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 § 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 9-21 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 9 recites: “wherein an epitaxial wafer having a heterojunction structure, in which a material with a different thermal expansion coefficient is epitaxially laminated on a growth substrate”. This limitation is indefinite. First, it is unclear whether the claim requires “the material” or the epitaxial wafer to have a different thermal expansion coefficient compared to the growth substrate, or whether the material grown on the growth substrate has different thermal expansion coefficients. It is further unclear whether the claim requires an epitaxial wafer to comprise a growth substrate or not. For purposes of examination, all possible interpretations are considered.
Claims 17 and 21 recite similar language to claim 9 and are indefinite for the same reasons.
Claim 21 recites: “a step of bonding an epitaxial growth layer of the epitaxial wafer and the support substrate via a bonding material, wherein a thermosetting material is applied and cured on the epitaxial growth layer, and the support substrate is further bonded thereon via the bonding material”. This limitation is indefinite. It is unclear whether the claim requires two separate materials between the epitaxial growth layer and the support substrate, or whether the bonding material is intended to be the same as the thermosetting material. For purposes of examination, the former is presumed.
Dependent claims not addressed are indefinite by virtue of dependence from an indefinite claim.
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, 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 9-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kub et al. (US 2006/0199353).
Regarding claim 9, Kub teaches a wafer bonded to a support (¶ 8). Since the wafer comprises layers of different materials (¶¶ 24-26), it necessarily contains materials with different thermal expansion coefficients absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112. Kub teaches the wafer consists of epitaxial layers and may have a heterojunction structure (¶ 27). The epitaxial wafer is grown on a substrate (¶ 60), and the wafer is bonded to a support via an adhesive material (¶ 30). The material for bonding has a thickness of 0.1 nm to 15 μm (¶¶ 83-84), depending on the method used. This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claims 10-12, Kub teaches the bonding material may be polyimide or BCB (¶ 84). Since this is the same material as that claimed, these bonding materials are presumed to be thermosetting with a thermal softening point lower than a thermosetting temperature.
Regarding claims 13-16, Kub teaches the bonding material may be in a softened state (¶ 33).
Regarding claim 17, Kub teaches a method of bonding a wafer to a support (¶ 8). Kub teaches the wafer consists of epitaxial layers and may have a heterojunction structure (¶ 27). The epitaxial wafer is grown on a substrate (¶ 60), and comprises layers of different materials (¶¶ 24-26). Since the wafer comprises layers of different materials, it necessarily contains materials with different thermal expansion coefficients absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112. The wafer is then bonded to a support via an adhesive material (¶ 30). The material for bonding has a thickness of 0.1 nm to 15 μm (¶¶ 83-84), depending on the method used. This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claims 18-20, Kub teaches the bonding material may be polyimide or BCB (¶ 84). Since this is the same material as that claimed, these bonding materials are presumed to be thermosetting with a thermal softening point lower than a thermosetting temperature, absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 21, Kub teaches a method of bonding a wafer to a support (¶ 8). Kub teaches the wafer consists of epitaxial layers and may have a heterojunction structure (¶ 27). The epitaxial wafer is grown on a substrate (¶ 60), and comprises layers of different materials (¶¶ 24-26). Since the wafer comprises layers of different materials, it necessarily contains materials with different thermal expansion coefficients absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112. The wafer is then bonded to a support via an adhesive material (¶ 30). The material for bonding has a thickness of 0.1 nm to 15 μm (¶¶ 83-84), depending on the method used. This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2112. Kub teaches the bonding material may be polyimide or BCB (¶ 84), which is a thermoset polymer having a thermal softening point lower than a thermosetting temperature, absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112. Kub also teaches the bonding material is applied to both substrates to be bonded (¶ 85), corresponding to the claimed bonding material and thermosetting material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAOBEI WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5705. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/XIAOBEI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights