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 claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 7/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/13/2024, 12/9/2025, and 4/24/2026 are in compliance with time for filing requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.97, and thus, the information disclosure statement has been considered except as otherwise indicated. However, foreign reference JP2019523994A has been submitted but is not listed on any of the IDS forms. Furthermore, foreign references JPH09-052798A and JPH09-213635A have not been considered due to the incorrect document number listed. JPH09-052798A should be changed to JP3628079B2 and JPH09-213635 to JP3487393B2.
Claim Objections
Claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: missing "µm" after "...thin-film transfer of 0.1..."
Claim 10: limitation “…according to claim 1” is inconsistent language with claims 1-9, should be amended to “as claimed in claim 1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4-11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7, 9, 13-14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,618,172B2 in view of Odnoblyudov et al. (US10355120B2). The claims of the instant application and the claims of the reference patent are compared in the table below, and the differences between the claims are highlighted below by bolding all limitations that differ, italicizing additional limitations, and underlining limitations that will be addressed below.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 12,618,172 B2
1. A seed substrate for epitaxial growth comprising:
a support substrate;
a planarizing layer provided on an upper surface of the support substrate, the planarizing layer having a thickness of between 0.5 µm and 3.0 µm, inclusive; and
a seed crystal layer provided on an upper surface planarizing layer,
wherein the support substrate comprises:
a core of polycrystalline ceramics with surface voids filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these; and
an encapsulating layer that encapsulates the core, the encapsulating layer having a thickness of between 0.05 µm and 1.5 µm, inclusive, and
the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer of 0.1 to 1.5 µm of surface layer of Si <111> single crystal.
1. A seed substrate for epitaxial growth comprising:
a support substrate;
a planarizing layer provided on an upper surface of the support substrate, the planarizing layer having a thickness of 0.5 to 3.0 μm; and
a seed crystal layer provided on an upper surface planarizing layer,
wherein the support substrate comprises:
a core formed by group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics; and
an encapsulating layer that encapsulates the core, the encapsulating layer having a thickness of 0.05 to 1.5 μm, and
the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer of 0.1 to 1.5 μm of a surface layer of Si<111> single crystal with oxidation-induced stacking faults of no more than 10 defects/cm2.
4. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics forming the core are AlN ceramics.
3. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics forming the core are AlN ceramics.
5. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the encapsulating layer includes at least a layer of Si3N4.
4. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the encapsulating layer includes at least a layer of Si3N4.
6. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the planarizing layer comprises SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs.
5. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the planarizing layer comprises SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs.
7. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the seed crystal layer is Si <111> with oxidation-induced stacking faults of 10 defects/cm2 or less.
8. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth, as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a stress-adjusting layer made of a semiconducting compound such as polycrystalline Si on the bottom surface of the support substrate.
9. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the stress-adjusting layer is polycrystalline Si with SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) interposing just below the bottom surface of the support substrate.
7. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a stress-adjusting layer on the bottom surface of the support substrate.
9. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 7, wherein the stress-adjusting layer is provided as polycrystalline Si with SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) interposing just below the bottom surface of the support substrate.
10. A semiconductor substrate on which a III-V semiconductor thin film is deposited on the top surface of the seed substrate for epitaxial growth according to claim 1.
13. A semiconductor substrate on which a III-V semiconductor thin film is deposited on the top surface of a seed substrate for epitaxial growth according to claim 1.
11. The semiconductor substrate, as claimed in claim 10, wherein the III-V semiconductor thin film is a nitride semiconductor thin film containing Ga and/or Al.
14. The semiconductor substrate as claimed in claim 13, wherein the III-V semiconductor thin film is a nitride semiconductor thin film containing Ga and/or Al.
2. A seed substrate for epitaxial growth comprising:
a support substrate;
a planarizing layer provided on an upper surface of the support substrate, the planarizing layer having a thickness of 0.5 to 3.0 μm; and
a seed crystal layer provided on an upper surface planarizing layer,
wherein the support substrate comprises:
a core formed by group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics; and
an encapsulating layer that encapsulates the core, the encapsulating layer having a thickness of 0.05 to 1.5 μm, and
the seed crystal layer has oxidation-induced stacking faults of no more than 10 defects/cm2, and the thickness of the seed crystal layer is 0.1 to 1.5 μm.
Regarding Claim 1:
Claim 1 of the reference patent teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application, while also citing further limitations, except “…with surface voids filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these...” However, Odnoblyudov, et al. teaches a polycrystalline ceramics core (elements 1110/1210, paragraph 56) with surface voids (paragraph 98) filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these (elements 1112/1212, paragraphs 57-58 and 71-72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include where the surface voids of the core are filled and flattened by the aforementioned compounds within the device of claim 1 of the reference patent in order to provide a relatively smooth surface – devoid of voids, particles, or other defects – for the transfer and bonding of the seed crystal layer (Odnoblyudov, paragraph 98).
Claim 1 of the instant application differs from claim 1 of the reference patent in that it recites a “between” and an “inclusive” in relation to the claimed ranges. However, the ranges recited in the reference patent still completely overlap with the ranges recited in the instant application.
Furthermore, Claim 2 of the reference patent teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application, while also citing further limitations, except “…with surface voids filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these...” However, given the above-mentioned reasoning, it would have been obvious to include this limitation within the device of claim 2 of the reference patent. Additionally, Claim 1 of the instant application differs from claim 2 of the reference patent in that it recites “the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer of 0.1 to 1.5 μm ” rather than reciting a general thickness range. However, given that this limitation is a product-by-process claim, patentable weight is only given to the product itself and not its method of production. MPEP 2113. Therefore, it is obvious the thickness of the seed crystal layer in claim 1 in the instant application is 0.1 to 1.5 μm [0053].
Regarding Claim 4:
Claim 3 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 4 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 5:
Claim 4 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 5 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 6:
Claim 5 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 6 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 7:
Claim 1 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 7 of the instant application. The reference patent recites “no more than 10 defects/cm2” rather than the recited limitation “of 10 defects/cm2 or less” in the instant application. However, the instant disclosure at paragraph [0050] shows that the oxidation-induced stacking faults should not exceed 10 defects/cm2 for reasons equivalent to the reference patent at paragraph [18].
Regarding Claim 8:
Claim 9 of the reference patent depends from and requires all of the limitations of claim 7. Claims 7 and 9 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 8 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 9:
Claim 9 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 9 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 10:
Claim 13 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 10 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 11:
Claim 14 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 11 of the instant application.
Claims 1, 4-11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7, 9, 13-14 of copending Application No. 18/845,148 in view of Odnoblyudov et al. (US10355120B2). The claims of the instant application and the claims of the reference application are compared in the table below, and the differences between the claims are highlighted below by bolding all limitations that differ, italicizing additional limitations, and underlining limitations that will be addressed below.
Instant Application
Copending Application 18/845,148
1. A seed substrate for epitaxial growth comprising:
a support substrate;
a planarizing layer provided on an upper surface of the support substrate, the planarizing layer having a thickness of between 0.5 µm and 3.0 µm, inclusive; and
a seed crystal layer provided on an upper surface planarizing layer,
wherein the support substrate comprises:
a core of polycrystalline ceramics with surface voids filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these; and
an encapsulating layer that encapsulates the core, the encapsulating layer having a thickness of between 0.05 µm and 1.5 µm, inclusive, and
the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer of 0.1 to 1.5 µm of surface layer of Si <111> single crystal.
1. A seed substrate for epitaxial growth comprising:
a support substrate;
a planarizing layer provided on an upper surface of the support substrate, the planarizing layer having a thickness of between 0.5 µm and 3.0 µm, inclusive; and
a seed crystal layer provided on an upper surface planarizing layer,
wherein the support substrate comprises:
a composite ceramic core composed of polycrystalline ceramics of group III nitrides and at least one nitrides or oxides of Group III or IV, which is a fiber-shaped single crystal; and
an encapsulating layer that encapsulates the core, the encapsulating layer having a thickness of between 0.05 µm and 1.5 µm, inclusive, and
wherein the seed crystal layer is a layer of Si <111> single crystal of 0.04 to 1.5 μm.
4. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics forming the core are AlN ceramics.
2. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics forming the core are AlN ceramics and the fiber-shaped single crystals are AlN, Si3N4 or Al2O3.
5. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the encapsulating layer includes at least a layer of Si3N4.
3. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the encapsulating layer includes at least a layer of Si3N4.
6. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the planarizing layer comprises SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs.
4. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the planarizing layer is a monolayer film of either SiO2, silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) and AlAs, or a multilayer film of any combination of these.
7. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the seed crystal layer is Si <111> with oxidation-induced stacking faults of 10 defects/cm2 or less.
5. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the oxidation-induced stacking faults in Si <111> single crystal that forms the seed crystal layer are 10 defects/cm2 or less.
8. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth, as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a stress-adjusting layer made of a semiconducting compound such as polycrystalline Si on the bottom surface of the support substrate.
9. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the stress-adjusting layer is polycrystalline Si with SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) interposing just below the bottom surface of the support substrate.
7. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a stress-adjusting layer on the bottom surface of the support substrate.
9. The seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 7, wherein the stress adjusting layer is composed of polycrystalline Si provided immediately below the lower surface of the support substrate interposed by SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz), and/or polycrystalline Si whose surface layer is partially nitrided.
