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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, filed 2/25/2026, have been fully considered and reviewed by the examiner. The examiner notes the amendments to claims and the prior 112(b) rejection have been withdrawn. Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s generally argue that passivating a surface with precursor 1 and pulsing precursor 2 completes a surface reaction in the first chamber to form a monolayer containing ZnO and TiO2 is supported by the specification. The examiner disagrees and notes the applicants fail to appreciate the requirements of the claims, specifically that the monolayer itself includes both ZnO and TiO2 and there is no disclosure in the original disclosure that would support a single monolayer (that which results from passivating and pulsing) can include these two materials.
Even taking the applicant’s position of a unique process of forming a monolayer through passivating and purging, citing 0044, “these precursors react - one precursor can include zinc and titanium put down through the passivating and the other precursor can be pulsed to react with the first to form the oxide in a monolayer. (listing titanium and zinc compounds in precursors, and "Precursor 1 is the organometallic and the precursor 2 is the reactant that completes the reaction to make it an oxide, nitride”), this does not provide support for a single monolayer comprising both ZnO and TiO2, at best is supports a single monolayer of ZnO and a single monolayer of TiO2.
Applicant’s reliance on Table 9 and 0068 which applicant argues discloses ZnO and TiO2 layers together and “the top layer” being TiO2-ZnO and therefore the monolayer containing ZnO and TiO2 is supported. Here, it is not the examiners position that the specification does not disclose these materials are used together (or a nanolaminate comprising each material as a layer or monolayer individually), as Figure 3 illustrates that these materials can be sequentially deposited as layers to form a nanolaminate of multiple monolayers, it is the examiners position that nowhere does the specification or original disclose that these two materials are within a single monolayer as a result of the pulse of a precursor 1 and precursor 2 (this sequence is claimed as forming a monolayer), nor does the specification provide the proper guidance that would suggest that a single monolayer of these two materials can be formed by the claimed pulse of a precursor 1 and precursor 2. The mere disclosure of “the top layer” does not support the amendment which requires the deposited monolayer to include both TiO2-ZnO, see 0070 which discloses “ZnO and TiO2 layers together” and such layers were studied in Table 9. Therefore Table 9 merely evaluates the ZnO and TiO2 layers are individual layers (i.e. see Figure 3 and accompanying text) when used together as the top layer of films.
Applicant’s arguments that precursor 1 can include zinc and titanium as a passivating agent and the other can be reactant to form the oxide in monolayer is noted, but not supported by the disclosure. The examiner can not locate any disclosure in the specification that zinc and titanium can be used together to form a passivation layer forming one monolayer to be thereafter oxidized to form the monolayer comprising TiO2 and ZnO. The generic disclosure is insufficient to support this very specific embodiment as the disclosure only discloses individual layers of TiO2 and ZnO in sequence, each layer formed by passivating with a precursor and each formed of a plurality of individual monolayers of TiO2 and ZnO respectively.
A full review of the specification does not provide support for the applicant’s claims, which require a monolayer to include both TiO2 and ZnO by passivating by pulsing precursor 1, purging with a carrier gas, pulsing with a precursor 2 that complete the surface reaction, followed by purging. Nor does the original disclosure support repeating this monolayer deposition to based on the thickness of the atomic layers.
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1-20 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.
Claim 1 requires “wherein the passivating and pulsing form one monolayer containing deposited zinc oxide and titanium dioxide” is deemed new matter as the monolayer is formed by the claimed sequence is now required to include both zinc oxide and titanium dioxide; however, the original disclosure does not provide a disclosure that a supplying of passivating with precursor 1 pulse, purge, pulsing precursor 2 and purge form a monolayer containing deposited zinc oxide and titanium oxide. Here, a full review of the original disclosure fails to support the instant claim “one monolayer containing deposited zinc oxide and titanium dioxide” using the claimed process of passivating and pulsing, nor that such can be repeated multiple times. While Figure 3 and accompanying text illustrates the presence of TiO2 and ZnO in the nanolaminate, such are individual layers and not monolayers (see e.g. 0062-0063) by depositing TiO2 and ZnO individual layers but there is no disclosure that one monolayer can or does contain both TiO2 and ZnO.
Claim 4 requires various precursor 1 or precursor 2 compounds with varying organometals (see e.g. Mo, Ta, Ni, Mo, W, Pt, Ag, Au, etc.) and it is unclear how these precursor 1 or precursor 2 compounds are utilized to form a monolayer of TiO2 and ZnO and there is no disclosure of using these varying organometals to perform such a deposition and as such this is deemed new matter.
Conclusion
Nanolaminates with layers including both TiO2 and ZnO and metal inclusive overcoat by ALD and PVD are taught by US Patent Application Publication 20220154335 by Chatterjee (0036, 0057).
Antimicrobial nanolaminates with ALD deposited ZnO and TiO2 is taught by US Patent Application Publication 20220098730 by Mane et al.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DAVID P TUROCY whose telephone number is (571)272-2940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Tues, Thurs, and Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
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 on 571-272-5166. 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.
/DAVID P TUROCY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718