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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-13, 15-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shatalov et al. (US 9818826) in view of Baek et al. (US 2019/0148615).
Regarding claim 1, Shatalov discloses a substrate for a semiconductor device, the substrate comprising:
a semiconductor wafer (12, fig. 3 and Col. 7);
an intermediate nanowire layer (40, fig. 3 and Col. 7) having a plurality of nanowires each having in succession a base portion mounted to the semiconductor wafer, an elongated body portion extending away from the semiconductor wafer, and a tip portion (figs. 3, 5-13); and
a buffer layer of aluminum nitride being made integral to the tip portions of the plurality of nanowires (42, fig. 3 and Col. 7). Shatalov does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of nanowires has a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from the base portion to the tip portion. Shatalov explicitly discloses the nanowires having hexagonal lateral cross-sections and further states that it is understood that this is only illustrative and that the columnar structures 46A-46B can have any of various cross-section (Col. 6). Baek discloses vertical nanowires with various cross-sections including nanowires having a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion (figs. 3-4, particularly 3b, 4b and paragraphs 0068-0071). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize Baek’s nanowire cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion since Shatalov states that various known cross-sections can be used and Baek discloses nanowires with various cross-sections including a nanowire cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion.
Regarding claim 2, Shatalov further discloses wherein the buffer layer of aluminum nitride has a thickness ranging between about 20 nm and about 2 µm (Col. 7).
Regarding claim 3, Shatalov further discloses wherein the buffer layer of aluminum nitride is at least one of metal-polar and non-metal polar (Cols. 7-8).
Regarding claim 4, Shatalov further discloses wherein the buffer layer of aluminum nitride is at least one of nitrogen-polar and aluminum-polar (Cols. 7-8).
Regarding claim 5, Shatalov further discloses an epilayer of a semiconductor material deposited on the buffer layer of aluminum nitride (16, fig. 3 and Col. 5).
Regarding claim 6, Shatalov further discloses wherein the epilayer is at least one of nitrogen-polar and aluminum-polar (Col. 5).
Regarding claim 7, Shatalov further discloses wherein the semiconductor material of the epilayer is a group-III nitride semiconductor (Col. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Shatalov further discloses wherein the semiconductor material is aluminum gallium nitride (Col. 5).
Regarding claim 9, Shatalov further discloses wherein the aluminum gallium nitride has an aluminum content varying between ~35% and ~70% (Col. 5).
Regarding claim 10, Shatalov further discloses wherein the semiconductor wafer is a silicon wafer (Col. 5).
Regarding claim 11, Shatalov further discloses wherein the nanowires are made of gallium nitride (Col. 5).
Regarding claim 12, Shatalov further discloses wherein the nanowires are grown in a self-organized manner with respect to the semiconductor wafer (Cols. 13-15).
Regarding claim 13, Shatalov further discloses wherein said buffer layer has a plurality of coalescence boundaries running within the buffer layer and terminating short of a distal face of the buffer layer, the distal face having a defect density lower than a defect density threshold (fig. 3 and Cols. 7-8).
Regarding claim 15, Shatalov further discloses a base layer of aluminum nitride disposed directly on the semiconductor wafer, the base portions of the plurality of nanowires being mounted on the base layer of aluminum nitride (86, fig. 12 and Col. 14).
Regarding claim 16, Shatalov further discloses wherein the base layer has a thickness ranging between about 0.5 nm and 10 nm (Col. 14).
Regarding claim 18, Shatalov discloses a method of manufacturing a substrate for a semiconductor device, the method comprising:
growing a plurality of nanowires on a semiconductor wafer (12, fig. 3 and Col. 7), the nanowires having in succession a base portion mounted to the semiconductor wafer, an elongated body portion extending away from the semiconductor wafer, and a tip portion (40, fig. 3 and Col. 7); and
making a buffer layer of aluminum nitride integral to the tip portions of the plurality of nanowires (42, fig. 3 and Col. 7). Shatalov explicitly discloses the nanowires having hexagonal lateral cross-sections and further states that it is understood that this is only illustrative and that the columnar structures 46A-46B can have any of various cross-section (Col. 6). Baek discloses vertical nanowires with various cross-sections including nanowires having a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion (figs. 3-4, particularly 3b, 4b and paragraphs 0068-0071). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize Baek’s nanowire cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion since Shatalov states that various known cross-sections can be used and Baek discloses nanowires with various cross-sections including a nanowire cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion.
Regarding claim 19, Shatalov further discloses wherein said making is performed under environmental conditions slowing aluminum adatom migration within the buffer layer, said making including making the buffer layer with a non-metal surface termination (Col. 14).
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weman et al. US 2015/0194549 in view of Baek et al. (US 2019/0148615).
Regarding claim 43, Weman discloses a substrate for a semiconductor device, the substrate comprising:
a semiconductor wafer (figs. 3A, 5A-B and paragraph 0218);
an intermediate nanowire layer having a plurality of nanowires each having in succession a base portion mounted to the semiconductor wafer, an elongated body portion extending away from the semiconductor wafer, and a tip portion (figs. 3A, 5A-B and paragraphs 0205-0210); and
a graphene electrode being made integral to the tip portions of the plurality of nanowires (fig. 5b and paragraph 0210). Shatalov explicitly discloses the nanowires having hexagonal lateral cross-sections and further states that it is understood that this is only illustrative and that the columnar structures 46A-46B can have any of various cross-section (Col. 6). Baek discloses vertical nanowires with various cross-sections including nanowires having a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion (figs. 3-4, particularly 3b, 4b and paragraphs 0068-0071). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize Baek’s nanowire cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion since Shatalov states that various known cross-sections can be used and Baek discloses nanowires with various cross-sections including a nanowire cross-sectional area increasing continuously from a base portion to the tip portion.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shatalov et al. (US 9818826) in view of Baek (US 2019/0148615), and further in view of Weman et al. (US 2015/0194549).
Regarding claim 17, Shatalov in view of Baek discloses the substrate of claim 1 as mentioned above. Shatalov further discloses the use of electrodes (Cols. 5-6). Shatalov does not explicitly discloses wherein the electrode comprises graphene. However, the use of graphene for electrode purposes in nanowire structures was well known at the time of filing and would therefore have been deemed obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. To illustrate such known use of graphene as an electrode see Weman (fig. 5b and paragraph 0210).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/15/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended the independent claims to include the limitation that “the plurality of nanowires having a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from the base portion to the tip portion” and argues three points as follows:
First, Applicant argues that element 42 cannot serve as the basis for mapping both the buffer layer and the inverse-tapered nanowires. This is not the case, see rejection above and note that claim 14 has been canceled.
Second, Applicant argues that Shatalov does not disclose the amended feature of the nanowires having a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from the base portion to the tip portion. Examiner agrees, however, as mentioned in the above rejection, Shatalov discloses nanowires with hexagonal cross-sections as illustrative only and explicitly discloses the columnar structure can have any of various cross-sections (Col. 6). The assumption being that the cross-sections are known in the art, for which Baek explicitly discloses nanowires with various cross-sections including nanowires having a cross-sectional area increasing continuously from the base portion to the tip portion. As mentioned in the rejection above, such teachings would render the limitation obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing.
Third, Applicant argues that Shatalov does not disclose the advantages flowing from the inverse-tapered shape of the nanowires. This argument is irrelevant as the claim is the name of the game.
Applicant has also amended claim 13 to include the limitation, “the distal face having a defect density lower than a defect density threshold”, and argues Shatalov does not disclose such. Since the defect density threshold is not defined, the threshold is arbitrary and can be anything, as such the limitation is met in the above rejection.
Finally, Applicant has amended claim 15 to state that the base layer of aluminum nitride is disposed directly on the semiconductor wafer and that the base portions of the nanowires being mounted on the base layer of aluminum nitride and argues that Shatalov does not disclose such features because Shatalov teaches aluminum nitride islands and that the term “layer” implies a continuous or substantially continuous surface. Examiner disagrees, the term “layer” is a very broad term and can be used to define a level of material that is different from the material above or below it. As such, the rejection above is proper.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS M MENZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1877. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jacob Choi can be reached at 469-295-9060. 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.
/DOUGLAS M MENZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897 9/11/26
Prosecution Insights