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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/2/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi (2014/0264044).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 19, Kobayashi teaches a scintillator of the formula Cs3Cu2I5:Tl(0.5 mol %). (Kobayashi, [0069). This falls within the claimed formulae.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Cs3Cu2I5:Tl(0.5 mol %) indicates substitution of the kind described of 0.5 mol %.
Regarding claim 7, Cs3Cu2I5:Tl(0.5 mol %) (Kobayashi, [0069) is not Cs3Cu2[I1-xClx]5.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (2021/0002547)
Regarding claims 8-10, Kim teaches a scintillator of the formula Cs3Cu2I5 with substitution of Li, B, or Na ([0108]-[0115])
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:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6, 15, 16, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi.
Regarding claims 6 and 20, both single crystal and polycrystalline forms of scintillators are known, with their relative strengths and drawbacks thoroughly understood in the art. Choosing a single crystal material would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention as a routine form of crystalline scintillator.
Regarding claims 15-17, application of scintillators typically includes photodetectors and such processing as is necessary to read pulse signals therefrom, and the foreseeable uses of a scintillator material include radiation and neutron sensing applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-13 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 11-13, no scintillator of the claimed formulae have been found.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN C GUNBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-3107. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/EDWIN C GUNBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights