Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claims 1-9 and 18-27 are pending. Claims 10-17 are cancelled. Specification 2. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: a.) The status of the parent application should be updated in the first paragraph of page 1. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation 3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 4. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 5. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a .) “circuitry that makes one or more measurements of the conductivity of the conducting channel, and uses the measured conductivity to find an indication of the local concentration of the molecules near the position of the conducting channel” in claim 18 . The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. b.) “circuitry measures the conductivity of the conducting channel by one or more of measuring the current for a value of the voltage, measuring the voltage for a value of the current, and, for a value of one function of the current and the voltage, measuring a different function of the current and the voltage” in claim 19. The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. c.) “circuitry measures a source to drain current at a source to drain voltage by measuring the source to drain current as a function of source to drain voltage for a plurality of values of the source to drain voltage, and uses the measured conductivity to calculate the local concentration of the adhering molecules by using the source to drain current as a function of the source to drain voltage to find a threshold voltage of the conducting channel, and using the threshold voltage to calculate the local concentration of the adhering molecules near the position of the conducting channel” in claim 20. The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. d.) “circuitry controls power supplies to successively apply different combinations of values of voltages to the left and right lateral gate electrodes and back gate electrode, changing one or more of a lateral position of the conducting channel in a left-right direction, a vertical position of the conducting channel in a direction perpendicular to the sensing surface, and a size and a shape of the conducting channel, and for each combination of values of gate voltages, measures the conductivity of the conducting channel, and uses the measured conductivities to find a concentration of the at least one type of molecules in the air sample” in claim 21. The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. e.) “ circuitry makes the one or more measurements of conductivity of the conducting channel when the conducting channel is at a same lateral position in a left-right direction” in claim 22. The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. f.) “circuitry controls power supplies to successively apply different values of voltage to the lateral gate electrodes, changing one or more of a vertical position of the conducting channel in a direction perpendicular to the sensing surface, and a size and a shape of the conducting channel, and for each of the different values of gate voltages, measures the conductivity of the conducting channel, and uses the measured conductivities to find an indication of the concentration of the at least one type of molecules in the air sample” in claim 25. The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. g.) “ circuitry controls power supplies to successively apply different values of voltage to the lateral gate electrodes, changing one or more of a size and a shape of the conducting channel, and for each of the different values of gate voltages, measures the conductivity of the conducting channel, and uses the measured conductivities to find an indication of the concentration of the at least one type of molecules in the air sample” in claim 26. The term “circuitry” is considered a generic placeholder and the instant specification does not discloses any specific “circuitry” for carrying out the claimed function. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 6 . The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the appl icant regards as his invention. 7 . Claim s 5 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 5 is vague because the recitation of “the concentration” in line 1 lacks antecedent support. There is no previous recitation of a concentration of dopants. Claim 22 is vague because the recitation of “a same lateral position” is not clear as what the lateral position is relative to, i.e. the same lateral position as what? Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 8. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 9. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 – (b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States. 10. Claims 1 - 2 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 (b) as being anticipated by Ahn et al (“Double-Gate Nanowire Field Effect Transistor for a Biosensor”, Nano Letters, 2010, 10, 2934-2938; herein referred to as Ahn) . Ahn discloses a double gated nanowire FET biosensor. As shown in Figures 1 and 2, the biosensor comprises a piece of semiconductor with a first region extending between a source region and drain region and left and right regions extending along the first region on different sides. Gate electrodes G1 and G2 flank the left and right regions along the first region. A sensing region is adjacent the first region and supports immobilized antigen (see Figure 4). Figure 4 also shows an electron conducting channel which can move laterally depending on the voltage applied to the gate electrodes G1 and G2 which reads on the geometry of the conducting channel of the instant system being dependent of the voltage applied to the gate electrodes. The charges of the biomolecules binding to the antigens in the first region directly effect the channel potential ; hence, the current-voltage characteristics are modulated accordingly. Bound antibody thus can be quantified in the first region (Page 2936). Double Patenting 11. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer . 