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 of Group I, claims 1-6, in the reply filed on 3/2/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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 (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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohno et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0047609, hereafter Ohno ‘609) in view of Miyasaka (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2002/0006689, hereafter Miyasaka ‘689) and Ryu et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0123244, hereafter Ryu ‘244).
Claim 1: Ohno ‘609 teaches a method of manufacturing a substrate (abstract) comprising:
depositing a first layer (20) on a first carrier (14) (Fig. 1A, [0088]) where the first layer can be amorphous silicon deposited by chemical vapor deposition ([0094]);
depositing a second layer (21) on the first layer (Fig. 1A, [0089]) where the second layer can be deposited as a metal layer by sputtering, which is a physical vapor deposition ([0103], [0104]);
forming a third layer (23) on the second layer (Fig. 1C, [0108], [0118]) where the third layer can be a photoresist layer ([0111]);
forming a buffer structure (25) on the third layer ([0147]);
taking the third layer and buffer structure from the second layer using laser peeling (Fig. 1F, [0173], [0176]); and
deposing the third layer and buffer structure on a second carrier (28, 29) (Figs. 5B and 9B, [0259]), where the third layer is between the second carrier and the buffer structure (Figs. 5B and 9B).
Ohno ‘609 further teaches that the method can be for making a semiconductor device for a display device (abstract, [0001]).
With respect to claim 1, Ohno ‘609 does not explicitly teach that a precursor used in the chemical vapor deposition comprise H2 gas and SiH4 gas, a flow rate of the H2 gas is 610 sccm to 2540 sccm and a flow rate of the SiH4 gas is 270 sccm to 540 sccm, that power used in the physical vapor deposition is 1000 W to 3000 W, or that surface roughness of the metal layer is 0.4 nanometers to 0.75 nanometers.
Miyasaka ‘689 teaches a method of making a semiconductor device for a display device (abstract) comprising forming an amorphous silicon layer by chemical vapor deposition ([0007]). Miyasaka ‘689 teaches that a precursor used for deposition of amorphous silicon by chemical vapor deposition can be a gas mixture of SiH4 at a flow rate of 225 sccm and H-2 at a flow rate of 1300 sccm ([0007]). Both Miyasaka ‘689 and Ohno ‘609 teach methods of making a semiconductor device for a display device (‘609, abstract, [0001]; ‘689, abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the gas mixture of SiH4 at a flow rate of 225 sccm and H-2 at a flow rate of 1300 sccm taught by Miyasaka ‘689 as the precursor for the deposition of the amorphous silicon in the method taught by Ohno ‘609 because it is a suitable precursor for depositing amorphous silicon by chemical vapor deposition, as taught by Miyasaka’ 689.
With respect to claim 1, the modified teachings of Ohno ‘609 do not explicitly teach that the flow rate of the SiH4 is 270 sccm to 540 sccm. However, the claimed SiH4 flow rate of 270 sccm to 540 sccm is obvious over the SiH4 flow rate of 225 sccm taught by the modified teachings of Ohno ‘609 because they are close enough that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. See MPEP 2144.05.I.
With respect to claim 1, the modified teachings of Ohno ‘609 do not explicitly teach that power used in the physical vapor deposition is 1000 W to 3000 W, or that surface roughness of the metal layer is 0.4 nanometers to 0.75 nanometers.
Ryu ‘244 teaches a method of making a display device ([0003]) comprising depositing a layer by sputtering ([0048], [0116]). Ryu ‘244 teaches that the power of the sputter process affects the surface roughness of the deposited layer ([0116]), and the surface roughness of the layer affects adhesion between layers ([0129]). Both Ryu ‘244 and Ohno ‘609 teach methods of making a display device (‘609, abstract, [0001]; ‘244, [0003]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the power of the sputtering and the surface roughness of the sputtered metal layer in the method taught by the modified teachings of Ohno ‘609 because the power of the sputter process affects the surface roughness of the deposited layer and the surface roughness of the layer affects adhesion between layers, as taught by Ryu ‘244. See MPEP 2144.05.II.
Claim 2: Ohno ‘609 teaches that the method can further comprise:
forming a black matrix (98) above the buffer structure (Figs. 9A-B, [0291]);
forming a color filter structure (97) above the buffer structure (Figs. 9A-B, [0290]);
forming a protective layer (95) on the black matrix and color filter (Figs. 9A-B, [0289]);
forming a wall structure (132) above the protective layer (Fig. 16, [0362]); and
forming a coloring layer (131) above the protective layer (Fig. 16, [0362]).
With respect to claim 2, Ohno ‘609 does not explicitly teach that these steps are performed after disposing the photoresist layer on the second carrier.
However, it has been held that the selection of any order of performing processing steps is obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. See MPEP 2144.04.IV.C.
Claim 4: Ohno ‘609 teaches that the energy of the laser is a variable that can be controlled based on the thickness and materials of the layers being separated ([0295]).
With respect to claim 4, the modified teachings of Ohno ‘609 do not explicitly teach that the laser energy is less than 400 mJ/cm2.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the laser energy in the method taught by the modified teachings of Ohno ‘609 because the energy of the laser is a variable that can be controlled based on the thickness and materials of the layers being separated, as taught by Ohno ‘609. See MPEP 2144.05.II.
Claim 5: Ohno ‘609 teaches that forming the third layer comprising a photoresist can comprise:
forming a photoresist material layer on the second layer by spin coating ([0115]) and
before depositing the buffer structure, curing the photoresist material to form a photoresist layer ([0118]).
Claim 6: Ohno ‘609 teaches that the precursor used in the chemical vapor deposition can be a gas mixture of SiH4 and H-2, as discussed above, which is a mixture that does not contain argon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to teach or render obvious a manufacturing method of a substrate including removing the second carrier as to the context of claim 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADFORD M GATES whose telephone number is (571)270-3558. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at (571) 270-3176. 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.
/BG/
/SHAMIM AHMED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights