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 .
Claims 15-16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b)
as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking
claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/22/25.
Applicant's election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 04/22/25 is
acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R. Zhang et
al (U. S. Patent Application: 2020/0001587, here after Zhang), further in view of
Katsunori Suzuki et al (Japanese Patent: 6701748, here after Suzuki), Benjamin J.
Brownlee et al, Applied Nano Materials 2020, 3, 10166-10175, here after Brownlee, and L. Ci et al, Nano letters vol. 8, No. 9(2008) 2762-2766, here after Ci.
Claim 1 is rejected. Zhang teaches a method for making a strain sensor
(pressure sensor) [abstract], the method comprising:
growing an iron (Fe) thin catalyst layer with patterns on a top surface of a silicon
oxide isolation layer (native oxide of silicon wafer) [0026] formed on a top surface of a
silicon wafer;
synthesizing a plurality of vertically aligned carbon nanotubes (VACNTs) on top
surfaces of the iron (Fe) thin seed layer (3 nm thick) to form electrodes of the strain
sensor [0039, 0003, 0010, 0012-0013, 0026]; Zhang teaches placing VACNT's onto PDMS and the tips of CNTs are partially immersed into the PDMS, while it is still in liquid form [0040] which in fact first PDMS layer disposed on and between adjacent VCANT if plurality VCANT as Zhang teaches embedded CNTs are eventually wetted by PDMS [0040], peeling the first PDMS layer and the plurality of VACNTs embedded in the first PDMS layer off from the top surface of the silicon oxide isolation layer [0040]. Zhang does not teach forming a second PDMS layer (rubber elastomer) on a bottom surface of the plurality of VACNTs embedded in the first PDMS layer. Suzuki teaches a method of making a strain sensor [page 1, Technical-Field] comprising vertically aligned growth carbon nanotubes impregnated in PDMS and a protective layer comprising PDMS on it, where the second PDMS (protective layer, which is in direct contact with the first PDMS layer) [page 5 lines 6-15]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Zhang, where a PDMS layer is deposited, because it will act as protective layer. Zhang teaches depositing catalysts (Fe) on patterned area and growing carbon nanotubes in a desired pattern [0012], but does not teach pattern being an interdigital finger shape and being formed by an e-beam evaporation and a lift off process. Brownlee teaches growing vertical CNT's on patterned Fe(catalyst) layer, where the pattern being an interdigital finger shape and being formed by an e-beam evaporation and photolithography (including a lift off process) [title, page 10167 column 2, 2.1. Electrode Fabrication, paragraph 1]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Zhang, where the catalyst is patterned as interdigital finger shape formed by an e-beam evaporation and a lift off process, because it is suitable way to pattern Fe catalyst layer for growing VCNT's. Zhang does not teach vacuuming the silicon wafer with VCNT array and PDMS precursor mixer in a vacuum chamber. Ci teaches infiltration of PDMS premixture in carbon nanotubes (VCNT) by placing in vacuum chamber to get ride of bubbles within the polymer and help infiltration process [page 2763 column 2 lines 4-8, 10-12]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Zhang, Suzuki, Brownlee were the CNT and PDMS (on silicon substrate) placed in a vacuum chamber to remove bubbles and air from intervals, because it helps infiltration (enhance filling PDMS performance).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R. Zhang et
al (U. S. Patent Application: 2020/0001587, here after Zhang), Katsunori Suzuki et al
(Japanese Patent: 6701748, here after Suzuki), Benjamin J. Brownlee et al, Applied
Nano Materials 2020, 3, 10166-10175, here after Brownlee, L. Ci et al, Nano letters vol. 8, No. 9(2008) 2762-2766, here after Ci, further in view of Chien-Chao Chiu et al, Surface & coatings technology 200(2006)3215-3219, here after Chiu, and A. Cao et al, Applied Physics Letters 84, (2004)109-111, here after Cao.
Claim 2 is rejected. Zhao teaches the iron (seed) layer is 3 nm thick, and not 2
nm thick. Chiu teaches forming vertically aligned CNTs on silicon substrate comprising
silica layer where an iron catalyst(seed) layer is deposited with thickness of 0.3-3 nm [2.
