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 .
Summary
Receipt of Applicant’s Remarks and Amendments filed on 12/04/2025 is acknowledged. Applicant elected Group I without traverse filed 09/05/2025, election is made Final.
Claims 1-4, 9-14, 16, and 18-20 are pending.
Claims 19 and 20 are cancelled.
Claims 1-3, 9,11,12,16, 24, and 35 are amended.
Claims 43 and 44 are new.
Claims 1-4, 9-14,16, 18, 43 and 44 are pending and under examination in this application.
Claims 24, 35-36 and 40-42 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1, 11, 35, 43, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The instant claims are directed to a device comprising chalcogenide nanoparticles “configured to generate” upconverted light through plasmon resonance in a… chalcogenide nanoparticles. The claimed invention is the device, and not what the device does. The device is being interpreted as the nanoparticles and the light-sensitive materials, thus both components are explicitly taught in prior art of record.
The Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. 112, Paragraph 1, “Written Description” Requirement, published at Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 4, pp. 1099-1111 outline the method of analysis of claims to determine whether adequate written description is present. The first step is to determine what the claim as a whole covers, i.e., discussion of the full scope of the claim. Second, the application should be fully reviewed to understand how applicant provides support for the claimed invention including each element and/or step, i.e., compare the scope of the claim with the scope of the description. Third, determine whether the applicant was in possession of the claimed invention as a whole at the time of filing. This should include the following considerations: (1) actual reduction to practice, (2) disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas, (3) sufficient relevant identifying characteristics such as complete structure, partial structure, physical and/or chemical properties and functional characteristics when coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure, (4) method of making the claimed invention, (5) level of skill and knowledge in the art and (6) predictability of the art. For each claim drawn to a single embodiment or species, each of these factors is to be considered with regard to that embodiment or species. For each claim drawn to a genus, each of these factors is to be considered to determine whether there is disclosure of a representative number of species that would lead one skilled in the art to conclude that applicant was in possession of the claimed invention. Where skill and knowledge in the art is high adequate written description would require fewer species to be disclosed than in an art where little is known; further, more species would need to be disclosed to provide adequate written description for a highly variable genus.
First, what do the claims as a whole cover? The amended claims are drawn to a new limitation of chalcogenide nanoparticles configured to generate upconverted light through plasmon resonance in a chalcogen-based material of the chalcogenide nanoparticles; and a light-sensitive material configured to absorb the upconverted light generated by the chalcogenide nanoparticles.
Second, how does the scope of the claims compare to the scope of the disclosure? Claims 1, 11, 35, 43, 44 recites “configured to” and “configured to generate”, however no discussion in the specification describes how the chalcogenide nanoparticles are “configured to” in order to generate the upconverted light.
Third, the factors need to be considered.
What was actually reduced to practice? Clearly, the chalcogenide nanoparticles configured to generate upconverted light through plasmon resonance was actually reduced to practice.
Is there disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas? There is no disclosure of structural chemical formula or how the chalcogenide nanoparticles give rise to the function of upconversion of light
Are there sufficient relevant identifying characteristics disclosed? No discussion in the specification describes how the chalcogenide nanoparticles are “configured to” in order to generate the upconverted light.
Is there at least one method of making the claimed invention disclosed? In general, one of ordinary skill in the art could use methods that include receiving, at chalcogenide nanoparticles, input light or desired wavelength, and upconverting the input light using the chalcogenide nanoparticles, to generate output light having a second wavelength.
What is the level of skill in the art and what knowledge is present in the art? The level of skill in the art of having a device comprising chalcogenide nanoparticles configured to generate upconverted light through plasmon resonance in a chalcogen-based material of the chalcogenide nanoparticles and a light-sensitive material configured to absorb the upconverted light generated by the chalcogenide nanoparticles is high, about that of a PhD scientist with several years’ experience with photon upconversion, upconverting materials of chalcogenide nanoparticles.
What is the level of predictability of the art? The level of predictability in this state of the art is to generate appreciable output light, and to the intensity of light emitted by pulsed is very low, rather than continuous-wavelengths and lasers are used.
Thus, having analyzed the claims with regard to the Written Description guidelines, it is clear that the specification does not disclose a representative number of species which would lead one skilled in the art to conclude that applicant was in possession of the claimed invention.
Maintained Rejections
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Klopfer et al. (US 9,267,889 B1) (hereinafter the patent is referred as Klopfer.
Klopfer teaches apparatus, systems, and methods using multi-shelled nanostructures can be used in a variety of applications, and in various embodiments, a multi-shelled nanostructure can include one or more light-absorbing and light-emitting cores enclosed by a number of nano-shells, and for a multi-shelled nanostructure
having multiple conductive nano-shells, the nano-shells are separated from each other by a dielectric (abstract).
Regarding claim 1, Klopfer teaches nanoparticle-based absorbers and
fluorophores can be provided for numerous high-efficiency absorber and emitter device applications (Fig 22; column 5, lines 39-41) comprising light-absorbing and light-emitting cores 2105-1, 2105-2…2105-N can include, but not limited to, organic luminophores, fluorophores, nontoxic fluorophores, semiconductor quantum dots (SQDs), or combination thereof…the SQDs can include, but are not limited to, CdSe, CdS, CdTe, lnAir, lnP, CuS, CuSe…or combination thereof) corresponding to chalcogenide nanoparticles; and a light-sensitive material (2230) configured to absorb unconverted light generated by the chalcogenide nanoparticles and Detection device 2230 can include data collection equipment such as imaging camera or various types of spectrographic equipment (column 15, lines 39-51; claim 15).
Regarding claim 2, as noted above Klopfer teaches the device, wherein the Light-absorbing and light-emitting cores 2105-1, 2105-2 ... 2105-N can include, but are not limited to, organic luminophores, fluorophores, non-toxic fluorophores, semiconductor quantum dots (SQDs), or combinations thereof ... The SQDs can include, but are not limited to, CdSe, CdS, CdTe. lnAir, lnP, CuS, CuSe ... ) (column 14, lines 55-61). Therefore, the limitation of chalcogenide nanoparticles are copper selenide nanoparticles are taught.
Regarding claim 9, Klopfer teaches imaging camera or various types of spectrographic equipment (column 15, lines 50-51). Therefore, the limitation of
the light-sensitive material is a light absorber in a solar cell or a photosensor is met.
Regarding claim 10, Klopfer teaches the diameter of a light absorbing and light emitting core, such as a quantum dot (QD), can range from 0.1 nm to 100 nm, typically ranging from5 to 20 nm (column 14, lines 62-64). Therefore, the limitation of the chalcogenide nanoparticles each have a diameter between about 10 nanometers and about 30 nanometers are overlapped.
New Rejections Necessitated by Amendments
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9,11,12,16, 18, 43 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 101489913 B1 (hereinafter the reference is referred as
KR ‘913) in view of evidentiary reference Warkentin (Continuous Wave Upconversion from a Copper Selenide Nanocrystal Film), Chen (US 2003/0030067 A1), Klopfer et al. (US 9,267,889 B1) (hereinafter the patent is referred as Klopfer), Heavily-doped colloidal semiconductor and metal oxide nanocrystals: an emerging new class of plasmonic nanomaterials (hereinafter the article is referred as Liu), Spitzer (US 2012/0060918 A1) and further in view of Sum et al. (US 2018/0002354 A1) (hereinafter the reference is referred as Sum).
KR ‘913 teaches Gap plasmon resonator (GPR) comprising up-conversion nanoparticles and solar cell using the same, with an object to improve the luminous efficiency of an up-conversion nanomaterial by using plasmon characteristic, shows the intensity of superior luminescence even in low power density, and has superior photoelectric conversion efficiency when it is used as a solar cell (abstract).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 9, and 16, KR ‘913 teaches objectives to improve the luminous efficiency of the upconversion material by using plasmon properties, and upconversion nano having excellent luminous intensity even at low power density. Another object of the present invention is to provide a solar cell (¶ 0066) having excellent light conversion efficiency by converting infrared light incident from natural light into visible light by using this as a back reflection layer comprising chalcogenides materials and the diameter of the upconversion nanoparticles is characterized in that of 5 ~ 50 nm (¶ 0005), and the upconversion materials are materials that can convert long-wave electromagnetic waves into shorter wavelengths. Basically, upconversion materials can absorb two or more low-energy photons and emit one high energy photon (¶ 0002). Furthermore, KR ‘913 discloses plasmon resonance characteristics (¶ 0041- ¶0042) and the solar cell absorbs infrared rays, which are not absorbed by the photoactive layer, and absorbs infrared rays from the rear reflection layer made of GPR including upconversion nanoparticles, converts them into visible light, and re-emits them into the photoactive layer, thereby reducing energy loss of the solar cell and improve conversion efficiency (¶ 0072).
Regarding claims 2-3, KR ‘913 teaches copper selenide (¶ 0070) and the upconversion nanoparticles are a mixture of doped chalcogenides and metal oxides (¶ 0005 and ¶ 0047)
Regarding claims 10-11, KR ‘913 teaches an upconversion characteristic of emitting infrared rays absorbed by plasmon resonance as visible energy of high energy (¶ 0064, and 0041-¶ 0042).
Regarding claim 13, KR ‘913 teaches light-sensitive material is an organic base absorber (¶ 0070).
Regarding claim 43, KR ‘913 teaches the protrusion diameter of the pattern layer 130 may be 50 ~ 300 nm, the height may be 10 ~ 200 nm., and when the projection diameter included in the pattern layer is less than 50 nm or exceeds 300 nm, the plasmon resonance effect may be reduced, thereby reducing the upconversion luminous efficiency (¶ 0041). In addition, KR ‘913 discloses when the protrusion height of the pattern layer 130 is less than 10 nm, the incident excitation wavelength may be transmitted, and the surface plasmon resonance effect may not be sufficiently exhibited, and when the protrusion height exceeds 200 nm, the incident excitation wavelength is reflected. Surface plasmon resonance may not be sufficiently achieved (¶ 0042). Furthermore, KR ‘913 discloses since the stacked structure of the pattern layer 170 manufactured through this can satisfy the resonance conditions of the excitation wavelength and the emission wavelength at the same time, it is possible to maximize
the upconversion efficiency and the emission performance (¶ 0056). Moreover,
KR ‘913 discloses the diameter of the upconversion nanoparticles 140 may be 5 to 50 nm, and despite this small size, by using surface plasmon resonance characteristics, it is possible to further increase up-conversion light emission. Specifically, the light incident on the GPR including the upconversion nanoparticles generates a collective
oscillation of the conduction band electrons, that is, a locally increased electric field along the interface between the pattern layer 130 and the spacer layer 120. This is transferred to the upconversion nanoparticles 140 applied between the cylindrical protrusions 130 of the pattern layer 130, thereby increasing upconversion efficiency and
luminous intensity (¶ 0048) and therefore, the GPR including the upconversion nanoparticles of the present invention having the above characteristics may have about 1000 times better luminous intensity under the same conditions than the conventional upconversion nanoparticles (¶ 0049).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to tune the optical response of the chalcogenide nanoparticles to overlap with the plasmon resonance frequency (or wavelength) of a plasmonic material in order to achieve enhanced excitation rate and/or absorption of more light.
KR ‘913 fails to specifically teach upconversion threshold less than 9 kW/cm2 for 105 of the chalcogenide NPs in an interaction volume, ligands, perovskite and chalcogenide nanoparticles bound to a coating.
Warkentin teaches the development of earth abundant, non-toxic materials that efficiently convert near infrared light into visible light and copper selenide-based materials meet these criteria, and are of great interest due to their unique thermoelectric and plasmonic properties. In particular, doped copper selenides (Cu2−xSe) have tunable near infrared localized surface plasmon resonances, large Seebeck coefficients, and low thermal conductivity, with a range of chemical and thermoelectric applications (abstract).
Regarding claim 44, Warkentin teaches the upconversion of near infrared light from a silica xerogel film containing degenerately doped Cu2−xSe nanocrystals, with an onset flux of ∼ 1.96 ± 0.29 kW/cm2 and at least 1% quantum yield. Our investigations suggest a plasmon-driven thermal mechanism likely plays a role in this upconversion process (abstract, and ¶ Results and Discussion).
Chen teaches devices directed in general to upconversion luminescence (UCL) materials and methods of making and using same and more particularly, but not meant to be limiting, to Mn doped semiconductor nanoparticles for use as UCL materials. The present invention also relates in general to upconversion luminescence including two-photon absorption upconversion, and potential applications using UCL materials, including light emitting diodes, upconversion lasers, infrared detectors, chemical Sensors, temperature and pressure Sensors, ultraviolet and radiation detectors and biological labels, all of which incorporate a UCL material. (¶ 0017).
Regarding claim 1, as noted above, Chen teaches a device comprising doped nanoparticles represent a class of materials that have novel properties that may allow more flexibility when designing application devices, wherein Mn2+ doped materials already have found uses as phosphors in many applications. In particular, Mn doped ZnS (ZnS:Mn2+) is of much interest because it is widely used in electroluminescence and cathodoluminescence displays. Since the report of significant emission lifetime shortening in ZnS:Mn2+ nanoparticles (¶ 0092). Moreover, Chen discloses
many articles on doped metal chalcogenide quantum dots have appeared, including topics such as new preparation methods, luminescence properties, and potential applications. In the field of doped nanoparticles, perhaps the most fundamentally interesting results are the luminescence enhancement and the lifetime shortening
of Mn2+ emission from milliseconds in bulk to nanoseconds in ZnS:Mn2+ nanocrystals (¶ 0092). Moreover, Chen discloses temperature sensor (47) includes the upconversion luminescence production assembly (20) discussed above, as well as a receiver (48) for
receiving the emission (22) and outputting an output signal indicative of the emission (22) ... the receiver can be a CCD, one or more phototransistors, one or more photodiodes or the like(¶ 0155- ¶ 0156) corresponding to limitation of a light-sensitive material (48) configured to absorb unconverted light generated by the chalcogenide nanoparticles. Therefore the limitations and structural features are met.
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches the UCL material (30) can be applied ... within the substrate (28) ... the emission (22) will typically pass through the substrate (28) if the substrate (28) is constructed of a material which permits passage of the
emission (22) and when the electromagnetic source (26) is an infrared electromagnetic source, the substrate (28) can be constructed of a substantially transparent material such as quartz, glass. methyl-acrylate, or natural or synthetic polymers (¶ 0120 - ¶ 0121).
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches the receiver (48) can be any device capable of
receiving the emission (22) and producing the output signal, for example, the receiver can be a CCD, one or more phototransistors, one or more photodiodes or the like (¶ 0156). Therefore, the limitation of wherein the light-sensitive material is a light absorber in a solar cell or a photosensor is taught.
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches in one preferred embodiment, the electromagnetic source (26) is an infrared source, and the UCL material (30) converts the infrared light (excitation 24) to visible light (emission 22), and in this instance, the excitation wavelength would be longer than about 800 nm and the emission wavelength would be in a range between about 360 nm to about 750 nm or shorter than 800 nm
(¶ 0119).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, Chen teaches the UCL material (30) can be bound or conjugated with biological material, such as a tumor within a human or non-human host (¶ 0158) and to make UCL sensors, probes, or labels, the upconversion luminescence material must be conjugated to a bio-specific ligand and/or have the ability to bind to a biological target (i.e. bioengineered or modified to have a surface state capable of binding to a biological target, such as a protein(¶ 0165). One of ordinary skill in the art, given the present disclosure, would appreciate that the UCL material of the presently claimed and disclosed invention could be used as a biomodified probe or label, wherein the probe or label is specifically a biomodified nanoparticle (¶0165). Moreover, Chen discloses nanoparticle bioconjugates selectively bind to cell components, DNA, or blood proteins and can be detected by strong luminescence which, in turn, is capable of being tuned by altering the particle size (¶ 0167). Furthermore, Chen teaches biomodified nanoparticles from a variety of inorganic materials are known in the art and such biomodified nanoparticles can be used in biological pursuits for luminescence tagging, drug delivery ... (¶ 0164). Therefore, the limitation of wherein the NPs comprise ligands or small molecules bound on the chalcogenide based material and coating is bound to a drug/chalcogenide NPs for a patient undergoing medical treatment is taught.
Chen fails to specifically teach copper selenide nanoparticles.
Klopfer teaches apparatus, systems, and methods using multi-shelled nanostructures can be used in a variety of applications, and in various embodiments, a multi-shelled nanostructure can include one or more light-absorbing and light-emitting cores enclosed by a number of nano-shells, and for a multi-shelled nanostructure
having multiple conductive nano-shells, the nano-shells are separated from each other by a dielectric (abstract).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 9 and 10, the teachings of Klopfer are outlined above.
Klopfer fails to specifically teach hole-doped Cu2-xSe nanoparticles.
Liu teaches intrinsically-doped materials copper chalcogenide comprising Cu2-xS and Cu2-xSe colloidal nanocrystals (NCs) with localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) (entire page 3909 to 3911).
Regarding claim 3, Liu teaches doped semiconductor NCs in which free holes result from the presence of cation vacancies and these are often called self-doping or
self-doped NCs. These intrinsically-doped materials are mainly copper-deficient copper chalcogenide NCs. including copper sulfide (Cu2-xS), copper selenide (Cu2-xSe), copper telluride (Cu2-xTe) and the related alloy NCs) (page 2, column 1). Therefore, the limitation of wherein the copper selenide nanoparticles are hole-doped Cu2-xSe nanoparticles is taught.
Spitzer teaches an energy conversion device directed to a photovoltaic solar cell, wherein the device minimized losses due to non-absorption and thermalization in solar cells by up converting the energies of incident photons prior to absorption by the semiconductor and improves the optical coupling between the semiconductor and an up conversion material (¶ 0006).
Regarding claim 13, Spitzer teaches up conversion composite material is disposed within cavities formed in the photon-absorbing semiconductor material (¶ 0007)...the mixture is embedded in cavities formed in Si (¶ 0031). Therefore, the limitation of wherein the chalcogenide nanoparticles are embedded in the light-sensitive
material is taught.
Regarding claim 16, Spitzer teaches the energy is converted to a form that can be absorbed by Si and in this way, up conversion can increase the photo-generated current of a Si solar cell (¶ 0028). Therefore, the limitation of wherein the device is part of a solar cell or a photosensor is taught.
Spitzer fails to specifically teach perovskite light absorber.
Sum teaches nanocrystal comprising a core comprised in a shell, wherein the core comprises a first material of a perovskite structure (abstract).
Regarding claim 14, Sum teaches a nanocrystal comprising a core comprised in a shell, ... wherein the shell comprises a second material of a perovskite structure (¶ 0013). Therefore, the limitation of the light-sensitive material is a perovskite light absorber is taught.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the device directed to chalcogenide nanoparticles as taught by KR ‘913 and configure the upconversion threshold to less than 9 kW/cm2 of the chalcogenide nanoparticles as taught by Warkentin. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) to use the hole-doped Cu2-xSe nanoparticles of KR ‘913 in view of Warkentin and tune the upconversion threshold to less than 9 kW/cm2 because the upconversion of near infrared light by Cu2−xSe at a low onset flux of approximately 2.0 ± 0.3 kW/cm2 and a lower limit of a quantum yield of at least 1% was observed in this process as taught by Warkentin (¶ conclusion), signifying a potential synergy between the excellent thermoelectric properties of copper-selenide and plasmon-driven heating of Cu2−xSe NC aggregates where thermally generated charges could potentially be involved in the upconverted photoluminescence (UCPL) as taught by Warkentin (page 10, ¶ conclusion). Furthermore, a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Chen and incorporate the copper selenide (chalcogenide nanoparticles) as taught by Klopfer in view of Liu, Spitzer and further in view of Sum to generate upconverted light through plasmon resonance in order to enhance absorption. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) to use the hole-doped Cu2-xSe nanoparticles of Liu with the chalcogenide nanoparticles of the device of Klopfer, to provide enhance absorbance of e absorbance at NIR and mid-lR wavelengths (see Liu, page 11, column 1). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a (PHOSITA) to use the perovskite layer of Sum with the chalcogenide nanoparticles of the device of Spitzer, to enhance the stability, efficiency and brightness of semiconductor nanocrystals, by providing a wider bandgap coating on the nanoparticles (see Sum, ¶ 0012, and ¶ 0014).
One would have been motivated to do so because the combined teachings of KR ‘913, Warkentin, Chen, Klopfer, Liu, Spitzer and Sum, discloses devices comprising chalcogenide nanoparticles and a light-sensitive material configured to absorb upconverted light generated by the chalcogenide nanoparticles. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this because all the references are drawn to chalcogenide nanoparticles for upconversion. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply the different chalcogenides (Cu2-xSe) or perovskite light absorber to improve absorbance and enhance the stability, efficiency and brightness of semiconductor nanocrystals, by providing a broader bandgap coating on the nanoparticles as taught by Liu in view of Sum.
From the combined teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. It is obvious to combine prior art elements according to the known methods to yield predictable results. Please see MPEP 2141 (III)(A)-(G).
Response to Arguments
Applicant Remarks and Arguments filed 12/04/2025 have been fully considered, however are found not persuasive.
Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 102
Applicant argues Klopfer is focused on “two-photon absorption induced fluorescence (TPAF) in semiconductor quantum dots and that TPAF is an entirely different process from “generating upconverted light through plasmon resonance”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Prior to amended claim 1 (filed 11/07/2022), upconverted light was not recited from “generating upconverted light through plasmon resonance”. Regardless, claim 1 and dependent claims are directed to “a device” not what the device does, and the device is the nanoparticles and the light-sensitive material, which are both explicitly taught by Klopfer. Moreover, in specification [027], explicitly states Photon upconversion ( or simply "upconversion") is a process in which lower energy photons are converted into higher-energy photons. In some cases, two lower energy photons are converted into a higher-energy photon having an energy that is the sum of energies of the lower-energy photons. Upconversion has applications in a variety of fields, including solar energy harvesting, photodynamic therapy, thermal
management strategies, and deep-tissue imaging. Thus, in various embodiments, Klopfer teachings of nanoparticle-based absorbers and fluorophores can be provided for numerous high-efficiency absorber and emitter device applications. Emitter device
applications can include the use of TPAF in such nanoparticles for medical applications such as deep-tissue imaging and deep-tissue photodynamic therapy (PDT). For example, plasmonic quantum dot nanoparticle assemblies can be used for such applications (column 5, lines 39-45), and these fluorescent labels can include quantum dots or other light-absorbing and light-emitting structures (column 5, lines 52-53). Thus, the teachings of Klopfer “two-photon absorption induced fluorescence (TPAF) falls within the instant subject matter.
Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 103
Applicant argues Chen, Klopfer, Liu, Spitzer and Sum fails to recognize use of chalcogenide NPs configured to generate upconverted light through plasmon resonance.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Klopfer teaches instant subject matter of photodynamic therapy, photon generated by two-photon upconversion comprising fluorophores can be provided for numerous high-efficiency absorber and emitter device applications (Fig 22; column 5, lines 39-41) comprising light-absorbing and light-emitting cores 2105-1, 2105-2…2105-N can include, but not limited to, organic luminophores,
CdSe, CdS, CdTe, lnAir, lnP, CuS, CuSe…or combination thereof) corresponding to chalcogenide nanoparticles; and a light-sensitive material (2230) configured to absorb unconverted light generated by the chalcogenide nanoparticles and Detection device as stated on page 4 of Office Action filed 09/05/2025. Chen teaches devices directed in general to upconversion luminescence (UCL) materials and methods of making and using same and doped metal chalcogenide (¶ 0092 of Chen) and electron spin resonance (¶ 0087 of Chen), Liu teaches intrinsically-doped materials copper chalcogenide comprising Cu2-xS and Cu2-xSe colloidal nanocrystals (NCs) with localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) (entire page 3909 to 3911), Spitzer teaches an energy conversion device directed to a photovoltaic solar cell, and Sum teaches nanocrystal comprising a core comprised in a shell, wherein the core comprises a first material of a perovskite structure (abstract).
Regarding new limitations of configured to generate upconverted light through plasmon resonance and upconversion threshold less than 9 kW/cm2, newly cited references are cited for the rejections above.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
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 or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE MACH whose telephone number is (571)272-2755. The examiner can normally be reached 0800 - 1700 M-F.
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, Robert A Wax can be reached at 571-272-0323. 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.
/ANDRE MACH/Examiner, Art Unit 1615
/Robert A Wax/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1615