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 .
This action is in response to the amendment filed 11/20/2025. Claims 1-7, 9-13, 15-18 have been amended. Claim 1-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bunyk et al. (US 2009/0008632 A1) in view of Oliver et al. (US 2018/0013052 A1) and further in view of Schoelkopf III et al. (US 2015/0357550 A1).
Claim 1. Bunyk discloses an apparatus, comprising:
a substrate, a dielectric layer (P 0060);
a superconducting qubit, a superconducting (flux) qubit (P 0019, 0020) a device is a (flux) qubit (P 0035), on a surface of the substrate, the devices (qubits) are contained by a (metal) layer (P 0056, 0057);
a superconducting ground plane, a superconducting ground plane (P 0032) wherein a superconducting shield is not used as a superconducting ground plane (P 0035),
a superconducting shield on the surface of the substrate, superconducting shielding layer is positioned on the substrate (P 0062 Fig 3).
Bunyk does not disclose a superconducting ground plane on the surface of the substrate, as disclosed in the claims. However, in the same field of invention, Oliver discloses at least two ground planes (22a, 22b, 22c) are positioned on a substrate (P 0154 Fig 2). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk and Oliver, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine a superconducting ground plane on the surface of the substrate with the teachings of Bunyk with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Bunyk does not disclose wherein the superconducting shield is positioned between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane, wherein the superconducting shield is not in contact with the superconducting ground plane, and wherein the superconducting shield and the superconducting ground plane are not in contact the superconducting qubit, as disclosed in the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses an electromagnetic shield includes a superconducting layer positioned on the outside of an enclosure containing at least one qubit (P 0050 Fig 1). Oliver discloses a ground plane is spaced from a resonator center by a gap (P 0154 Fig 2). The combination of Oliver and Schoelkopf with Bunyk would be to position a superconducting shield separated from the qubits of Bunyk by a gap on the substrate and then a superconducting ground plane separated from the superconducting shield by a gap. Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield is positioned between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane, wherein the superconducting shield is not in contact with the superconducting ground plane, and wherein the superconducting shield and the superconducting ground plane are not in contact the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk and Oliver with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 2. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Bunyk discloses areas of shielding are provided for quantum computing to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit (P 0048) magnetic shielding may be used to controllably couple quantum devices together and promote the quantum effects exhibited by quantum devices (P 0051, 0053) a superconducting shielding layer is not a ground plane (P 0059) an insulating layer separates the layer with the devices (qubits) from (P 0061) the superconducting shielding layer (P 0062). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine the superconducting shield reduces a coupling between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 3. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Oliver discloses a via is formed in wafers by etching (P 0146) a conductor is disposed using etching and one or more conductive vias are formed in the structure (P 0176) openings are formed in the conductive layer via etching or masking (P 0177). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield is at least partially entrenched within the substrate with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 4. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 1, but Bunyk does not disclose wherein the superconducting shield comprises a gap located adjacent to a superconducting transmission line operatively coupled to the superconducting qubit, as disclosed in the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses the substrate of the superconducting layer is disposed such that there is a gap between a feedline and the superconducting layer (P 0052). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield comprises a gap located adjacent to a superconducting transmission line operatively coupled to the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 5. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 4, and Schoelkopf the substrate includes a trough from which an electromagnet shield is formed, covered in a superconducting layer that may also cover portions of the substrate that are part of the trough, and a support layer is a dielectric membrane suspended across the trough in substrate (P 0051) the substrates may be formed with troughs and channels as desired using three-dimensional printing techniques forming a first trough in a first substrate and a second trough in a second substrate and placing the two substrates together with the two troughs adjacent to one another (P 0054). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield comprises a first portion located on the surface of the substrate and a second portion that extends into the substrate, and wherein the gap is located in the second portion with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 6. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and Bunyk discloses wherein the superconducting shield at least partially surrounds the superconducting qubit, an integrated circuit may include an unshielded region surrounded by a shielded region (P 0065).
Claim 7. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 1, but Bunyk does disclose wherein the superconducting qubit is capacitively coupled to differential resonator circuitry, as disclosed in the claims. However, Oliver discloses a superconducting integrated circuit includes at least one superconducting resonator is provided from a substrate having a conductive layer disposed over a surface (P 0008). Schoelkopf discloses a first three-dimensional cavity resonator may be configured to resonate at least one frequency ranging between 1 GHz and 20 GHz and a second three-dimensional cavity may be configured to resonate at least one frequency ranging between 5 GHz and 9 GHz (P 0046) there is a gap between the feedlines and the resonator such that the two components are weakly, capacitively coupled (P 0053). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting qubit is capacitively coupled to differential resonator circuitry with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 8. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the apparatus of claim 1, but Bunyk does not disclose wherein the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit, as disclosed in the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit (P 0053). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 9 is directed to a device claim similar to the apparatus claim of Claim 1 and is rejected with the same rationale. Claim 9 includes the further limitation, wherein the superconducting shield comprises a material that inhibits a coupling interaction between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane. Bunyk discloses to reduce noise in a controlled manner (P 0059) an insulating dialect layer is positioned on the superconducting shield (P 0060 Fig 3). Furthermore, Schoelkopf discloses the plurality of qubits are enclosed in an electromagnetic shield and isolated from external electromagnetic noise to prevent decoherence due to unwanted electromagnetic radiation and cross-couplings (P 0052). Therefore, Claim 9 is rejected in view of Schoelkopf with the same rationale used in the rejection of Claim 1.