10. A semiconductor substrate on which a III-V semiconductor thin film is deposited on the top surface of the seed substrate for epitaxial growth according to claim 1.
13. A semiconductor substrate on which a III-V semiconductor thin film is deposited on the top surface of a seed substrate for epitaxial growth according to claim 1.
11. The semiconductor substrate, as claimed in claim 10, wherein the III-V semiconductor thin film is a nitride semiconductor thin film containing Ga and/or Al.
14. The semiconductor substrate as claimed in claim 13, wherein the III-V semiconductor thin film is a nitride semiconductor thin film containing Ga and/or Al.
Regarding Claim 1:
Claim 1 of the reference application teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application, while also citing further limitations, except “…with surface voids filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these...” However, Odnoblyudov, et al. teaches a polycrystalline ceramics core (elements 1110/1210, paragraph 56) with surface voids (paragraph 98) filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these (elements 1112/1212, paragraphs 57-58 and 71-72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include where the surface voids of the core are filled and flattened by the aforementioned compounds within the device of claim 1 of the reference application in order to provide a relatively smooth surface – devoid of voids, particles, or other defects – for the bonding of the seed crystal layer (Odnoblyudov, paragraph 98).
Additionally, claim 1 of the instant application differs from claim 1 of the reference application in that it recites “the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer of 0.1 to 1.5 μm ” rather than reciting a general thickness range (i.e., 0.04 to 1.5 μm) . However, given that this limitation is a product-by-process claim, patentable weight is only given to the product itself and not its method of production. MPEP 2113. Therefore, it is obvious the thickness of the seed crystal layer in claim 1 of the instant application is 0.1 to 1.5 μm [0053], which overlaps with the range recited in the reference application.
Regarding Claim 4:
Claim 2 of the reference patent teaches the same limitations as claim 4 of the instant application, while also reciting further limitations.
Regarding Claim 5:
Claim 3 of the reference application teaches the same limitations as claim 5 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 6:
Claim 6 of the instant application differs from claim 4 of the reference application in that it recites the planarizing layer “comprises SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs” rather than “[comprising}…a monolayer film of either SiO2, silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) and AlAs, or a multilayer film of any combination of these.” However, the instant disclosure at paragraphs [0046 and 0085] shows that the planarizing layer can be of a composite material. Within the broadest reasonable interpretation, a composite material in film form can be either a monolayer or a multilayer structure. Thus, claim 4 of the reference application is obvious over claim 6 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 7:
Claim 5 of the reference application teaches the same limitations as claim 7 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 8:
Claim 9 of the reference application depends from and requires all of the limitations of claim 7. Claims 7 and 9 of the reference application teaches the same limitations as claim 8 of the instant application, while also reciting further limitations.
Regarding Claim 9:
Claim 9 of the reference patent depends from and requires all of the limitations of claim 7. Claims 7 and 9 of the reference application teaches the same limitations as claim 8 of the instant application, while also reciting further limitations.
Regarding Claim 10:
Claim 13 of the reference application teaches the same limitations as claim 10 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 11:
Claim 14 of the reference application teaches the same limitations as claim 11 of the instant application.
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 3-4, 6 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 3 recites the limitation "the silicon compound" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, since claim 3 depends on claim 1, the limitation “wherein a silicon compound…” renders claim 3 indefinite because it is unclear the relationship of “a silicon compound” to the limitations of claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the planarizing layer comprises SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs.” This renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what combination, if any, of “SiO2“, “silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz)”, or AlA is included. Based on broadest reasonable interpretation, the examiner has interpreted this limitation as the planarizing layer comprises SiO2 or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the stress-adjusting layer" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, the limitation “stress-adjusting layer is polycrystalline Si with SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) interposing…” renders claim 9 indefinite because it is unclear if the stress-adjusting layer is a combination of polycrystalline Si with SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride – and what is included in this combination – or if the stress-adjusting layer is a separate layer from the SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride. Based on broadest reasonable interpretation, the examiner has interpreted this limitation as a first stress-adjusting layer and a second SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride layer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-2. 4-6, 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Odnoblyudov et al. (US10355120B2).
Regarding Claim 1:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth (Figs. 11-13 elements 1200/1300) comprising:
a support substrate (elements 1110/1210/1310/1112/1212/1216/1218/1316/1318);
a planarizing layer (elements 1120/1220) provided on an upper surface of the support substrate (Figs. 11-12), the planarizing layer having a thickness of between 0.5 µm and 3.0 µm (paragraphs 66 and 79), inclusive; and
a seed crystal layer (elements 1125/1222) provided on an upper surface planarizing layer (paragraphs 66-67),
wherein the support substrate comprises:
a core of polycrystalline ceramics (elements 1110/1210/1310, paragraph 56) with surface voids (paragraph 98) filled and flattened by Al or Si oxide, nitride, oxynitride, or a mixture of these (elements 1112/1212/1312, paragraphs 57-58 and 71-72); and
an encapsulating layer that encapsulates the core (elements 1216/1218/1316/1318), the encapsulating layer having a thickness of between 0.05 µm and 1.5 µm (paragraphs 76-77), inclusive, and
the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer of 0.1 to 1.5 µm (paragraphs 79) of surface layer of Si <111> single crystal (paragraphs 55 and 66).
