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, 2, and 8 to 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (ep2441861).
The Kondo reference teaches a method and apparatus for silicon carbide growth, note entire reference. The apparatus consists of a crucible which has a body bottom and cover, note fig 1. There is space for a raw material and opposite a seed on the cover, note fig. 1 para 009-010. There is a crystal expansion guide which is attached to the crucible and goes from a space apart from the raw material and the seed, para 0015. There is a frame member between the crucible body and the cover, note fig 1, S. There is a tubular core member. This is connected to the inner wall and the opposite side the same size of the seed. This member is shaped as a cone, note fig 1, no 11 and para 0015. The member does not react with the raw material and controls the shape of the grown crystal, note fig 2. The raw material is silicon carbide which is heated to sublimation temperatures and then deposits onto the seed crystal. The growth of the SiC has an increased diameter due to the tubular member, second embodiment. The sole difference between the instant claim and the prior art is the composition of the tubular member. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the Kondo reference to use a pure graphite as the tubular member in order to have a material that with not introduce impurities and can withstand conditions of the process.
With regards to claim 2, the Kondo reference teaches the tubular member to be the similar diameter to the inner wall and connected , note figures 1 and 2.
With regards to claim 8, the Kondo reference teaches using graphite for the frame, note, para 0015.
With regards to claim 9, the Kondo reference teaches the tube to have a similar diameter to the crystal, note figures 1 and 2.
Claim(s) 3 to 5, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (ep2441861).
The Kondo reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the manufacture and material of the tube. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the Kondo reference to different forms of graphite and manufacture for the tubular member in order to have a flexible tube for better fitting.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (ep2441861).
The Kondo reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the specific silicon carbide. 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 type of silicon carbide, doped and orientation in the Kondo reference in order to grow the silicon carbide for later uses.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (ep2441861).
The Kondo reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the size of the grown silicon carbide and seed. 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 sizes of silicon carbide and seed in the Kondo reference in order to grow the silicon carbide for later uses.
Claims 6 and 11 to 15 are 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 claims are objected as the prior art does not teach nor render obvious the instantly claimed invention. There is no teaching in the art to have the tube parts fall off during growth of the silicon carbide as is now claimed.
Examiner’s Remarks
The remaining references are merely cited to show the state of the art in silicon carbide growth.
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