation film 48 of Costa’978 with the boron nitride passivation film of the present claim. Although it would be predictable based on the teaching of Costa’803 that such a replacement would have the effect of improving the thermal properties ( e.g. , thermal conductivity) of the passivation film 48 of Costa’978, such a replacement would not constitute an etch passivation film tha t is formed on the active layer 24 as a direct result of the completion of a dry etching process of a sacrificial SiGe interfacial layer. Also, such a replacement would not include boron chloride within the passivation film 48 as required by the present claim. Claims 2–3 and 5–19 are allowed at least for the reason that they depend on allowed claim 1. Claims 4 and 20 would be allowed, at least for the reason that they depend on allowed claim 1, if the present rejections of claims 4 and 20 under 35 USC §112(b) were overcome. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Similar to Fig. 1 of Costa’978: US 2021 / 0134699 A1 — Fig. 1 US 2020 / 0235054 A1 — Fig. 1 US 2020 / 0235066 A1 — Fig. 1 US 2020 / 0235024 A1 — Fig. 1 US 2020 / 0006193 A1 — Fig. 1 Similar to Fig. 1 of Costa’978, but missing the passivation layer 48: US 2021 / 0183693 A1 — Fig. 1 US 2021 / 0167031 A1 — Fig. 1 Similar to Fig. 1 of Costa’978, but the isolation structures 44 do not extend vertically above the top surface of the active layer 24: US 2020 / 0235040 A1 — Fig. 1 US 2020 / 0235074 A1 — Fig. 1 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Adam J Mott whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2367 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Fri 8:30AM-5:00PM 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Eliseo Ramos Feliciano can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-7925 . 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. /A.J.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 2817 /ELISEO RAMOS FELICIANO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817