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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding Claim 3, bridging lines 1 and 2, “said” is unnecessarily repeated. Regarding Claim 4, bridging lines 1 and 2, “said” is unnecessarily repeated. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell USPA 7,314,521. Powell teaches SiC supporting substrate having claimed micropipe density (Table 1) at surface. Powell teaches that epitaxial layers can be grown on this surface (Figure 2; col. 4, lines 47-54; col. 5, lines 3 and 4), among which are group 13 nitrides (GaN, AlN, and InN). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to grow these group 13 nitrides on the SiC supporting substrate since Powell suggests these combinations are useful. In doing so, claimed composite would be formed. Regarding Claim 6, as described, there is direct bonding. Regarding Claim 8, Powell teaches that the group 13 nitride substrate grows epitaxially (col. 5, lines 1-5) and so it would be expected that the second main surface is a growth surface for group 13 nitride.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell USPA 7,314,521 in view of Yamada JP 2016-139655. Powell is relied upon as set forth above in the section 103 rejection over Powell. Powell does not teach a bonding layer. Yamada teaches that, in forming group 13 nitride on SiC supporting substrate having micropipes, a bonding layer (nucleation layer) can be used (paragraphs 18 and 19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to grow the GaN layer with AlN nucleation layer as suggested by Yamada for effective epitaxial growth.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 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.
Regarding Claims 2-5, the reviewed prior art does not teach or suggest the subject matter of these claims. Particularly, the reviewed prior art does not expressly teach or suggest the features of these specific claims or provide basis for establishing inherency of the features of these specific claims in combination with the composite features of independent Claim 1. For example, Powell USPA 7,314,521 teaches and suggests many features for the reasons set forth above in the section 103 rejections based on Powell, but Powell does not expressly teach or suggest the features of these specific claims or provide basis for establishing inherency of the features of these specific claims in combination with the composite features of independent Claim 1. See Powell (entire document).
EXAMINER’S COMMENT
Ishibashi USPA 2015/0194442 is cited. Ishibashi teaches group 13 nitride substrate and supporting substrate composites.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL E. LA VILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-1539. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. through Fri. from 9:00 a.m. ET to 5:30 p.m. ET.
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, Humera N. Sheikh, can be reached at (571) 272-0604. 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.
/MICHAEL E. LA VILLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784 22 September 2026
Prosecution Insights