12. Claim s 1 , 3, 4, 5, and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting a s being unpatentable over claim s 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 10,054,562 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because patent ’562 claims a method that uses a system that anticipates the instant invention . Patent ‘562 claims: 1. A method of sensing molecules in a gas or liquid sample with a multi-gate field effect transistor having a conducting channel connecting a source region to a drain region, a position of the conducting channel in a lateral direction controllable by changing two lateral gate voltages, and the conductivity of the conducting channel affected by the molecules adhering to a sensing surface of the transistor at a position near the conducting channel, the method comprising: a) exposing the sensing surface to the gas or liquid sample; b) changing the position of the conducting channel in the lateral direction, and measuring a conductivity of the channel at a plurality of positions of the channel; and c) detecting the molecules by observing a change in conductivity of the conducting channel when it is in a position such that it passes close to one of the adhering molecules, or close to a fluctuation in a concentration of the adhering molecules on the sensing surface. 2. A method according to claim 1, wherein the multi-gate field effect transistor is a field effect transistor comprising a back gate electrode that affects one or both of an average distance and range of distance of the conducting channel from the sensing surface, the method also comprising adjusting a voltage of the back gate electrode to improve a sensitivity of the conductivity of the conducting channel to the adhering molecules. 3. A method according the claim 1, wherein changing the two lateral gate voltages affects a cross-sectional area of the conducting channel, a cross-sectional shape of the conducting channel, or both, at least partly independently of the position of the conducting channel in the lateral direction, as well as affecting the position of the conducting channel in the lateral direction. 4. A method according to claim 3, wherein changing a position of the conducting channel in the lateral direction comprises keeping the two lateral gate voltages at values such that the conducting channel has a width in the lateral direction no greater than 50% of a full range of the positions that the conducting channel can move to in the lateral direction. 5. A method according to claim 3, wherein changing a position of the conducting channel in the lateral direction comprises keeping the two lateral gate voltages at values such that the conducting channel has a width in the lateral direction no greater than 200 nanometers. 6. A method according to claim 1, wherein the sample comprises a gas sample. 7. A method according to claim 1, wherein the sample comprises a liquid sample, and exposing the sensing surface to the liquid sample comprises holding the liquid sample in a reservoir. 8. A method according to claim 1, wherein the field effect transistor has a first region extending from the source region to the drain region, and left and right lateral regions extending along the first region on either side, and the lateral gate electrodes create the conducting channel in the first region by producing an electric field in the left and right lateral regions. 9. A method according to claim 8, wherein the source region, drain region and first region are doped with dopants of a same sign, and the left and right lateral regions are doped with dopants of an opposite sign to the source region, drain region, and first region. 10. A method according to claim 9, wherein the concentration of dopants of the lateral regions extends into the first region, falling off gradually over a scale length greater than a width of the conducting channel. 11. A method according to claim 1, wherein exposing the sensing surface comprising exposing to a sample of air, and the gate voltages are such that a width of the conducting channel and a distance of the conducting channel from the sensing surface allow an equilibrium concentration of the adhering molecules to be determined when the concentration of the molecules in the air sample is only 100 parts per million. 13. Claim s 1-9 and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting a s being unpatentable over claim s 1- 11 and 17- 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,112,379 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because patent ‘379 claims a system and method of modifying a field effect transistor that anticipates the instant invention . Patent ‘379 claims: 1. A system for sensing at least one type of molecules in a gas or liquid sample, comprising: a) at least one multi-gate field effect transistor, comprising: 1) a piece of semiconductor with a first region extending between a source region and a drain region, and left and right lateral regions extending along the first region on different sides; 2) left and right lateral gate electrodes that respectively produce an electric field in the left and right lateral regions, creating a conducting channel in the first region when appropriate voltages are applied to them, a position of the conducting channel depending on the applied voltages; 3) a sensing surface adjacent to the first region, that molecules of the at least one type adhere to when the sensing surface is exposed to the molecules, the conductivity of the conducting channel being measurably affected by a local concentration of the adhering molecules near the position of the conducting channel; and b) a controller that controls power supplies to successively apply different voltages to the lateral gate electrodes of the transistor, moving the conducting channel to a plurality of different positions in a lateral direction, and at each position uses a circuit to measure the conductivity of the conducting channel by measuring a source to drain current at a source to drain voltage, and uses the measured conductivity to calculate a local concentration of the adhering molecules at that position. 2. A system according to claim 1, wherein the sensing surface is coated with a ligand that binds specifically to the molecules that are being sensed. 3. A system according to claim 1, wherein the source region and drain region are doped with dopants of a same sign, and the left and right lateral regions are doped with dopants of an opposite sign to the source and drain regions. 4. A system according to claim 3, wherein the first region is doped with a dopant of the same sign as the source and drain regions. 5. A system according to claim 4, wherein the concentration of dopants of the lateral regions extends into the first region, falling off gradually over a scale length greater than the width of the conducting channel. 6. A product manufactured by a process comprising: a) providing the system of claim 4; and b) heat treating the field effect transistor under conditions such that some of the dopants from the left and right lateral regions diffuse into the first region, reducing an effective width of the first region by at least 30% at its narrowest point, but not reducing the effective width to zero at any point. 7. A system according to claim 1, wherein the first region is narrower than 1 micrometer between the left and right lateral regions. 8. A system according to claim 1, wherein the field effect transistor also comprises a back gate electrode, located in a direction away from the sensing surface and separated from the first region at least by an insulator layer. 9. A system according to claim 1, which, for at least one choice of gate electrode voltages, would have a width of the conducting channel and a distance of the conducting channel from the sensing surface such that an equilibrium concentration of the adhering molecules could be determined when a concentration of the molecules in air that the sensing surface is exposed to is only 100 parts per million. 10. A system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one field effect transistor comprises a plurality of field effect transistors, with their sensing surfaces chemically modified in substantially a same way for binding to molecules in a gas or liquid sample, and the controller controls power supplies to change the lateral gate voltages to change the position of the conductive channel in a lateral direction in each transistor, and uses a circuit to measure the conductivity of the conductive channel at a plurality of different positions in each transistor, after exposing the sensing surfaces of the transistors to the sample, and calculates a greatest concentration of said molecules adhering near any of the positions, for each transistor, from the measured conductivities, and calculates an average over the transistors of the greatest concentrations of the adhering molecules. 11. A system according to claim 1 for use as an electronic nose for sensing a plurality of different types of molecules, wherein the at least one field effect transistor comprises a plurality of field effect transistors with sensing surfaces having different chemical properties, causing them to have different relative tendencies for the different molecules to adhere to them, and the controller controls power supplies to change lateral gate voltages to change the position of the conducting channel in a lateral direction, and calculates a concentration of any adhering molecules near each of the positions of the conducting channels after the sensing surfaces are exposed to a gas or liquid sample, from the conductivity measured at each of the positions, for each transistor, and finds the type of molecules present in the sample by comparing a pattern of the concentrations of molecules adhering to each field effect transistor, to an expected pattern of concentrations of adhering molecules for each of the types of molecules. 17. A system according to claim 1, wherein the controller measures the source to drain current at a source to drain voltage by one or more of keeping the voltage at a constant value at the different positions and measuring changes in the current, keeping the current at a constant value at the different positions and measuring changes in the voltage, and keeping a function of the current and the voltage at a constant value at the different positions and measuring changes in a different function of the current and the voltage. 18. A method of modifying a multi-gate field effect transistor usable for sensing at least one type of molecules in a gas or liquid sample and comprising: a) a piece of semiconductor with a first region extending between a source region and a drain region, and left and right lateral regions extending along the first region on different sides, the source region and drain region doped with dopants of a same sign, the left and right lateral regions doped with dopants of an opposite sign to the source and drain regions, and the first region doped with a dopant of the same sign as the source and drain regions; b) left and right lateral gate electrodes that respectively produce an electric field in the left and right lateral regions, creating a conducting channel in the first region when appropriate voltages are applied to them, a position of the conducting channel depending on the applied voltages; and c) a sensing surface adjacent to the first region, that molecules of the at least one type adhere to when the sensing surface is exposed to the molecules, the conductivity of the conducting channel being measurably affected by a local concentration of the adhering molecules near the position of the conducting channel; the method comprising heat treating the transistor under conditions such that some of the dopants from the left and right lateral regions diffuse into the first region, reducing an effective width of the first region by at least 30% at its narrowest point, but not reducing the effective width to zero at any point. Allowable Subject Matter 14. Claims 3-9 and 18-27 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. Claims 3-9 and 18-27 are free of the prior art of record because the closest prior art being Ahn et al does not teach a system with the additional limitations recited in the aforementioned claims. Conclusion 1 5 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHRISTOPHER L CHIN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-0815 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday, 10:00am - 6:30pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Bao-Thuy Nguyen can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-0824 . 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. /CHRISTOPHER L CHIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1677 3/3 1 /26