The limitation “the seed crystal layer is provided by thin-film transfer…” is a product-by-process limitation and determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. MPEP 2113.
Regarding Claim 2:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the surface voids of the polycrystalline ceramics are filled and flattened by applying a silicone compound (Figs. 11-13 elements 1112/1212/1312) and/or a silicone compound with at least SiO2, Si3N4, or AlN powder to the surface of the polycrystalline ceramics (TEOS; paragraphs 57, 71, and 82), followed by treatment in an N2 atmosphere (furnace-based processes; paragraphs 58, 72, and 83).
Regarding Claim 4:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein group III nitride polycrystalline ceramics forming the core (Figs. 11-13 elements 1110/1210/1310) are AlN ceramics (paragraphs 56).
Regarding Claim 5:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the encapsulating layer (Figs. 12-13 elements 1216/1218/1316/1318) includes at least a layer of Si3N4 (paragraph 77).
Regarding Claim 6:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the planarizing layer (Figs. 11-13 elements 1120/1220) comprises SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) or AlAs (paragraph 66).
Regarding Claim 8:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth, as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a stress-adjusting layer (Figs. 13-14 elements 1314/1414, paragraphs 61, 85, and 90) made of a semiconducting compound such as polycrystalline Si on the bottom surface of the support substrate (elements 1310/1312, paragraphs 84).
Regarding Claim 9:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein a stress-adjusting layer is polycrystalline Si (Figs. 13-14 elements 1314/1414, paragraphs 61 and 84-85) with SiO2 and/or silicon oxynitride (SixOyNz) interposing just below the bottom surface of the support substrate (elements 1316/1416, paragraphs 82 and 86).
Regarding Claim 10:
Odnoblyudov discloses a semiconductor substrate (Figs. 11-13 elements 1200/1300) on which a III-V semiconductor thin film (element 1230, paragraph 54) is deposited on the top surface of the seed substrate for epitaxial growth (paragraphs 69 and 78-79) as claimed in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11:
Odnoblyudov discloses a semiconductor substrate, as claimed in claim 10, wherein the III-V semiconductor thin film (Figs. 12-13 element 1230) is a nitride semiconductor thin film containing Ga and/or Al (paragraphs 54 and 79).
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 3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Odnoblyudov et al. (US10355120B2).
Regarding Claim 3:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein a silicone compound (Figs. 11-13 elements 1112/1212/1312) is alkoxysilane and/or condensate thereof (paragraphs 57, 71, and 82).
Examiner notes that while Odnoblyudov does not explicitly disclose the silicone compound as an alkoxysilane and/or condensate, one of ordinary skill in the art would know that tetraethyl orthosilicate [TEOS] is an alkoxysilane precursor in which, through CVD processes, forms a TEOS oxide layer which is a condensate.
Regarding Claim 7:
Odnoblyudov discloses a seed substrate for epitaxial growth as claimed in claim 1, wherein the seed crystal layer is Si <111> (Figs. 11-12 elements 1125/1222) with oxidation-induced stacking faults of 10 defects/cm2 or less (paragraphs 99-102).
The examiner first notes that Odnoblyudov does not explicitly disclose a specified range for oxidation-induced stacking faults within the Si <111> seed crystal layer. The examiner next notes that the value of oxidation-induced stacking faults is a result-effective variable because if the value is greater than 10 defects/cm2, this could result in a device with poor long-term reliability and electrical performance. The examiner additionally notes that the value of oxidation-induced faults (or dislocations/defects) present in the seed layer and, therefore, the epitaxial growth layer is recognized by the prior art as a result-effective variable (Odnoblyudov, paragraphs 42-44 and 99-101). The examiner now notes that optimization of result-effective variables through routine experimentation is an obviousness expedient and not a patentable distinction. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to disclose a seed crystal layer – Si <111> – with oxidation-induced stacking faults of 10 defects/cm2 or less. Doing so reduces dislocation density and improves the overall crystal quality of the epitaxial grown layers (Odnoblyudov, paragraphs 42-44).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
D’Evelyn et al. (US 9650723 B1), Odnoblyudov et al. (US 10134589 B2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Chloë E Benton whose telephone number is (571)272-9976. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 8am-6pm 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, Zandra Smith can be reached at (571) 272-2429. 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.
/CALEEN O SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/Chloë E Benton/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights