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 information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on October 25, 2023, and March 18, 2025 were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 3 was rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 3 recites “… the source region contacts a portion of the channel layer outside of the active region”. However, the subject matter was neither described in the specification nor in the drawings. As a matter of fact, both the specification and the drawing teach a completely contradictory subject matter, i.e., the source region is positioned entirely within the active region (Par. 0052, 0064; Figs. 2-3)
However, appropriate correction and/or clarification is requested
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 3, 8 & 11 were 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites “… the source region contacts a portion of the channel layer outside of the active region”. However, the subject matter was neither described in the specification nor in the drawings. As a matter of fact, both the specification and the drawing teach a completely contradictory subject matter, i.e., the source region is positioned entirely within the active region (Par. 0052, 0064; Figs. 2-3) Appropriate correction/clarification is requested.
Claims 8 and 11 recite the limitation "the channel region". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “the channel region” as “the channel layer” However, appropriate correction and/or clarification is requested.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10, 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0273065 A1) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0273065 A1) in view of Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0223699 A1), hereinafter, Brun et al. (‘699).
Regarding Claim 1, Brun et al. discloses a method, comprising: forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of a high electron mobility transistor (HEMT) (Par. 0032, 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0061-0063; Figs. 10A-10B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A - semiconductor heterostructure 1002 comprising channel layer 212 (active layer; GaN) and barrier layer 214 (AlGaN)); forming a gate layer of GaN on the channel layer (Par. 0032, 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0061-0063; Figs. 10A-10B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A - gate layer 1004 is p-doped GaN); patterning the gate layer to form a first gate finger, a second gate finger, and a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par. 0034; 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0061-0063; Figs. 11A-11B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – the inner side of the portion of gate that connects the two fingers has an arch shape);
PNG
media_image1.png
418
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
forming an isolation mask covering an active region of the semiconductor heterostructure and the gate arc (Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0068; Figs. 15A-15B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A - isolation mask 1502; Fig. 4A shows that the inactive area 104 surrounds the gate without ever being in contact with any part of the gate; this implies that the isolation mask covers the gate arc completely); and performing an ion bombardment process on an inactive region of the semiconductor heterostructure exposed by the isolation mask (Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0068; Figs. 15A-15B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – ion bombardment 1504). In the alternative, assuming arguendo that Brun et al. is not emphatic enough regarding patterning the gate layer to form a first gate finger, a second gate finger, and a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger, Brun et al. (‘699) teaches patterning the gate layer to form a first gate finger, a second gate finger, and a gate arc
PNG
media_image2.png
356
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par. 0074-0076; Figs. 12A-13B – this prior art explicitly teaches a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Brun et al. (‘699) to adapt a method of patterning the gate layer of Brun et al. to form a first gate finger, a second gate finger, and a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger in order to deliver lower leakage, sharper switching and higher reliability.
Regarding Claim 2, Brun et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses the method, comprising forming a source region positioned between the first gate finger and the second gate finger and in contact with the channel layer in the active region (Brun et al. - Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0065-0068; Figs. 12A-13B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – source region 106A).
Regarding Claim 4, Brun et al., as applied to claim 2, discloses the method, wherein the first and second gate fingers extend in a first direction, wherein the isolation mask has a substantially straight edge extending in a second direction transverse to the first direction past the first gate finger, the second gate finger, and the gate arc (Brun et al. - Fig. 4A/ Brun et al. (‘699) – Figs. 16A-17B in light of Fig. 8B).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 2, discloses the method, wherein the first and second gate fingers extend in a first direction, wherein an edge of the isolation mask has a first portion that is arced in a shape of an outer edge of the gate arc adjacent to the gate arc (modified Brun et al. already teaches a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (see rejection of claim 1); furthermore Brun et al. teaches the contour of the edge of isolation mask follows the contour of the outer edge of the gate portion that connects that first gate finger to the second gate finger (Fig. 4A); so when the contour of the outer edge of the gate portion connecting that first gate finger to the second gate finger is arched, the edge of the isolation mask will be arched too).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 5, discloses the method, wherein the edge of the isolation mask has a second portion that is straight and extends in a second direction transverse to the first direction and connects to the first portion (Brun et al. - Fig. 4A).
Regarding Claim 10, Brun et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses the method, comprising doping the gate layer with p-type dopants (Par. 0034).
Regarding Claim 12, Brun et al. discloses a device, comprising: a semiconductor heterostructure including an active region and an inactive region and having a channel layer of a high electron mobility transistor (HEMT) (Par. 0032-0034, 0040-0043; Figs. 2A-4A - semiconductor heterostructure 1002 comprising channel layer 212 (active layer; GaN) and barrier layer 214 (AlGaN); active region 102, inactive region 104);
PNG
media_image1.png
418
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a gate layer of GaN on the channel layer and including a first gate finger, a second gate finger, and a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par. 0032-0034, 0040-0043; Figs. 2A-4A - gate layer 216; the inner side of the portion of gate that connects the two fingers has an arch shape); a source region between the first gate finger and the second gate finger and in contact with the channel layer between, wherein the channel layer has a higher concentration of an isolation dopant species in the inactive region than in the active region, wherein an entirety of the gate arc is directly above the active region (Par. 0032-0034, 0040-0043; Fig. 4A - source region 106A; Fig. 4A presents an embodiment wherein an entirety of the gate arc is directly above the active region 102).
In the alternative, assuming arguendo that Brun et al. is not emphatic enough regarding a gate layer including a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger, Brun et al. (‘699) teaches a gate layer including a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par.
PNG
media_image2.png
356
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
0074-0076; Figs. 12A-13B – this prior art explicitly teaches a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Brun et al. (‘699) to adapt a device, comprising: the gate layer of Brun et al. including a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger in order to deliver lower leakage, sharper switching and higher reliability.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 12, discloses the method, wherein the first and second gate fingers extend in a first direction, wherein a boundary between the active region and the inactive region has a substantially straight edge extending in a second direction transverse to the first direction past the first gate finger, the second gate finger, and the gate arc (Brun et al. - Fig. 4A – there is a portion of a boundary between the active region 102 and the inactive region 104 that has a substantially straight edge extending in a second direction transverse to the first direction past the first gate finger, the second gate finger, and the gate arc; also see Brun et al. (‘699) – Figs. 16A-17B in light of Fig. 8B).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 12, discloses the device, wherein the first and second gate fingers extend in a first direction, wherein a boundary between the active region and the inactive region has a first portion that is arced in a shape of an outer edge of the gate arc adjacent to the gate arc (Brun et al. – Fig. 4A; modified Brun et al. already teaches a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (see rejection of claim 12); furthermore Brun et al. teaches the contour of a portion of the inactive region follows the contour of the outer edge of the gate portion that connects that first gate finger to the second gate finger (Fig. 4A); so when the contour of the outer edge of the gate portion connecting that first gate finger to the second gate finger is arched, the first portion of a boundary between the active region and the inactive region will be arched too).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 14, discloses the device, wherein the boundary between the active region and the inactive region has a second portion that is straight and extends in a second direction transverse to the first direction and connects to the first portion (Brun et al. - Fig. 4A).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 12, discloses the device, comprising a drain region of the HEMT in contact with the channel region in the inactive region and in the active region (Brun et al. - Par. 0032-0034, 0040-0043; Figs. 2A-4A - drain region 110).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0273065 A1) and Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0223699 A1), hereinafter, Brun et al. (‘699), as applied to claim 2, further in view of Okita et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0254902 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 2, discloses the method, comprising: removing the isolation mask after performing the ion bombardment process (Brun et al. - Par. 0068-0069; Figs. 15A-16B).
Modified Brun et al. does not explicitly disclose the method, comprising: forming the source region after removing the isolation mask. However, Okita et al., at least implicitly teaches the method, comprising: forming the source region after removing the isolation mask (Par. 0063-0071; Fig. 10 – this prior art teaches formation of the inactive region first before source region and drain region are formed). In a nutshell, whereas Brun et al. teaches formation of the source region and the drain region before the ion implantation for forming the inactive region, Okita et al. teaches just as the instant application does, formation of the source region and the drain region after the formation of the inactive region, i.e., after the removal of the isolation mask. In other words, both sequences of forming the source region and the drain region are known in the art.
Brun et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, comprising: forming the source region after removing the isolation mask. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, comprising: forming the source region after removing the isolation mask, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)
Regarding Claim 8, Brun et al., as applied to claim 7, discloses the method, comprising forming a drain region in contact with the channel region in a same process that forms the source region (Par. 0065-0066; Figs. 12A-13B – this prior art teaches forming a drain region in contact with the channel region in a same process that forms the source region).
Claims 9, 11 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0273065 A1) and Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0223699 A1), hereinafter, Brun et al. (‘699), as applied to claim 1 and claim 12, further in view of Boles et al. (Pub. No.: US 2017/0301780 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Brun et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses the method, wherein the ion bombardment process includes implanting ions in the inactive region (Par. 0033 - this prior art is silent regarding the names of the ions that are implanted).
Brun et al. does not explicitly disclose the method, wherein the ion bombardment process includes implanting nitrogen ions in the inactive region.
However, Boles et al., at least implicitly teaches the method, wherein the ion bombardment process includes implanting nitrogen ions in the inactive region. (Par. 0010 – this prior art teaches that nitrogen, phosphorus, boron , or argon could be implanted to create the inactive region).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Boles et al. to adapt the method, wherein the ion bombardment process of Brun et al. includes implanting nitrogen ions in the inactive region in order to form reliable isolation between neighboring devices.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Brun et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses the method, wherein the channel region includes GaN (Brun et al. - Par. 0032).
Modified Brun et al. does not explicitly disclose the method, wherein the channel region includes AlGaN.
However, Boles et al., at least implicitly teaches the method, wherein the channel region includes AlGaN (Par. 0027 – this prior art teaches that the channel layer is formed of GaN or alternately of AlGaN). In other words, both GaN and AlGaN are known in the prior art to be used as material for the channel region
Modified Brun et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, wherein the channel region includes AlGaN. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, wherein the channel region includes AlGaN, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious.
Regarding Claim 17, Brun et al., as applied to claim 16, discloses the device, wherein the drain region has a substantially straight edge, wherein the source region also has a straight edge (Brun et al. – Fig. 4A).
Brun et al. does not explicitly disclose the device, wherein the source region has a semicircular edge.
However, Boles et al., at least implicitly teaches the device, wherein the source region has a semicircular edge (Par. 0026; Fig. 8B – source region 104). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Boles et al. to adapt the device, wherein the source region of Brun et al. has a semicircular edge in order to improve electrical field distribution around the edges.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0273065 A1) in view of Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0223699 A1), hereinafter, Brun et al. (‘699) and Boles et al. (Pub. No.: US 2017/0301780 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, Brun et al. discloses a method, comprising: forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of GaN of a high electron mobility transistor (HEMT) (Par. 0032, 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0061-0063; Figs. 10A-10B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A - semiconductor heterostructure 1002 comprising channel layer 212 (active layer; GaN) and barrier layer 214 (AlGaN)); forming a gate layer of GaN on the channel layer (Par. 0032, 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0061-0063; Figs. 10A-10B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A - gate layer 1004 is p-doped GaN); patterning the gate layer to form a first gate finger extending in a first direction, a second gate finger extending the first direction, and a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par. 0034; 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0061-0063; Figs. 11A-11B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – the inner side of the portion of gate that connects the two fingers has an arch shape);
PNG
media_image1.png
418
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
forming an isolation mask covering an active region of the semiconductor heterostructure and the gate arc and having a substantially straight edge adjacent to the gate arc and at least 500 nm away from the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0068; Figs. 15A-15B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A - isolation mask 1502; Fig. 4A shows that the inactive area 104 surrounds the gate without ever being in contact with any part of the gate; this implies that the isolation mask covers the gate arc completely); and defining an inactive region of the semiconductor heterostructure laterally outside the isolation mask by performing an ion bombardment process in a present of the isolation mask (Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0068; Figs. 15A-15B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – ion bombardment 1504). In the alternative, assuming arguendo that Brun et al. is not emphatic enough regarding patterning the gate layer to form a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger, Brun et al. (‘699) teaches patterning the gate layer to form a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Par. 0074-0076; Figs. 12A-13B – this prior art explicitly teaches a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger).
PNG
media_image2.png
356
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Brun et al. (‘699) to adapt a method of patterning the gate layer of Brun et al. to form a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger in order to deliver lower leakage, sharper switching and higher reliability. Modified Brun et al. does not disclose a method, comprising: forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of AlGaN; and forming an isolation mask having a substantially straight edge adjacent to the gate arc and at least 500 nm away from the first gate finger and the second gate finger However, Boles et al., at least implicitly teaches the method, comprising: forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of AlGaN (Par. 0027 – this prior art teaches that the channel layer is formed of GaN or alternately of AlGaN). In other words, both GaN and AlGaN are known in the prior art to be used as material for the channel region
Modified Brun et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, comprising: i) forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of AlGaN; and ii) forming an isolation mask having a substantially straight edge adjacent to the gate arc and at least 500 nm away from the first gate finger and the second gate finger. Regarding forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of AlGaN, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, comprising: forming a semiconductor heterostructure including a channel layer of AlGaN, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. Regarding, ii) forming an isolation mask having a substantially straight edge adjacent to the gate arc and at least 500 nm away from the first gate finger and the second gate finger, the distance or the gap is a result effective variable. If the distance is too small, implanted ions may penetrate under the gate and adversely affect the performance. On the other hand, too big a gap would affect the packing density of the devices. Modified Brun et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, comprising: forming an isolation mask having a substantially straight edge adjacent to the gate arc and at least 500 nm away from the first gate finger and the second gate finger It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, comprising: forming an isolation mask having a substantially straight edge adjacent to the gate arc and at least 500 nm away from the first gate finger and the second gate finger, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 19, Brun et al., as applied to claim 18, discloses the method, wherein the ion bombardment process implants atoms in the inactive region of the semiconductor heterostructure (Par. 0033 - this prior art is silent regarding the atoms that are implanted).
Brun et al. does not explicitly disclose the method, wherein the ion bombardment process implants nitrogen atoms in the inactive region of the semiconductor heterostructure.
However, Boles et al., at least implicitly teaches the method, wherein the ion bombardment process implants nitrogen atoms in the inactive region of the semiconductor heterostructure (Par. 0010 – this prior art teaches that nitrogen, phosphorus, boron , or argon could be implanted to create the inactive region).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Boles et al. to adapt the method, wherein the ion bombardment process of Brun et al. implants nitrogen atoms in the inactive region of the semiconductor heterostructure in order to form reliable isolation between neighboring devices.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0273065 A1), Brun et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0223699 A1), hereinafter, Brun et al. (‘699) and Boles et al. (Pub. No.: US 2017/0301780 A1), as applied to claim 19, further in view of Okita et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0254902 A1) .
Regarding Claim 20, Brun et al., as applied to claim 19, discloses the method, comprising: forming a source region of the HEMT between the first and second gate fingers and in contact with the channel layer only at the active region (Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0065-0068; Figs. 12A-13B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – source region 106A); and forming a drain region of the HEMT in contact with the channel layer at the active region and the inactive region (Par. 0040-0043 (Fig. 4A), 0065-0068; Figs. 12A-13B in light of the structure shown in Fig. 4A – drain region 110A). Brun et al. does not explicitly disclose the method, wherein the source region and the drain region are formed after the removal of the isolation mask.
However, Okita et al., at least implicitly teaches the method, wherein the source region and the drain region are formed after the removal of the isolation mask (Par. 0063-0071; Fig. 10 – this prior art teaches formation of the inactive region first before source region and drain region are formed). In a nutshell, whereas Brun et al. teaches formation of the source region and the drain region before the ion implantation for forming the inactive region, Okita et al. teaches just as the instant application does, formation of the source region and the drain region after the formation of the inactive region, i.e., after the removal of the isolation mask. In other words, both sequences of forming the source region and the drain region are known in the art.
Brun et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, wherein the source region and the drain region are formed after the removal of the isolation mask. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, wherein the source region and the drain region are formed after the removal of the isolation mask, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1. Chang et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0083085 A1) – This prior art teaches a device, comprising: a semiconductor heterostructure including an active region (102A) and an inactive region (102B) and having a channel layer (124) of a high electron mobility transistor (HEMT); a gate layer (108) of GaN on the channel layer and including a first gate finger, a second gate finger, and a gate arc connecting the first gate finger and the second gate finger (Fig. 1); a source region (110) between the first gate finger and the second gate finger and in contact with the channel layer between, wherein the channel layer has a higher concentration of an isolation dopant species in the inactive region than in the active region, wherein an entirety of the gate arc is directly above the active region (Figs. 1-2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED I GHEYAS whose telephone number is (571)272-0592. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Britt Hanley, can be reached at telephone number (571)270-3042. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
03/06/2026
/SYED I GHEYAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893