Experimental]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the invention was made to have a method of Zhang when the catalyst(seed)
layer thickness is 0.3-3nm, because it is suitable thickness range for iron catalyst layer
for growing VACNT's. Overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness. It
would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the
portion of [overlapping range] that corresponds to the claimed range. In re Malagari, 182
USPQ 549 (CCPA 1974). They do not teach the thickness of the silicon substrate is 1
um. However, the thickness of the silicon substrate determines the thickness of the
silicon oxide layer (native oxide) on it in which affect growth rate of CNT's as discussed
by Cao [abstract, conclusion). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Zhang, and
Chiu, and Brownlee where the silicon wafer substrate has predetermined thickness (1
um), because it effects on growth rate of CNT's.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R. Zhang et
al (U. S. Patent Application: 2020/0001587, here after Zhang), Katsunori Suzuki et al
(Japanese Patent: 6701748, here after Suzuki), Benjamin J. Brownlee et al, Applied
Nano Materials 2020, 3, 10166-10175, here after Brownlee, L. Ci et al, Nano letters vol. 8, No. 9(2008) 2762-2766, here after Ci, further in view of Young Chul Choi et al, Applied Physics Letters 76, 17(2000) 2367-2369, here after Choi.
Claim 3 is rejected. Zhang does not teach synthesizing a plurality of VACNTs is
performed by a microwave plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD)
method. Choi teaches synthesis vertically aligned CNTs on silicon substrate using
microwave plasma enhanced chemical vapor to control diameter and density of the
1718 aligned nanotubes [title abstract]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of
Zhang, Brownlee when the aligned nanotubes synthesized by microwave plasma
enhanced CVD, because it is suitable method for making vertically aligned carbon
nanotubes on silicon wafer.
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R.
Zhang et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2020/0001587, here after Zhang), Katsunori
Suzuki et al (Japanese Patent: 6701748, here after Suzuki), Benjamin J. Brownlee et al,
Applied Nano Materials 2020, 3, 10166-10175, here after Brownlee, L. Ci et al, Nano letters vol. 8, No. 9(2008) 2762-2766, here after Ci. further in view of Jong Man Kim et al (Korean Patent: 20180078560, here after Kim).
Claim 4 is rejected. Zhang teaches placing VACNT's onto PDMS and the tips of
CNTs are partially immersed into the PDMS, while it is still in liquid form and degassed
[0040], wherein PDMS is precursor mixer on top and lateral surfaces and therefore
placing PDMS precursor mixer on top and lateral surfaces of the VACNTs to cover the
top and lateral surfaces of the VACNTs. Zhang does not teach the forming first
polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) layer is performed by spinning a first degassed PDMS
precursor mixer on top and lateral surfaces. Kim teaches a method of making pressure
sensor and teaches spin coating PDMS on VACNTSs [page 2 first paragraph, page 4
example 1]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the invention was made to have a method of Zhang, Brownlee when the
PDMS is applied on VACNTs by spin coating, because spin coating can be employed
with expectation of success for disposing PDMS on CNT's.
Claim 5 is rejected as Zhang teaches the PDMS precursor mixer has a ratio of
PDMS base(monomer) to curing agent in a range of about 10:1[0027].
Claim 6 is rejected as Kim teaches the spinning is performed by a spin coater at
a rotation speed of about 150 rotations/minute for about 40 seconds [example 1].
Claim 7 is rejected. Zhang teaches placing VACNT's onto PDMS and the tips of
CNTs are partially immersed into the PDMS, while it is still in liquid form and degassed
[0040], wherein PDMS is precursor mixer on top and lateral surfaces and therefore
placing PDMS precursor mixer on top and lateral surfaces of the VACNTs to cover the
top and lateral surfaces of the VACNTs. Zhang does not teach the forming
polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) layer is performed by spinning (second) PDMS precursor
mixer on top and lateral surfaces. Kim teaches a method of making pressure sensor
and teaches spin coating PDMS on VACNTs [page 2 first paragraph, page 4 example
1]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
the invention was made to have a method of Zhang, Brownlee when the PDMS is
applied on VACNTs by spin coating, because spin coating can be employed with
expectation of success for disposing PDMS on CNT's. Kim teaches forming (second)
PDMS layer is performed by coating (a second) degassed PDMS precursor mixer at a
rotation speed of about 200 rotations/minute for about 40 seconds and curing for about
1 hour and 15 min at a temperature of about 70°C [example 3]. Although Kim does not
teach curing time of 2 hours, however longer curing time is not patentable over prior art
as it does not destroy the layer. Kim does not teach the rotation speed of 2000 rpm.
However, the thickness of the PDMS layer on VACNTs depends on spin rate, viscosity
of PDMS and environment temperature. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of
Zhang, Brownlee and Kim to spin PDMS at much higher rates (2000 rpm) when the
viscosity of PDMS is high in absence of criticality.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-14 are allowed. Claims are allowed for the same reason indicated in
office cation mailed on 06/03/25. The examiner did not find any other reference.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/12/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Zhang does not degassing after depositing PDMS, however Ci teaches it( see claim rejection above).
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 or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights