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 .
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 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirai (2017/0009374) in view of CN115044964.
The Shirai reference teaches a method for preparing SiC single crystals substrate of polytype 3C, note entire reference. The method comprising the steps of fixing a SiC seed crystal to a graphite lifting rod by a carbon adhesive, para 0042 and 0064. Then placing a flux containing Si and Al in a graphite crucible which accommodates the Si-C solution with Si, Cr, and Al, para 0065 and 0066. The next step of loading the graphite crucible and the graphite lifting rod into a growth furnace see Fig. 1 and para 0068. Then vacuumizing the growth furnace, and introducing a gas to control the gas pressure in the growth furnace. Conditions set for performing the process after vacuuming the interior and introducing argon gas to achieve a pressure of 1 atm para 0066, The next step of heating the graphite crucible until the flux is completely molten to form a melt and the growth temperature of SiC is reached para 0065 and 0066. Finally, pushing down the graphite lifting rod to make the SiC seed crystals contact with the melt, thereby growing 3C-SiC single crystals completing the crystal growth, para 0068,0069. The flux further contains a 3d-transition metal with a melting point lower than the growth temperature of SiC i.e. Cr, 0065,0066. The sole difference between the instant claim and the prior art is the crystal holder. However, the CN115044964 reference teaches attaching a SiC seed to a seed holder which is then attached to a rod, note figures. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the Shirai reference by the teachings of the CN115044964 reference to use a seed holder attached to a rod in order to increase the size of the seed crystal increasing growth front.
With respect to claim 2, the CN115044964 reference teaches the flux can contain cobalt, iron or titanium, note, description.
Claim(s) 3is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirai (2017/0009374) in view of CN115044964.
The Shirai and CN115044964 references are relied on for the same reasons stated, supra, and differ from the instant claim in the atomic ratio of the flux. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to determine through routine experimentation the optimum, operable flux atomic ratio in the combined references in order to have a proper number of silicon atoms in the melt.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirai (2017/0009374) in view of CN115044964.
The Shirai and CN115044964 references are relied on for the same reasons stated, supra, and differ from the instant claims in the one flux element being a rare earth. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to determine through routine experimentation the optimum, operable flux elements in the combined references in order to have a flux with a fully melted crucible.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirai (2017/0009374) in view of CN115044964.
The Shirai and CN115044964 references are relied on for the same reasons stated, supra, and differ from the instant claims in the one flux element being a group IIIA or Iva element. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to determine through routine experimentation the optimum, operable flux elements in the combined references in order to have a flux melted with a fully melted crucible.
Claim(s) 8 to 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirai (2017/0009374) in view of CN115044964.
The Shirai and CN115044964 references are relied on for the same reasons stated, supra, and differ from the instant claims in the process parameters, pressures, inert gases, seed sizes. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to determine through routine experimentation the optimum, operable process parameters in the combined references in order to grow a uniform pure crystal.
Examiner’s Remarks
The remaining references are merely cited of interest as showing the state of the art in SiC growth from flux.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT M KUNEMUND whose telephone number is (571)272-1464. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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.
RMK
/ROBERT M KUNEMUND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights