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 .
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. It is suggested that the title include the phrase “comprising a high reflectance.”
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 10-17 and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Japanese. Pat. Pub. No. JP 2020113570 A to Watabe et al. (hereinafter “Watabe”).
Regarding claim 10, Watabe teaches a laminated structure (example 1) [0067]-[0074] having at least a base substrate (110; fig. 2) [0071] and a crystalline oxide film containing gallium oxide as a main component [0067],wherein an average value of reflectance of light having a wavelength of 400 to 800 nm is 16% or greater [0078] on a surface on a side of the crystalline oxide film of the laminated structure.
Regarding claim 11, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 10, wherein the base substrate is a single crystal [0053], and the crystalline oxide film is a single crystal (α-gallium oxide) [0002] or a uniaxially oriented film.
Regarding claim 12, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 10, wherein the base substrate (110) is any of a sapphire substrate [0053], a lithium tantalate substrate, or a lithium niobate substrate.
Regarding claim 13, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 11 wherein the base substrate is any of a sapphire substrate [0053], a lithium tantalate substrate, or a lithium niobate substrate.
Regarding claim 14, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 10, wherein the crystalline oxide film has a corundum structure [0067].
Regarding claim 15, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 11, wherein the crystalline oxide film has a corundum structure [0067].
Regarding claim 16, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 12, wherein the crystalline oxide film has a corundum structure [0067].
Regarding claim 17, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 13, wherein the crystalline oxide film has a corundum structure [0067].
Regarding claim 22, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 10, wherein the base substrate (110) has a surface area of 100 mm2 or more having the crystalline oxide film, or a diameter of 2 inches (50 mm) or more [0068].
Regarding claim 23, Watabe teaches a method of forming a crystalline oxide film containing gallium oxide as a main component [0067] by Mist CVD [0002], comprising supplying a carrier gas containing mist [0057] from a nozzle to a base substrate (110; fig. 2) [0071] placed in a deposition chamber (107; fig. 2) [0083], wherein the film is formed with temperature of the nozzle or an inner wall of the deposition chamber higher than a room temperature [0059].
Regarding claim 24, Watabe teaches the method of forming a crystalline oxide film according to claim 23, wherein the temperature of the nozzle is 50 to 250°C [0059].
Regarding claim 25, Watabe teaches a semiconductor device (example 1) [0067]-[0074] comprising a crystalline oxide film as an insulating thin film or a conductive thin film (film) [0067], the crystalline oxide film containing gallium oxide as a main component [0067],wherein an average value of reflectance of light having a wavelength of 400 to 800 nm is 16% or greater [0078] on a surface on a side of the crystalline oxide film (film).
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 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 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watabe in view of Japanese Pat. Pub. No. JP 2021125676 A to Watabe et al. (hereinafter “Watabe 676”).
Regarding claim 18, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 14, wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds.
Watabe 676, however, teaches a laminated structure wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure [0046] has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds [0078].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the structure of Watabe to comprise a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds to allow for the structure to be lifted off as taught by Watabe 676 [0078].
Regarding claim 19, Watabe teaches the laminated structure according to claim 15, wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds.
Watabe 676, however, teaches a laminated structure wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure [0046] has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds [0078].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the structure of Watabe to comprise a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds to allow for the structure to be lifted off as taught by Watabe 676 [0078].
Regarding claim 20, Watabe does not teach the laminated structure according to claim 16, wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds.
Watabe 676, however, teaches a laminated structure wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure [0046] has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds [0078].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the structure of Watabe to comprise a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds to allow for the structure to be lifted off as taught by Watabe 676 [0078].
Regarding claim 21, Watabe does not teache the laminated structure according to claim 17, wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds.
Watabe 676, however, teaches a laminated structure wherein the crystalline oxide film having the corundum structure [0046] has a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds [0078].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the structure of Watabe to comprise a half width of an x-ray rocking curve of a (006) plane of 5 to 20 seconds to allow for the structure to be lifted off as taught by Watabe 676 [0078].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20190214248 A1 to Nagaoka teaches a film forming method.
US 20210143251 A1 to Matsuda et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20200263290 A1 to Raab et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20210272805 A1 to Takahashi et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20210296511 A1 to Sugimto et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20070164117 A1 to Swiler et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20210013311 A1 to Sugimoto et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20210013035 A1 to Fujita et al. teaches a film forming method.
US 20200385884 A1 to Nagaoka et al. teaches a film forming method.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETHAN EDWARD CUTLER whose telephone number is (703)756-5415. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Eastern Time.
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, Drew Richards can be reached on (571) 272-1736. 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.
/ETHAN EDWARD CUTLER/Examiner, Art Unit 2892
/NORMAN D RICHARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Prosecution Insights