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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II and Species (A1) in the reply filed on June 22, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 12-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 22, 2026.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
Process chamber for growing a SiC ingot comprised of a fixed heater, a first moveable heater at a first end, and a second movable heater at a second end
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation 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 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
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.
Claims 22-28 are 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 claim(s) contains subject matter which was 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.
New claim 22 recites a “first heater configured to heat sidewalls of the process chamber” and that “at least one of the first heater or the second heater is moveable” while claim 24 recites that the “first heater includes at least one moveable inductive heater.” However, the specification as originally filed does not appear to teach or suggest that the first heater, meaning the induction coil (112) that surrounds the crucible, is movable. Dependent claims 23 and 25-28 are similarly rejected due to their dependence on claim 22.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 22 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Patent Appl. Publ. No. JP 2014-234331 A to Tsuge, et al. (hereinafter “Tsuge”).
Regarding claim 22, Tsuge teaches an apparatus (see the Abstract, Figs. 1-5, and entire reference which teach an embodiment of a sublimation apparatus for the growth of SiC), comprising:
a process chamber for growing a SiC crystalline ingot (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teaches a crucible (1) for growing a SiC ingot);
a first heater configured to heat sidewalls of the process chamber (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach an induction coil (17) configured to heat the sidewalls of the crucible (1)); and
a second heater configured to heat an end region of the process chamber (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a heat generating member (1a) which is configured to heat a bottom of the crucible (1)),
wherein at least one of the first heater or the second heater is moveable relative to the process chamber to adjust a temperature distribution within the process chamber during growth of the SiC crystalline ingot (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach that heat generating member (1a) is movable relative to the crucible to adjust the temperature distribution therein).
Regarding claim 28, Tsuge teaches a SiC precursor disposed in a lower region of the process chamber; and a SiC seed disposed in an upper region of the process chamber (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a SiC raw material (3) and a SiC seed (2) disposed in lower and upper regions of the crucible (1), respectively).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 9-11, 14-17, 21, and 23-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuge in view of Chinese Patent Appl. Publ. No. CN 219670709 U to Yin-tu Ba (“Ba”).
Regarding claim 9, Tsuge teaches an apparatus (see the Abstract, Figs. 1-5, and entire reference which teach an embodiment of a sublimation apparatus for the growth of SiC), comprising:
a crucible having an upper end and a lower end region and a lower region (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teaches a crucible (1) having upper and lower regions);
a silicon carbide (SiC) precursor disposed in the lower region of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a SiC raw material (3) disposed in a lower region of the crucible (1));
a SiC seed disposed in the upper region of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a SiC seed (2) disposed in an upper region of the crucible (1));
an inductive heater surrounding sidewalls of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach an induction coil (17) configured to heat the sidewalls of the crucible (1)); and
a second moveable heater disposed at the lower end of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a heat generating member (1a) which is configured to heat a bottom of the crucible (1)).
Tsuge does not teach that a first moveable heater is disposed at the upper end of the crucible. However, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which a SiC raw material and seed crystal contained within a crucible (100) are heated by bottom (250), side (220), and top (240) heaters. Ba further teaches that the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). In this manner it is possible to flexibly adjust the temperature at different positions in the axial and radial directions within the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate a movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge in order to provide greater control over axial and radial temperature gradients in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Regarding claim 10, Tsuge teaches that the second moveable heater is moveable along a vertical axis of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teaches that the heat generating member (1a) is movable along a vertical axis of the crucible (1)), but does not teach that the first moveable heater is moveable along a vertical axis of the crucible. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 9, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate a movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge which is movable along a vertical axis of the crucible in order to provide greater control over axial temperature gradients in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Regarding claim 11, Tsuge does not teach that the first moveable heater and the second moveable heater include inductive heating elements. However, in Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 Tsuge teaches the use of an induction heating element (17) as a side heater. Then in the fourth paragraph at p. 5 Ba teaches an embodiment in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are resistive heaters, but further teaches that the type of heaters utilized can be adjusted according to the actual application conditions. It therefore would have been within the capabilities of a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize an induction coil as the top and bottom heaters in the apparatus of Tsuge and Ba since as this would involve nothing more than the use of a known equivalent or alternative heating means according to its intended use. It is prima facie obvious to combine or substitute known equivalents for the same purpose. See MPEP 2144.06. Moreover, the use of a separately controlled induction coil as the bottom heater in the apparatus of Tsuge would facilitate greater and independent control over temperature gradients near the bottom of the crucible and a PHOSITA would be motivated to utilize a bottom induction coil for this purpose. It has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is within the capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See, e.g., MPEP 2143(B).
Regarding claim 14, Tsuge teaches that the second moveable heater can be positioned independently at different distances from the upper end and the lower end of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach that the heat generating member (1a) can be independently positioned at different distances from the ends of the crucible (1)), but does not teach that the first moveable heater also can be positioned independently at different distances from the upper end and the lower end of the crucible. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 9, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate an independently movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge in order to provide greater control over axial temperature gradients in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Regarding claim 15, Tsuge teaches that a pressure inside the crucible is maintained between about 0.1 Torr and about 50 Torr (As an initial matter it is noted that this limitation does not carry patentable weight in an apparatus claim as it relates to the manner of operating the claimed apparatus rather than its structure. In this case the apparatus of Tsuge is capable of maintaining a pressure of between 0.1 and 50 Torr by operation of the Ar gas supply (15) and pump (14). Alternatively, in at least Example 1 Tsuge teaches that the pressure is maintained at 1.3 kPa which falls within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 16, Tsuge teaches that the crucible further includes an outer shell and the second moveable heater is disposed inside the outer shell (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments at p. 4 which teach that a quartz tube (13) is provided around the crucible (1) with the heat generating member (1a) being disposed inside of the quartz tube (13)), but does not explicitly teach that the first moveable heater is disposed inside the inner shell. However, since the top heater (240) in Figs. 1-2 of Ba has a direct line-of-sight with the crucible (100) in order to more efficiently heat the crucible (100) itself, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to provide the top heater (240) of Ba within the outer quartz tube (13) of Tsuge in order to ensure more efficient heating of the top of the crucible itself.
Regarding claim 17, Tsuge teaches that the crucible further includes an outer shell, and the inductive heater is disposed outside the outer shell (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments at p. 4 which teach that a quartz tube (13) is provided around the crucible (1) with the induction coil (17) being disposed outside of the quartz tube (13)).
Regarding claim 21, Tsuge teaches a SiC precursor disposed in a lower region of the crucible; and a SiC seed disposed in an upper region of the crucible (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a SiC raw material (3) and a SiC seed (2) disposed in lower and upper regions of the crucible (1), respectively).
Regarding claim 23, Tsuge teaches that the first heater is an inductive heater (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach an induction coil (17) configured to heat the sidewalls of the crucible (1)), but does not teach that the second heater includes at least one moveable inductive heater. However, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which a SiC raw material and seed crystal contained within a crucible (100) are heated by movable bottom (250), side (220), and top (240) heaters. Then in the fourth paragraph at p. 5 Ba teaches an embodiment in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are resistive heaters, but further teaches that the type of heaters utilized can be adjusted according to the actual application conditions. It therefore would have been within the capabilities of a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize an induction coil as the bottom heater in the apparatus of Tsuge and Ba since as this would involve nothing more than the use of a known equivalent or alternative heating means according to its intended use. It is prima facie obvious to combine or substitute known equivalents for the same purpose. See MPEP 2144.06. Moreover, the use of a separately controlled induction coil as the bottom heater in the apparatus of Tsuge would facilitate greater and independent control over temperature gradients near the bottom of the crucible and a PHOSITA would be motivated to utilize a bottom induction coil for this purpose. It has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is within the capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See, e.g., MPEP 2143(B).
Regarding claim 24, Tsuge teaches that the first heater includes at least one moveable inductive heater, and that the second heater is disposed adjacent the end region of the process chamber (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach that the induction coil (17) is moveable and that the heat generating member (1a) is disposed adjacent a bottom of the crucible (1)), but does not teach that the second heater is an inductive heater. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 23, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which a SiC raw material and seed crystal contained within a crucible (100) are heated by movable bottom (250), side (220), and top (240) heaters. Then in the fourth paragraph at p. 5 Ba teaches an embodiment in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are resistive heaters, but further teaches that the type of heaters utilized can be adjusted according to the actual application conditions. It therefore would have been within the capabilities of a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize an induction coil as the bottom heater in the apparatus of Tsuge and Ba since as this would involve nothing more than the use of a known equivalent or alternative heating means according to its intended use. It is prima facie obvious to combine or substitute known equivalents for the same purpose. See MPEP 2144.06. Moreover, the use of a separately controlled induction coil as the bottom heater in the apparatus of Tsuge would facilitate greater and independent control over temperature gradients near the bottom of the crucible and a PHOSITA would be motivated to utilize a bottom induction coil for this purpose. It has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is within the capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See, e.g., MPEP 2143(B).
Regarding claim 25, Tsuge teaches that the end region is a first end region (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach that the heat generating member (1a) is located at a bottom end of the crucible (1)), but does not teach that the apparatus further comprises a third heater configured to heat a second end region of the process chamber. However, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which a SiC raw material and seed crystal contained within a crucible (100) are heated by bottom (250), side (220), and top (240) heaters. Ba further teaches that the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). In this manner it is possible to flexibly adjust the temperature at different positions in the axial and radial directions within the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate a movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge in order to provide greater control over axial and radial temperature gradients in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Regarding claim 26, Tsuge teaches that the second heater is independently movable (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teaches that the heat generating member (1a) is independently movable), but does not teach that the third heater is independently moveable. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 25, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate an independently movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge in order to provide greater control over axial temperature gradients in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Regarding claim 27, Tsuge teaches that the position of the second heater is adjustable to control a growth rate of the SiC crystalline ingot (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teaches that the heat generating member (1a) can be adjusted to control a growth rate of the SiC ingot), but does not teach that the third heater is adjustable to control a growth rate of the SiC crystalline ingot. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claims 25-26, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate an independently movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge in order to provide greater control over axial temperature gradients and, consequently, the growth rate in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Claims 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuge in view of Ba and further in view of U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2016/0138185 to Hori, et al. (“Hori”).
Regarding claim 18, Tsuge teaches a system (see the Abstract, Figs. 1-5, and entire reference which teach an embodiment of a sublimation apparatus for the growth of SiC), comprising:
a process chamber for growing a SiC crystalline ingot (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teaches a crucible (1) for growing a SiC ingot);
a fixed heater disposed around sides of the process chamber (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach an induction coil (17) configured to heat the sidewalls of the crucible (1); moreover, the induction coil (17) is fixed if it is not moved);
a first moveable heater disposed at a first end of the process chamber (see Fig. 3 and the Description of Embodiments section at p. 4 which teach a heat generating member (1a) which is configured to heat a bottom of the crucible (1)); and
controlling a first temperature of the first moveable heater and a second temperature of the second moveable heater, according to a target schedule (see Examples 1-2 at pp. 6-7 which teach that the temperature produced by the induction coil (17) and the heat generating member (1a) is controlled to produce a predetermined temperature profile for a predetermined duration in order to grow a SiC single crystal ingot).
Tsuge does not teach a second moveable heater disposed at a second end of the process chamber. However, in Figs. 1-2 and the Example at pp. 4-6 Ba teaches an analogous embodiment of a SiC sublimation growth system (10) in which a SiC raw material and seed crystal contained within a crucible (100) are heated by bottom (250), side (220), and top (240) heaters. Ba further teaches that the side (220) and top (240) heaters are connected to a moving mechanism which includes, inter alia, a first driving member (212) and a fourth driving member (216) which respectively move the side (220) and top (240) heaters in a direction parallel to the axial (vertical) direction of the crucible (100). In this manner it is possible to flexibly adjust the temperature at different positions in the axial and radial directions within the crucible (100). Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to incorporate a movable top heater in the SiC sublimation growth apparatus of Tsuge in order to provide greater control over axial and radial temperature gradients in the vicinity of the seed crystal during SiC crystal growth.
Tsuge and Ba do not teach the use of a processor to control the temperature of the first and second movable heaters. However, in Figs. 19-28 and ¶¶[0110]-[0160] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Hori teaches an analogous embodiment of an apparatus (100) for the growth of SiC single crystals by sublimation of a source material (12) contained within a crucible (5). As disclosed specifically in Figs. 19 & 23 and ¶¶[0119]-[0123] Hori teaches the use of a controller (20) which includes a central processing unit (CPU) which reads and executes a program that precisely controls the amount of heat delivered by upper (1), side (2), and bottom (3) heaters during crystal growth in order to produce the desired temperature gradients for the desired duration. Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Hori and would be motivated to utilize a processor or CPU to automate control of the temperature of the movable heaters in the SiC sublimation growth system of Tsuge and Ba according to a growth schedule in order to obtain more precise and accurate temperature control during growth of each successive SiC single crystal ingot. It has previously been held that providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplishes the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. See In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958). See also MPEP 2144.04(III).
Regarding claim 19, Tsuge and Ba do not teach that the processor is programmed to energize the fixed heater, the first moveable heater, and the second moveable heater while growing the SiC crystalline ingot. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 18, in Figs. 19 & 23 and ¶¶[0119]-[0123] Hori teaches a SiC sublimation growth system (100) which utilizes a controller (20) having a central processing unit (CPU) which reads and executes a program that precisely controls the amount of heat delivered by upper (1), side (2), and bottom (3) heaters during crystal growth in order to produce the desired temperature gradients for the desired duration. Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Hori and would be motivated to utilize a processor or CPU which is programmed to automate control of the location and temperature of each of the heaters in the SiC sublimation growth system of Tsuge and Ba in order to obtain more precise and accurate temperature control during growth of each successive SiC single crystal ingot.
Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuge in view of Ba and further in view of Hori and still further in view of U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2010/0180814 to Wu, et al. (“Wu”).
Regarding claim 20, Tsuge and Ba do not teach that the processor is programmed to energize the first moveable heater and the second moveable heater to perform an annealing process after growing the SiC crystalline ingot. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claims 18-19, in Figs. 19 & 23 and ¶¶[0119]-[0123] Hori teaches a SiC sublimation growth system (100) which utilizes a controller (20) having a central processing unit (CPU) which reads and executes a program that precisely controls the amount of heat delivered by upper (1), side (2), and bottom (3) heaters during crystal growth in order to produce the desired temperature gradients for the desired duration. Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Hori and would be motivated to utilize a processor or CPU which is programmed to automate control of the location and temperature of each of the heaters in the SiC sublimation growth system of Tsuge and Ba in order to obtain more precise and accurate temperature control during growth of each successive SiC single crystal ingot.
Tsuge, Ba, and Hori do not teach that the processor is programmed to perform an annealing process after growing the SiC crystalline ingot. However, in at least Figs. 2-4 and ¶¶[0034]-[0045] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Wu teaches an analogous system and method for the growth of SiC single crystal ingots by sublimation of a SiC source material (22) contained within a crucible (4’). In ¶[00353] and ¶¶0041]-[0045] Wu specifically teaches that it is preferable to perform a post-growth annealing process on the SiC ingot using a reverse temperature gradient in order to reduce the level of stress and the nonuniformity of the stress distribution in the SiC single crystal. Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to program the processor or CPU off Hori with a post-growth annealing process in order to reduce the level of stress and to produce a more uniform stress distribution within the grown SiC single crystal ingot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH A BRATLAND JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 7:30 am to 4:30 pm 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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at (571) 272-1344. 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.
/KENNETH A BRATLAND JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights