DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant’s amendments filed 24 May 2023 have been entered into the record. The applicant has cancelled Claims 7 and 11. New claims 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 are also entered into the record. Currently, Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 are pending and under examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ladam et al.
Ladam et al. (“One-pot ball-milling synthesis of a Ni-Ti-Si based composite as anode material for Li-ion batteries,” Electrochim. Acta 2017, 245, 497-504) is directed toward an anode for Li-batteries.
Regarding Claim 1, Ladam discloses an electrode comprising a carrier (analogous to the copper foil of the anode on pg. 498: 2. Experimental Section) with the electrode having particles of a ternary alloy of silicon-titanium-nickel (SixTiyNiz) on the outer surface as supported by the XRD and elemental analyses of “Material A” and “Material B” (pg. 499: Fig. 1 and pg. 499 and pg. 501: 3. Results and Discussion Section). Ladam et al. further discloses that the ternary alloy is formed by planetary mixing of stoichiometric amounts of each element (pg. 498: 2. Experimental Section and pg. 499: Results and Discussion Section) resulting in a Material A having a stoichiometry of Si7Ti4Ni4 and Material B having an overall stoichiometry of Si19Ti3Ni3 (normalized to 25 mol of alloy having the composition Si0.76Ti0.12Ni0.12). Both materials satisfy the claim limitation of SixTiyNiz wherein x, y and z are natural numbers less than or equal to 100. Pertaining to the particles forming protrusions of the alloy, Ladam et al. provides support for that limitation of Claim 1 in the supplementary information in Fig. S1 (SEM image of Material A), Fig. S2 (SEM image of Material B) and Fig. S3 (EDS map of Material B).
Regarding Claim 5, Ladam et al. discloses the electrode of Claim 1. Wherein the protrusions of the alloy have a size of less than 5 microns as evidenced by pg. 499 in the Results and Discussion section where it is says the SEM image shows the granular structure of the particles with a broad size distribution, most of them having a submicrometer size (pictured in the SEM images in Fig. S1 and Fig. S2 of the supporting information). A prima facie case of anticipation exists when the prior art discloses an example which is within the claimed range. See 2131.03(I) - A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE IN THE PRIOR ART WHICH IS WITHIN A CLAIMED RANGE ANTICIPATES THE RANGE.
Regarding Claim 14, Ladam et al. discloses the electrode according to Claim 5, wherein the protrusions of the alloy have a size ranging from 150 nm to 1 micron as evidenced by pg. 499 in the Results and Discussion section where it is says the SEM image shows the granular structure of the particles with a broad size distribution, most of them having a submicrometer size (pictured in the SEM images in Fig. S1 and Fig. S2 of the supporting information). A prima facie case of anticipation exists when the prior art discloses an example which is within the claimed range. See 2131.03(I) - A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE IN THE PRIOR ART WHICH IS WITHIN A CLAIMED RANGE ANTICIPATES THE RANGE
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1, 2, 3, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.
Ladam et al. (“One-pot ball-milling synthesis of a Ni-Ti-Si based composite as anode material for Li-ion batteries,” Electrochim. Acta 2017, 245, 497-504) is directed toward an anode for Li-batteries (pg. 497: title). Liu et al. (“Ti-Si photocatalyst for producing hydrogen synthesized by shock wave,” AIP Conf. Proc. 2012, 1426, 1403-1406) is directed toward Ti-Si photocatalysts (pg. 1403: title). Ritterskamp et al. (“A Titanium Disilicide Derived Semiconducting Catalyst for Water Splitting under Solar Radiation—Reversible Storage of Oxygen and Hydrogen,” Agnew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46(41), 7770-7774 and electronic supporting information) is directed toward a catalyst for water splitting (pg. 7770: title).
Regarding Claim 1, Ladam discloses an electrode comprising a carrier (analogous to the copper foil of the anode on pg. 498: 2. Experimental Section) with the electrode having particles of a ternary alloy of silicon-titanium-nickel (SixTiyNiz) on the outer surface as supported by the XRD and elemental analyses of “Material A” and “Material B” (pg. 499: Fig. 1 and pg. 499 and pg. 501: 3. Results and Discussion Section). Ladam et al. further discloses that the ternary alloy is formed by planetary mixing of stoichiometric amount of each element (pg. 498: 2. Experimental Section and pg. 499: Results and Discussion Section) resulting in a Material A having a stoichiometry of Si7Ti4Ni4 and Material B having an overall stoichiometry of Si19Ti3Ni3 (normalized to 25 mol of alloy having the composition Si0.76Ti0.12Ni0.12). Both materials satisfy the claim limitation of SixTiyNiz wherein x, y and z are natural numbers less than or equal to 100. Pertaining the particles forming protrusions of the alloy, Ladam et al. provides support for that limitation of Claim 1 in the supplementary information in Fig. S1 (SEM image of Material A), Fig. S2 (SEM image of Material B) and Fig. S3 (EDS map of Material B).
The instant application is directed toward photocatalysis using a ternary alloy of Si-Ti-Ni and Ladam et al. does not expressly discuss the use of the STN-ternary alloy in a photoelectrode. In the characterization of Material B (i.e.: Si19Ti3Ni3), Ladam et al. indicates that multiple different intermetallic domains exist within the ternary alloy including: Ti5Si3, NiTi, TiSi2, or NiSi2. Various titanium silicides including Ti5Si3 and TiSi2 are known to exhibit photocatalytic activity toward water.
Liu et al. indicated that synthesis of Ti5Si3 or TiSi2 was confirmed by XRD (pg. 1404: Figure 2) and both are effective catalysts for the photocatalytic formation of hydrogen from water with Ti5Si3 being a superior catalyst (pg. 1403: abstract and pg. 1405: Figure 4). Liu et al. clearly indicates that the aforementioned titanium silicides are capable of forming hydrogen, thus functioning as a cathodic photocatalyst (i.e.: reduction).
Ritterskamp et al. discloses that TiSi2 particles when exposed to water while illuminated with a halogen lamp result in the formation of oxygen and hydrogen from water (pg. 7771: Figure 3). Moreover, Ritterskamp et al. provides experimental evidence in Table 1 (pg. 7772) showing that hydrogen and oxygen both form in the presence of illuminated TiSi2. Ritterskamp et al. clearly indicates TiSi2 is capable of forming hydrogen, thus functioning as a cathodic photocatalyst (i.e.: reduction) and is capable of forming oxygen, thus functioning as a anodic photocatalyst (i.e.: oxidation).
Therefore, Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. both provide evidentiary support that Material B of Ladam et al. is capable of being both a photocathode and a photoanode as the intermetallic species of Ti-Si are known to have photocatalytic hydrogen evolution activity and photocatalytic oxygen evolution activity from water.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the Si-Ti-Ni electrode of Ladam et al. as a photoelectrode with the reasonable expectation of splitting water given intermetallic species present in the Si-Ti-Ni alloy of Ladam et al.
Regarding Claim 2, Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. discloses the electrode as per Claim 1, where the STN-ternary alloy is part of a photoelectrode as evidenced by the ability to generate hydrogen and oxygen from water under illumination (see: Ritterskamp et al. on pg. 7771: Figure 3 and (pg. 7772: Table 1). Ritterskamp et al. clearly indicates TiSi2 is capable of forming hydrogen, thus functioning as a cathodic photocatalyst (i.e.: reduction) and is capable of forming oxygen, thus functioning as a anodic photocatalyst (i.e.: oxidation).
Regarding Claim 3, Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. disclose the electrode of Claim 1, wherein the electrode is a photocathode as supported by both Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. which show that the intermetallic Ti-Si species (e.g.: Ti5Si3 and TiSi2) present in the ternary alloy of Ladam et al. have photocatalytic hydrogen evolution activity (title and abstract of both references).
Regarding Claim 13, Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. disclose the electrode of Claim 1, wherein the electrode is a photoanode as supported by Ritterskamp et al. which show that the intermetallic Ti-Si species (e.g.: TiSi2) present in the ternary alloy of Ladam et al. has oxygen evolution activity (title and abstract of Ritterskamp).
8. Claims 4, 6, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.
as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Vijselaar et al.
Ladam et al. (“One-pot ball-milling synthesis of a Ni-Ti-Si based composite as anode material for Li-ion batteries,” Electrochim. Acta 2017, 245, 497-504) is directed toward an anode for Li-batteries (pg. 497: title). Liu et al. (“Ti-Si photocatalyst for producing hydrogen synthesized by shock wave,” AIP Conf. Proc. 2012, 1426, 1403-1406) is directed toward Ti-Si photocatalysts (pg. 1403: title). Ritterskamp et al. (“A Titanium Disilicide Derived Semiconducting Catalyst for Water Splitting under Solar Radiation—Reversible Storage of Oxygen and Hydrogen,” Agnew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46(41), 7770-7774 and electronic supporting information) is directed toward a catalyst for water splitting (pg. 7770: title). Vijselaar et al. (“Efficient and Stable Silicon Microwire Photocathodes with a Nickel Silicide Interlayer for Operation in Strongly Alkaline Solutions,” ACS Energy Lett. 2018, 3, 1086-1092) is directed toward a photocathode (pg. 1086: title).
Regarding Claim 4, Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. disclose the electrode of Claim 1, but the carrier is copper (and not a silicon).
Vijselaar et al. is directed toward a photocathode having a silicon base material with a Ni-based photocatalytic layer with a nickel silicide interlayer (pg. 1086: abstract). Vijselaar et al. is directed toward a photocathode that forms hydrogen in (alkaline) water under light application so it is equivalent art to Ladam et al. with the evidentiary support of Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. Vijselaar et al. further indicates that the light-absorbing carrier (e.g.: the p-n silicon microwire array) has a high surface area (pg. 1087: Scheme 1 and pg. 1088: Figure 1) and using conformal coating process (e.g.: ALD) to deposit a smooth nickel improved catalytic activity (pg. 1090). Vijselaar et al. found that a NiSi interlayer formed between the microwire array and the Ni-based photocatalyst, and said interlayer improved the electrical conductivity of the system (pg. 1087).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the (photo)electrode of Ladam et al. (with support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) by replacing the copper carrier with the p-n Si microwire array with a NiSi interlayer as taught by Vijselaar et al. with the reasonable expectation of improving the photocatalytic activity for hydrogen evolution given the high surface area of the Si carrier and the highly conductive NiSi interlayer.
Regarding Claim 6, Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. disclose the electrode of Claim 1 as a photoelectrode, but does not disclose its use in a photoelectrochemical cell.
Vijselaar et al. is directed toward a photocathode having a silicon base material with a Ni-based catalytic layer with a nickel silicide interlayer (pg. 1086: abstract). Vijselaar et al. is directed toward a photocathode that forms hydrogen in (alkaline) water under light application so it is equivalent art to Ladam et al. with the evidentiary support of Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. Vijselaar et al. further indicates that the light-absorbing p-n silicon microwire array has a high surface area (pg. 1087: Scheme 1 and pg. 1088: Figure 1) and using conformal coating process (e.g.: ALD) to deposit a smooth nickel improved catalytic activity (pg. 1090). Vijselaar et al. found that a NiSi interlayer formed between the microwire array and the Ni-based catalyst, and said interlayer improved the electrical conductivity of the system (pg. 1087).
