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, 3, 4, 6, 12 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolbert et al (2017/0162875)
The Tolbert et al reference teaches a method of growing a transition metal dichalcogenide, note entire reference. (Para 0181, MoS2) The method comprises providing a substrate (Para 00180, polar substrate) and positioning the substrate in a furnace (Para 0182). The substrate has a film of transition metal compound. A step of reducing a transition metal compound (Para 0180) to produce a plurality of reduced transition metal compounds (Para 0180, porous MoO2). The plurality of reduced transition metal compounds are aligned on the substrate (Para 0180). The substrate is a polar substrate, and the deposition process is dip-coating on a polar substrate. Then reacting the plurality of reduced transition metal compounds (Porous MoO2) with a chalcogen precursor (Para 0182, H2S) to form one or more layers of a transition metal dichalcogenide (Para 0182, MoS2). The sole difference between the instant claim and the prior art is the electrostatically aligning the compounds. 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 means to align the compounds in the Tolbert et al reference in order to have an order to the compounds producing a uniform layer.
Regarding Claim 3, Tolbert et al teaches the formation of the one or more layers of the transition metal dichalcogenide (Para 0182, MoS2)
Regarding Claim 4, Tolbert et al teaches the substrate is electrically insulating or semiconducting (Para 0180, substrate comprises electrically insulating material (SiO2) as well as semiconducting material (Si))
Regarding Claim 6, Tolbert et al teaches the substrate is electrically insulating or semiconducting (Para 0180, substrate may comprise SiO2 (electrically insulating) and Si (semiconducting)).
Regarding Claim 12, Tolbert et al teaches the transition metal compound comprises MoO3 or MoCl5 (Para 0180, MoCl5).
Regarding Claim 17, Tolbert et al teaches the chalcogen precursor comprises sulfur or selenium (Para 0182, H2S, sulfur).
Claim(s) 7 to 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolbert et al (2017/0162875)
The Tolbert et al reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the substrate being amorphous. 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 substrate type and crystallinity in the Tolbert et al reference in order to provide a substrate comprising insulating areas commonly used in semiconductor manufacturing.
Regarding Claim 8, Tolbert et al teaches the substrate comprise SiO2 (Para 0180, Substrate comprise SiO2).
Regarding Claim 9, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the priority date to choose suitable materials for a substrate for semiconductor device manufacturing, since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolbert et al (2017/0162875) in view of Park et al (2020/0277700)
The Tolbert et al reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims the one or more layers of the transition metal dichalcogenide consists of a monolayer. However, Park et al reference teaches a method wherein the one or more layers of the transition metal dichalcogenide consists of a monolayer (Para 0111). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the Tolbert et al process by the teachings of the Park et al reference to have multiple layers in order to create indirect band gap semiconductor into a direct band gap semiconductor which may be ideal properties for various photoelectronic devices (HUEC, Para 0004).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolbert et al (2017/0162875)
The Tolbert et al reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claims in the temperature of condensing. 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 temperatures to operate at in the Tolbert et al reference in order to ensure complete uniform deposition.
Claims 2, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, and 18 to 20 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 prior art does not teach nor render obvious the instantly claimed limitations, of sizes of crystals, specific elements of the compounds, the charged state of the reduced compounds, and the specific process parameters.
Examiner’s Remarks
The remaining references are merely cited of interest as showing the state of the art in dichalcogenide formation.
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