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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 10/10/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/10/2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 7, 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The preamble of claim 5 recites “A process according to Claim 1…”. The recitation of “A process…” in the preamble of claim 5 deviates from independent claim 1 reciting a “method” and other dependent claims reciting “the method according to…”.
Claim 16 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 7. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7, 10-17 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 1 recites the limitation “the rear side” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘rear flat side’.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the front side” in line 5 and in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘front flat side’.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “d. electrochemically etching mesopores of at least 4 micrometers pore depth into the front side of the silicon wafer by establishing a predetermined etching current density while e. generating a porosity between 40% and 80% in the mesoporous layer”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether step d. electrochemically etching generates the claimed porosity between 40% and 80% in the mesoporous layer or step d. and step e. occur in sequence.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the mesoporous layer” in line 9 and in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “at least a few micrometers” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “at least a few micrometers” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The thickness of the deposited metal layer has been rendered indefinite because the specification lacks some standard for measuring a thickness if “at least a few micrometers”. Thus, the scope of the term is unclear.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the etched front side” in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘etched front flat side’.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the mesopores are etched with pore depths between 4 and 16 micrometers”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation recites a separate method step or further limits step d in claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the mesoporous layer”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the elemental metals”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “one of the elemental metals copper or nickel is deposited into the mesopores”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation recites a separate method step or further limits one of the steps recited in claim 1.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the deposition of the elemental metal”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether the limitation refers to the deposition of one of the elemental metals recited in claim 5, the elemental metal electrodeposited in claim 1 or the metal layer deposited in claim 1.
The terms “a few 10” and “several 100” in claim 6 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “a few 10” and “several 100” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The pore depth range at which the elemental metal is deposited in the mesoporous has been rendered indefinite because the specification lacks some standard for measuring “between a few 10 micrometers and several 100 nanometers”. Thus, the scope of the term(s) is unclear.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the mesopores are etched with pore depths between 6 and 12 micrometers”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation recites a separate method step or further limits step d in claim 1.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the deposition of the elemental metal…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether the limitation refers to the deposition of one of the elemental metals recited in claim 5, the elemental metal electrodeposited in claim 1 or the metal layer deposited in claim 1.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the pores”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the deposition of the elemental metal…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether the limitation refers to the deposition of one of the elemental metals recited in claim 5, the elemental metal electrodeposited in claim 1 or the metal layer deposited in claim 1.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the etched front side”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘etched front flat side’.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “in step i. a metal layer up to 4 micrometers thick is deposited onto the etched front side of the wafer”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether said limitation further limits the thickness of the metal layer deposited onto the etched front side of the wafer while producing electrically conductive and mechanically adherent contacts of the metal layer with the elemental metal in the mesopores or said limitation recites a further metal layer deposition step in step i.
Further, dependent claims 2-7, 10-17 are rendered indefinite due to their dependency on any of the indefinite claims as set forth above.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the rear side” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘rear flat side’.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the front side” in line 4 and in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘front flat side’.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “d. electrochemically etching mesopores of at least 4 micrometers pore depth into the front side of the silicon wafer by establishing a predetermined etching current density while e. generating a porosity between 40% and 80% in the mesoporous layer”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether step d. electrochemically etching generates the claimed porosity between 40% and 80% in the mesoporous layer or step d. and step e. occur in sequence.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the mesoporous layer” in line 8 and in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the etched front side” in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation is assumed to refer to the ‘etched front flat side’.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 7, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the metal layer is formed 1-4 micrometers thick” which fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 reciting “i. depositing a metal layer at least a few micrometers thick”. As stated above, claim 1 reciting “i. depositing a metal layer at least a few micrometers thick” is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite and, thus, the scope of the claim is unclear. The metal layer thickness range recited in claim 7 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 which is deemed to be indefinite.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the metal layer is formed 1-4 micrometers thick” which fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 reciting “i. depositing a metal layer at least a few micrometers thick”. As stated above, claim 1 reciting “i. depositing a metal layer at least a few micrometers thick” is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite and, thus, the scope of the claim is unclear. The metal layer thickness range recited in claim 16 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 which is deemed to be indefinite.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “a metal layer up to 4 micrometers thick” which fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 reciting “i. depositing a metal layer at least a few micrometers thick”. As stated above, claim 1 reciting “i. depositing a metal layer at least a few micrometers thick” is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite and, thus, the scope of the claim is unclear. The metal layer thickness range recited in claim 16 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 which is deemed to be indefinite.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bahr (US 2016/0118643A1) discloses a method for manufacturing an electrode having silicon for lithium ion batteries, wherein a p-type silicon wafer is etched in an electrolyte having HF at a predetermined etching current to form silicon nanowires, a metal such as copper is electrodeposited on the etched wafer and the silicon nanowires anchored to the metal film is configured to be detached from the substrate (see Title, Abstract, [0024]-[0025], [0032-[0038], [0044]-[0046], Fig. 1-6).
DE102015120879A1 discloses a method for producing an anode, wherein a copper foil is provided as a metal substrate, an adhesion promoter layer is applied to a surface of the copper and a silicon layer is subsequently applied, wherein the silicon layer is porousized by electrochemical etching ([0001], [0040]-[0044]).
DE1031895A1 discloses a method for producing continuous (mesoporous) membranes from semiconductor materials such as Si, wherein the method includes producing a sacrificial layer configured to be later destroyed/removed ([0001], [0016]-[0017], [0021]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM.
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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached at (571)270-3879. 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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 12/12/2025