Vijselaar et al. further discloses a photoelectrochemical cell as described in the supporting information on pg. S6 to pg. S8 in the JE Measurements section. The photoelectrochemical cell comprised the coated photocathode as the working electrode, a platinum wire mesh as the counter electrode and an Ag/AgCl electrode as the reference electrode with an electrolyte of M potassium hydroxide (KOH) (pg. S6). JE measurements in Vijselaar et al. were conducted under illumination using a 300 W xenon arc light source (pg. S7). According to Vijselaar et al., the cell was heated to the desired temperature, after which a linear sweep from right to left (i.e. 0.6 V to -0.1 V vs. RHE) was performed under AM 1.5 G simulated solar light (pg. S7-S8).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the (photo)electrode of Ladam et al. (with support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) by replacing the copper carrier with the p-n Si microwire array with a NiSi interlayer as taught by Vijselaar et al. and then use that photocathode in the photoelectrochemical cell of Vijselaar et al. with the reasonable expectation of improving the photocatalytic activity of the cell given the high surface area of the Si carrier and the highly conductive NiSi interlayer.
Regarding Claim 12, Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. disclose the electrode of Claim 1 as a photoelectrode, but does not disclose the carrier is a photo absorber.
Vijselaar et al. is directed toward a photocathode having a silicon base material with a Ni-based catalytic layer with a nickel silicide interlayer (pg. 1086: abstract). Vijselaar et al. is directed toward a photocathode that forms hydrogen in (alkaline) water under light application so it is equivalent art to Ladam et al. with the evidentiary support of Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. Vijselaar et al. further indicates that the light-absorbing p-n silicon microwire array (analogous to photo absorber limitation of Claim 14) has a high surface area (pg. 1087: Scheme 1 and pg. 1088: Figure 1) and using conformal coating process (e.g.: ALD) to deposit a smooth nickel improved catalytic activity (pg. 1090). Vijselaar et al. found that a NiSi interlayer formed between the microwire array and the Ni-based catalyst, and said interlayer improved the electrical conductivity of the system (pg. 1087).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the (photo)electrode of Ladam et al. (with support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) by replacing the copper carrier with the p-n Si microwire array with a NiSi interlayer as taught by Vijselaar et al. with the reasonable expectation of improving the photocatalytic activity for hydrogen evolution given the high surface area of the Si carrier and the highly conductive NiSi interlayer.
9. Claims 8, 9, 10, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritter and further in view of Lichterman et al. and Hu et al.
Ladam et al. (“One-pot ball-milling synthesis of a Ni-Ti-Si based composite as anode material for Li-ion batteries,” Electrochim. Acta 2017, 245, 497-504) is directed toward an anode for Li-batteries (pg. 497: title). Liu et al. (“Ti-Si photocatalyst for producing hydrogen synthesized by shock wave,” AIP Conf. Proc. 2012, 1426, 1403-1406) is directed toward Ti-Si photocatalysts (pg. 1403: title). Ritterskamp et al. (“A Titanium Disilicide Derived Semiconducting Catalyst for Water Splitting under Solar Radiation—Reversible Storage of Oxygen and Hydrogen,” Agnew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46(41), 7770-7774 and electronic supporting information) is directed toward a catalyst for water splitting (pg. 7770: title).
Lichterman et al. (“An Electrochemical, Micro topographical and Ambient Pressure X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopic Investigation of Si/TiO2/Ni/Electrolyte Interfaces,” J. Electrochem. Soc. 2016, 163(2), H139-H146) is directed toward the preparation of an electrode (pg. H139: title and abstract). Hu et al. (“The 1100 °C Isothermal Section of the Ti-Ni-Si Ternary System,” J. Phase Equilar. 1999, 20(5), 508-514) is directed at the phase composition of Ti-Ni-Si alloys (pg. 508: title).
Regarding Claim 8, Ladam discloses an electrode comprising a carrier (analogous to the copper foil of the anode on pg. 498: 2. Experimental Section) with the electrode having particles of a ternary alloy of silicon-titanium-nickel (SixTiyNiz) on the outer surface as supported by the XRD and elemental analyses of “Material A” and “Material B” (pg. 499: Fig. 1 and pg. 499 and pg. 501: 3. Results and Discussion Section). Ladam et al. further discloses that the ternary alloy is formed by the method of planetary mixing of each element in a specified ratio (pg. 498: 2. Experimental Section and pg. 499: Results and Discussion Section) resulting in a Material A having a stoichiometry of Si7Ti4Ni4 and Material B having an overall stoichiometry of Si19Ti3Ni3 (normalized to 25 mol of alloy having the composition Si0.76Ti0.12Ni0.12). Both materials satisfy the claim limitation of SixTiyNiz wherein x, y and z are natural numbers less than or equal to 100.
The instant application is directed toward photocatalysis using a ternary alloy of Si-Ti-Ni and Ladam et al. does not expressly discuss the use of the STN-ternary alloy in a photoelectrode. In the characterization of Material B (i.e.: Si19Ti3Ni3), Ladam et al. indicates that multiple different intermetallic domains exist within the ternary alloy including: Ti5Si3, NiTi, TiSi2, or NiSi2. Various titanium silicides including Ti5Si3 and TiSi2 are known to exhibit photocatalytic activity toward water.
Liu et al. indicated that synthesis of Ti5Si3 or TiSi2 was confirmed by XRD (pg. 1404: Figure 2) and both are effective catalysts for the photocatalytic formation of hydrogen from water with Ti5Si3 being a superior catalyst (pg. 1403: abstract and pg. 1405: Figure 4). Liu et al. clearly indicates that the aforementioned titanium silicides are capable of forming hydrogen, thus functioning as a cathodic photocatalyst (i.e.: reduction).
Ritterskamp et al. discloses that TiSi2 particles when exposed to water while illuminated with a halogen lamp result in the formation of oxygen and hydrogen from water (pg. 7771: Figure 3). Moreover, Ritterskamp et al. provides experimental evidence in Table 1 (pg. 7772) showing that hydrogen and oxygen both form in the presence of illuminated TiSi2. Ritterskamp et al. clearly indicates TiSi2 is capable of forming hydrogen, thus functioning as a cathodic photocatalyst (i.e.: reduction) and is capable of forming oxygen, thus functioning as a anodic photocatalyst (i.e.: oxidation).
Therefore, Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. provide evidentiary support that Material B of Ladam et al. is capable of being both a photocathode or a photoanode as the intermetallic species of Ti-Si are known to have photocatalytic hydrogen evolution activity and/or photocatalytic oxygen evolution activity for water.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the Si-Ti-Ni electrode of Ladam et al. as a photoelectrode with the reasonable expectation of splitting water given intermetallic species present in the Si-Ti-Ni alloy of Ladam et al. However, the method of Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al. does not teach a method of having a step of heating a carrier comprising a surface comprising a layer of silicon on which a layer of TiO2 is arranged, the layer of TiO2 being covered with a layer of NiO; the heating step being carried out at a temperature above 1000 degrees Celsius.
Pertaining to the layered structure in the method Claim 8, a material having the layered structure of Si then TiO2, and NiO is disclosed by Lichterman et al. as supported by Fig. 1a (pg. H140) and Fig. 5a (pg. H143). The presence of NiO is supported on pg. H145 in the conclusion of Lichterman et al. Given the relative thicknesses of each layer, Si has a higher concentration than either Ti or Ni. Lichterman et al. indicates that the thicknesses of the layers can be controlled since TiO2 is applied using ALD and the NiO is applied using RF sputtering (pg. H140: Experimental Section). However, Lichterman et al. does not disclose a heating step of the layered structure.
Hu et al. discloses the formation of a ternary alloy of Si-Ti-Ni by applying an annealing step to mixtures of silicon, titanium, and nickel species with different stoichiometric ratios (pg. 508: abstract). The annealing step is at 1100 degrees Celsius (pg. 509: 3. Experimental section). Therefore, Hu et al. discloses the heating step and temperature of Claim 8.
Hu et al. discloses an alloy (No. 22) having a higher concentration of Si than either Ni or Ti with a specific composition of Si63Ti32Ni5 which has intermetallic or phases of TiSi2 and Si7Ti4Ni4 as indicated in pg. 510: Table 2 and pg. 513: Fig. 3. Similarly, Hu et al. discloses other alloys (e.g.: No. 30, No. 31, No. 37, No. 40) having higher concentrations of Ti relative to either Ni or Si with the formation of the Ti5Si3 phase forming among other phases (pg. 510: Table 2). Therefore, Hu et al. teaches that selection of the stoichiometry of the ternary alloys allows for selection of the intermetallic species that form after annealing.
Combining the layered deposition steps of Lichterman et al. with the heating step of Hu et al. would allow the skilled artisan to synthesize a Si-Ti-Ni ternary alloy of varying stoichiometry (i.e.: ratios of each element) and varying intermetallic composition (i.e.: Ti5Si3 or TiSi2) with selection of both parameters as part of routine optimization with said selection depending upon the end use/application (See MPEP 2144.05(II) – Routine Optimization). When the method of Lichterman et al. and Hu et al. is applied to the formation or Si-Ti-Ni alloys for photocatalysis as taught by Ladam et al. with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al., one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to deposit a layered structure with a stoichiometry that when annealed results in the formation of intermetallic species such as TiSi2 and Ti5Si3 as these are known photocathodes for the photoelectrochemical production of hydrogen from water and optimization of the formation of said titanium silicides would result in increased photocatalytic activity for HER.
Regarding Claim 9, Ladam et al. (with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) and further in view of Lichterman et al. and Hu et al. discloses the method according to Claim 8, wherein at least one of the layers of TiO2 and NiO is applied by using the ALD technique as supported by Lichterman et al. where TiO2 is applied to the silicon carrier using ALD (pg. H140: Experimental) where titanium(IV) dimethylamide is the TiO2 precursor molecule.
Regarding Claim 10, Ladam et al. (with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) and further in view of Lichterman et al. and Hu et al. discloses the method according to Claim 8, wherein the layer of TiO2 has a thickness of ~70 nm and NiO has a thickness ranging up to 10 nm as supported by Figure 3 in Lichterman et al. (pg. H141). A prima facie case of obviousness exists when the prior art discloses a range that is overlapping with the claimed ranged. See MPEP 2144.05(I) - OVERLAPPING, APPROACHING, AND SIMILAR RANGES, AMOUNTS, AND PROPORTIONS
Regarding Claim 15, Ladam et al. (with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) and further in view of Lichterman et al. and Hu et al. discloses the method according to Claim 8, wherein the temperature ranges from 1150 degrees Celsius to 1250 degrees Celsius as evidenced by Hu et al. on pg. 508 in the abstract and pg. 509 in the section. 3. Experimental (where the annealing temperature is 1100 degrees Celsius. A prima facie case of obviousness exists when the prior art discloses a range that is approaching the claimed ranged. See MPEP 2144.05(I) - OVERLAPPING, APPROACHING, AND SIMILAR RANGES, AMOUNTS, AND PROPORTIONS.
Regarding Claim 16, Ladam et al. (with evidentiary support from Liu et al. and Ritterskamp et al.) and further in view of Lichterman et al. and Hu et al. discloses the method according to Claim 10, wherein the NiO layer has a thickness ranging up to 10 nm as supported by Figure 3 and deposition rate of 2 nm per minute in Lichterman et al. (pg. H141). A prima facie case of obviousness exists when the prior art discloses a range that overlaps with the claimed ranged. See MPEP 2144.05(I) - OVERLAPPING, APPROACHING, AND SIMILAR RANGES, AMOUNTS, AND PROPORTIONS.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN SYLVESTER whose telephone number is 703-756-5536. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:15 AM to 4:30 PM EST.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
11. 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.
/KEVIN SYLVESTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
/JAMES LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights