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 .
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, 3, 7 and 10-11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 and 9 of copending Application No. 18/796750 in view of Ogawa et al. (US 2016/0329419 A1).
Instant application
Copending application 18/796750
Difference
Claim 1
A laminate comprising
group 13 nitride single crystal substrate with an off-angle of 0.4° or more and 1.0° or less,
buffer layer,
channel layer with a thickness <=700nm,
barrier layer
Claim 1
group 13 nitride single crystal substrate with an off-angle of 0.4° or more and 1.0° or less
Claim 9/5
buffer layer
channel layer,
barrier layer
All limitations of claim 1 are disclosed in claims 1+5+9 of the reference application, except the channel layer thickness.
Claim 3
group 13 nitride single crystal substrate has a specific resistance at room temperature of 1×107 Ωcm or higher.
Claim 2
group 13 nitride single crystal substrate has a specific resistance at room temperature of 1×107 Ωcm or higher.
Substantially equal
Claim 7
said channel layer has a carbon concentration of 2×1016/cm3 or lower.
n/a
Carbon layer concentration not disclosed, and therefore implicitly includes carbon concentration of 0.
Claim 10
said first main face has said off-angle of 0.5° or more and 0.7° or less.
Claim 4
said off-angle of said first main face is 0.5° or more and 0.7° or less.
Substantially equal
Claim 11
group 13 nitride single crystal is produced by flux method.
Claim 3
group 13 nitride single crystal is produced by flux method.
Substantially equal
As noted above, the limitations recited in claims 1, 3, 7 and 10-11 are disclosed in claims 1-5 and 9 of the reference application, with the exception of the channel layer thickness. However, the channel layer thickness of group 13 nitride laminates is well-known in the field of semiconductor manufacturing. For example, Ogawa teaches a laminate (fig. 5) including a channel layer (1106) with a thickness of 700 nm or smaller (¶ 0119: 600 nm). Accordingly, claims 1, 3, 7 and 10-11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 and 9 of copending Application No. 18/796750 in view of Ogawa.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichimura et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2018/0294336 A1) in view of Jiang (PG Pub. No. US 2021/0249252 A1) and Ogawa et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2016/0329419 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ichimura teaches a laminate comprising:
a group 13 nitride single crystal substrate comprising a group 13 nitride single crystal (¶ 0033: 1) and having a first main face and a second main face (fig. 1: top & bottom surfaces);
a buffer layer (¶ 0034: 2) provided on said first main face of said group 13 nitride single crystal substrate (fig. 1: 2 provided on top surface of 1);
a channel layer (¶ 0036: 3) provided on said buffer layer (fig. 1); and
a barrier layer (¶ 0037: 4) provided on said channel layer (fig. 1),
wherein said channel layer has a thickness of 5000 nm or smaller (¶ 0036).
Ichimura does not teach said channel layer has a thickness of 700 nm or smaller, or wherein said first main face of said group 13 nitride single crystal substrate has an off-angle of 0.4° or more and 1.0° or less.
Jiang teaches a single crystalline group 13 nitride substrate (¶ 0041: 101) with an off-angle of 0.4° or more and 1° or less (¶ 0104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the substrate of Ichimura with the off-angle of Jiang, as a means to avoid defects such as stresses and cracking (Jiang, ¶ 0037).
Ichimura in view of Jiang does not teach said channel layer has a thickness of 700 nm or smaller.
Ogawa teaches a laminate (fig. 5) including a channel layer (¶ 0104: 1106) with a thickness of 700 nm or smaller (¶ 0119: 600 nm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the channel layer of Ichimura in view of Jiang with a thickness of less than 700 nm, as a means to optimize electrical properties of the channel layer, such as mobility and on-resistance (Ogawa, ¶¶ 0121-0136).
Furthermore, such a channel layer thickness modification would have involved a mere change in the size (thickness) of a component (channel layer of Ichimura). A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 2, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said group 13 nitride single crystal contains one or more elements selected from the group consisting of zinc, manganese and iron as a dopant (Ichimura, ¶ 0019).
Regarding claim 4, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said channel layer has a thickness of 50 nm or larger (Ogawa, ¶ 0119).
Regarding claim 5, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said buffer layer comprises aluminum nitride or aluminum gallium nitride (Ichimura, ¶ 0034).
Regarding claim 7, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said channel layer has a carbon concentration of 2×1016/cm3 or lower (Ichimura is silent to the channel layer containing carbon, and therefore implicitly teaches carbon concentration of 0×1016/cm3, meeting the BRI of less than 2x1016/cm3).
Regarding claim 8, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said barrier layer comprises indium aluminum gallium nitride, indium aluminum nitride or aluminum gallium nitride (Ichimura, ¶ 0038).
Regarding claim 9, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said channel layer comprises gallium nitride (Ichimura, ¶ 0038 and/or Ogawa, ¶ 0104).
Regarding claim 10, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said first main face has said off-angle of 0.5° or more and 0.7° or less (Jiang, ¶ 0041: 0.5°).
Regarding claim 11, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said group 13 nitride single crystal is produced by flux method (Ichimura, ¶ 0033).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Khalil et al. (PG Pub No. US 2021/0202408 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, comprising a group 13 nitride single crystal substrate (Ichimura, 1).
Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa as applied to claim 1 fails to teach wherein said group 13 nitride single crystal substrate has a specific resistance at room temperature of 1×107 Ωcm or higher.
Khalil teaches a said group 13 nitride single crystal substrate (¶ 0050: 310) having a specific resistance at room temperature of 1×107 Ωcm or higher (¶ 0050: 310 has bulk resistivity up to 108 ohm-cm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the substrate of Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa with specific resistance at room temperature of 1×107 Ωcm or higher, as a means to enable various on-die circuitry to exhibit relatively low losses (Khalil, ¶ 0050).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yaita et al (PG Pub. No. US 2022/0013642 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa teaches the laminate of claim 1, wherein said buffer layer has a thickness of 1 nm or larger (Ichimura, ¶ 0034), and wherein said buffer layer comprises aluminum nitride or aluminum gallium nitride (Ichimura, ¶ 0034).
Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa does not teach said buffer layer has a thickness of 20 nm or smaller.
Yaita teaches a laminate (fig. 9) including a buffer layer (¶ 0045: 103), wherein said buffer layer has a thickness of 1 nm or larger and 20 nm or smaller (¶ 0045: 103 has a thickness of 5 nm to 20 nm), and wherein said buffer layer comprises aluminum nitride or aluminum gallium nitride (¶ 0045: 103 comprises AlGaN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to further limit the buffer layer of Ichimura in view of Jiang and Ogawa to include a thickness of 20 nm or smaller, as a means to provide lattice matching to adjacent epitaxial layers, allowing for optimization of in-plane stress (Yaita, ¶ 0046), allowing for improved electrical characteristics such as mobility.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In the instant case, the claimed range of 1 nm or larger and 20 nm or smaller lies inside or overlaps the ranges disclosed by Ichimura and/or Yaita.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN TURNER whose telephone number is (571)270-5411. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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.
/BRIAN TURNER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights