The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA
.
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of device claims in the reply filed on 08/18/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 of this title, 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 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (10,964,788) in view of Nakazawa et al. (7,230,285).Regarding claim 1, Chen et al. teach in figure 5 and related text a display device comprising:
a nitride semiconductor layer 108;
a dielectric oxynitride film 114 provided on the nitride semiconductor layer and having a first surface facing the nitride semiconductor layer; and
a gate electrode 118 provided on the dielectric oxynitride film, wherein a surface of the nitride semiconductor layer facing the dielectric oxynitride film has a nitrogen.
Chen et al. do not explicitly state that a surface of the nitride semiconductor layer facing the dielectric oxynitride film has a nitrogen polarity.Nakazawa et al. teach in related text that a surface of the second nitride semiconductor layer has a nitrogen polarity..
Chen et al. and Nakazawa et al. are analogous art because they are directed to nitride semiconductor layer and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to form a surface of the nitride semiconductor layer facing the dielectric oxynitride film to have a nitrogen polarity, as taught by Nakazawa et al., in Chen et al.’s device, in order to improve the device characteristics due to the direction of the internal polarization field and the surface atomic configuration
Regarding claim 4, Chen et al. do not teach that the dielectric oxynitride film includes at least one selected from a group consisting of hafnium, lanthanum, and zirconium.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to includes at least one selected from a group consisting of hafnium, lanthanum, and zirconium in the dielectric oxynitride film,
in Chen et al.’s device, in order to improve the device characteristics
Regarding the claimed limitations of using specific materials, it is noted that substitution of materials is not patentable even when the substitution is new and useful. Safetran Systems Corp. v. Federal Sign & Signal Corp. (DC NIII, 1981) 215 USPQ 979.
It is further held that it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 5, Chen et al. teach in figure 5 and related text that the dielectric oxynitride film includes at least one selected from a group consisting of silicon and aluminum.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (10,964,788) and Nakazawa et al. (7,230,285), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Park (6,306,785) and Higuchi et al. (2012/0068251).Regarding claims 2-3, Chen et al. and Nakazawa et al. teach substantially the entire claimed structure, as applied to claim 1 above, except having a first concentration of nitrogen atoms at a first point in the dielectric oxynitride film is higher than a second concentration of nitrogen atoms at a second point in the dielectric oxynitride film, the first point being spaced apart from the first surface by a first distance, and the second point being spaced apart from the first surface by a second distance that is longer than the first distance, and
wherein a concentration of nitrogen atoms in the dielectric oxynitride film continuously changes with respect to a distance from the first surface.
In other words, prior art does not teach a concentration gradient of nitrogen in an oxynitride layer.
Park teaches in figure 5 and related text a concentration gradient of nitrogen in an oxynitride layer 36.
Higuchi et al. teach in figure 4 and related text a concentration gradient of nitrogen in an oxynitride layer 27.
Park , Higuchi et al. Chen et al. and Nakazawa et al. are analogous art because they are directed to nitride semiconductor layer and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to form a concentration gradient of nitrogen in an oxynitride layer, as taught by Park and Higuchi et al., such that having a first concentration of nitrogen atoms at a first point in the dielectric oxynitride film is higher than a second concentration of nitrogen atoms at a second point in the dielectric oxynitride film, the first point being spaced apart from the first surface by a first distance, and the second point being spaced apart from the first surface by a second distance that is longer than the first distance, and wherein a concentration of nitrogen atoms in the dielectric oxynitride film continuously changes with respect to a distance from the first surface, in Chen et al.’s device, in order to improve the device characteristics due to the direction of the internal polarization field and the surface atomic configuration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ORI NADAV whose telephone number is 571-272-1660. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 7 AM to 4 PM (Eastern Standard Time) Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lynne Gurley can be reached on 571-272-1670. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
O.N. /ORI NADAV/
9/1/2026 PRIMARY EXAMINER
TECHNOLOGY CENTER 2800
Prosecution Insights