Claim 10. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the device of claim 9, and Bunyk discloses wherein the material of the superconducting shield further mitigates crosstalk between the superconducting qubit and another superconducting qubit of the device, the superconducting shielding layer magnetically isolates the device (qubits) (P 0062).
Claim 11. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the device of claim 9, but Bunyk does not disclose wherein the superconducting shield at least partially surrounds the superconducting qubit, as disclosed in the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses an electromagnetic shield includes a superconducting layer for enclosing the qubits (P 0050). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield at least partially surrounds the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 12. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the device of claim 9, and Oliver discloses at least two ground planes (22a, 22b, 22c) are positioned on a substrate, a ground plane is spaced from a resonator center by a gap (P 0154 Fig 2) and Schoelkopf discloses an electromagnetic shield includes a superconducting layer positioned on the outside of an enclosure containing at least one qubit (P 0050 Fig 1) the substrate of the superconducting layer is disposed such that there is a gap between a feedline and the superconducting layer (P 0052). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine the superconducting shield comprises a gap located adjacent to a superconducting transmission line operatively coupled to the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 13. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the device of claim 12, and Oliver discloses a via is formed in wafers by etching (P 0146) a conductor is disposed using etching and one or more conductive vias are formed in the structure (P 0176) openings are formed in the conductive layer via etching or masking (P 0177). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein a portion of the superconducting shield is entrenched within the substrate with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 14. Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf disclose the device of claim 9, but Bunyk does not disclose wherein the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit, as disclosed in the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit (P 0053). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bunyk et al. (US 2009/0008632 A1) in view of Oliver et al. (US 2018/0013052 A1) and further in view of Schoelkopf III et al. (US 2015/0357550 A1) and Willliams (EP 2 560 133 A1).
Claim 15. Bunyk discloses method, comprising: improving coherence of
a superconducting qubit, a superconducting (flux) qubit (P 0019, 0020) a device is a (flux) qubit (P 0035), on a surface of a substrate, the devices (qubits) are contained by a (metal) layer (P 0056, 0057)on a dielectric layer (P 0060),
by providing a superconducting ground plane …, a superconducting ground plane (P 0032) wherein a superconducting shield is not used as a superconducting ground plane (P 0035),
and a superconducting shield on the surface of the substrate, superconducting shielding layer is positioned on the substrate (P 0062 Fig 3).
Bunyk does not disclose a superconducting ground plane on the surface of the substrate, as disclosed in the claims. However, in the same field of invention, Oliver discloses at least two ground planes (22a, 22b, 22c) are positioned on a substrate (P 0154 Fig 2). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk and Oliver, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine a superconducting ground plane on the surface of the substrate with the teachings of Bunyk with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Bunyk does not disclose a superconducting shield on the surface of the substrate, wherein the superconducting shield is not in contact with the superconducting ground plane, wherein the superconducting shield and the superconducting ground plane are not in contact the superconducting qubit, as disclosed the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses an electromagnetic shield includes a superconducting layer positioned on the outside of an enclosure containing at least one qubit (P 0050 Fig 1). Oliver discloses a ground plane is spaced from a resonator center by a gap (P 0154 Fig 2). The combination of Oliver and Schoelkopf with Bunyk would be to position a superconducting shield separated from the qubits of Bunyk by a gap on the substrate and then a superconducting ground plane separated from the superconducting shield by a gap. Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver and Schoelkopf, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine a superconducting shield on the surface of the substrate, wherein the superconducting shield is not in contact with the superconducting ground plane, wherein the superconducting shield and the superconducting ground plane are not in contact the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk and Oliver with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Bunyk does not disclose wherein the superconducting shield screens an electric field and reduces an overall dipole moment of the superconducting qubit, as disclosed in the claims. However, Schoelkopf discloses the first enclosure may be electrically connected to the wiring layer through at least one via (P 0020) each superconducting qubit may comprise a Josephson junction disposed between two superconducting portions that act as a dipole antenna, the superconducting qubits are oriented vertically such that the axis of each superconducting qubit (as determined by the orientation of the dipole antenna) is perpendicular to the superconducting layer and the qubits thereby couple to the electromagnetic fields of the resonant cavity (P 0047) preventing a change in electric dipole moment of an qubit so there is no interaction between qubits through electric dipole moments (P 0068). Furthermore, in the same field of invention, Williams discloses applying an electric field (P 0035). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield screens an electric field and reduces an overall dipole moment of the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, and Schoelkopf with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 16. Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams disclose the method of claim 15, But Bunyk does not disclose inhibiting, via the superconducting shield, a coupling interaction between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane, as disclosed in the claims. However, Bunyk discloses Bunyk discloses to reduce noise in a controlled manner (P 0059) an insulating dialect layer is positioned on the superconducting shield (P 0060 Fig 3). Furthermore, Schoelkopf discloses the plurality of qubits are enclosed in an electromagnetic shield and isolated from external electromagnetic noise to prevent decoherence due to unwanted electromagnetic radiation and cross-couplings (P 0052). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine inhibiting, via the superconducting shield, a coupling interaction between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 17. Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams disclose the method of claim 15, and Bunyk discloses mitigating, via the superconducting shield, crosstalk between the superconducting qubit and another superconducting qubit, the superconducting shielding layer magnetically isolates the device (qubits) (P 0062).
Claim 18. Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams disclose the method of claim 15, and Schoelkoph discloses an “electromagnetic shield” is a type of enclosure that is configured to prevent external electromagnetic radiation from entering the enclosure and prevent internal electromagnetic radiation from leaking out of the enclosure to the external environment (P 0038) the plurality of qubits are enclosed in an electromagnetic shield and isolated from external electromagnetic noise to prevent decoherence due to unwanted electromagnetic radiation and cross-couplings (P 0052). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting shield minimizes energy leakage from the superconducting qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 19. Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams disclose the method of claim 15, and Oliver discloses a superconducting integrated circuit includes at least one superconducting resonator is provided from a substrate having a conductive layer disposed over a surface (P 0008). Schoelkopf discloses a first three-dimensional cavity resonator may be configured to resonate at least one frequency ranging between 1 GHz and 20 GHz and a second three-dimensional cavity may be configured to resonate at least one frequency ranging between 5 GHz and 9 GHz (P 0046) there is a gap between the feedlines and the resonator such that the two components are weakly, capacitively coupled (P 0053). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine capacitively coupling the superconducting qubit to a differential resonator circuitry with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Claim 20. Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams disclose the method of claim 15, Schoelkopf discloses the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit (P 0053). Therefore, considering the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have been motivated to combine wherein the superconducting qubit is a transmon qubit with the teachings of Bunyk, Oliver, Schoelkopf and Williams with the motivation to reduce destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The amendments are intended to capture the embodiment of the invention in Applicant’s figures 1 and 2.
Bunyk discloses an embodiment wherein a qubit device situated on a substrate is disclosed in Figure 3. The superconducting shield layer is positioned on the substrate with the qubit device. However, there is no gap or space between the qubit device and the superconducting shield layer. Bunyk discloses a ground plane, but the superconducting shield is not used as the ground plane. But, Bunyk does not disclose the specific positioning of the ground plane.
Schoelkopf discloses a qubit device positioned on a substrate and separated, on the same level, by a gap or space from a superconducting shield layer. In an embodiment, Schoelkopf discloses that a support layer is covered with a superconducting layer as a ground plane, but is offset from both the superconducting shield.
Neither Bunyk nor Schoelkopf disclose that the ground plane is positioned on the substrate separated by a gap or space from the superconducting shield as shown in Applicant’s Figure 2. New prior art reference Oliver has been combined with Bunyk and Schoelkopf to reject the limitations, the superconducting ground plane is positioned on the surface of the substrate, and the superconducting shield is positioned between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane, and the superconducting ground plane is not in contact with the superconducting qubit.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 9, 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. New prior art reference Oliver has been combined with Bunyk and Schoelkopf to reject the limitations, the superconducting ground plane is positioned on the surface of the substrate, and the superconducting shield is positioned between the superconducting qubit and the superconducting ground plane, and the superconducting ground plane is not in contact with the superconducting qubit.
Oliver discloses a superconducting integrated circuit includes at least one superconducting resonator is provided from a substrate having a conductive layer disposed over a surface (P 0008) a via is formed in wafers by etching (P 0146) at least two ground planes (22a, 22b, 22c) are positioned on a substrate, a ground plane is spaced from a resonator center by a gap (P 0154 Fig 2) a conductor is disposed using etching and one or more conductive vias are formed in the structure (P 0176) openings are formed in the conductive layer via etching or masking (P 0177). Adding these features to the combination of Bunyk and Schoelkopf provides the benefit of reducing destructive interference between quantum devices and to facilitate desirable interactions between the quantum devices, as well as to shield the quantum devices from destructive interactions due to sources external to the integrated circuit Bunyk (P 0048) to enhance long coherence times a fault tolerant quantum computer for increased performance (Oliver: P 0005, 0006)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to JOHN M HEFFINGTON at telephone number (571)270-1696.
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN M HEFFINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1696. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:30 am to 5:30 pm Central.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Cesar B Paula, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-4128. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/J.M.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2145 12/30/2025
/CHAU T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2145
Prosecution Insights