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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/24/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 4 recites “said tunnel coupling allowing exchange of one or more charged particles between the first subsystem and the second subsystem and being modulated by a gate voltage applied to one or more gates configured to form a potential barrier between the first subsystem and the second subsystem”. The claim is indefinite because while claim 4 begins by reciting an apparatus, claim 4 further includes a method of using the structure in an operation process. The claim is not considered a product by process claim because the claim does not state that any feature was made using application of gate voltages. The claim recites that the apparatus is used in applying a gate voltage to one or more gates configured to form a potential barrier between the first subsystem and the second subsystem.
A single claim that includes both an apparatus and a method of using the apparatus is indefinite (See MPEP 2173.05(p)(II)). It is unclear if infringement would occur when the semiconductor device is created as an apparatus or when the device is used in applying a gate voltage to one or more gates. For the purposes of examination the process limitation will be treated as an intended result limitation (i.e. the apparatus must be capable of being used in applying a gate voltage to one or more gates).
Suggestion:
A system comprising a first subsystem and a second subsystem, the first subsystem and/or the second subsystem configured to contain zero, one or more charged particles, a tunnel coupling existing between the first subsystem and the second subsystem, said tunnel coupling allowing exchange of one or more charged particles between the first subsystem and the second subsystem and configured to be modulated by a gate voltage applied to one or more gates configured to form a potential barrier between the first subsystem and the second subsystem, the system also comprising a charge-state detector comprising an electrometer configured to measure a charge state of the first subsystem and/or the second subsystem, the system also comprising a controller comprising one or more processors and memory storing instructions that cause the controller to execute the steps of the method according to claim 1.
The use of “configured to” makes the clause functional language and would overcome the rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3 and 6 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art (Maune, B., Borselli, M., Huang, B. et al. Coherent singlet-triplet oscillations in a silicon-based double quantum dot. Nature 481, 344–347 (2012). “Maune”) teaches simulations and physical systems capable of a method for determining a conversion factor between a voltage applied to a plurality of gates of a system and a potential difference between a first quantum dot and a second quantum dot of a pair of quantum dots, the system comprising a physical device including the pair of quantum dots (quantum dots formed in the 2DEG Fig. 1) containing two charged particles and including a first quantum dot and a second quantum dot (paragraph 2 of Main section of Maune), the plurality of gates (electrostatic gates Fig. 1), a charge-state detector comprising an electrometer arranged to measure a charge state of the first quantum dot and/or the second quantum dot (charge states in each QD is measured therefore it is inherent that a sensor for this measurement exists in the system), and a microwave source coupled to the system, a tunnel coupling existing between the first quantum dot and the second quantum dot, said plurality of gates being arranged to modulate (i) the potential difference between the first quantum dot and the second quantum dot being modulated using the plurality of gates and (ii) a tunnel coupling between the first quantum dot and the second quantum dot, a set of voltages applied to said gates of the plurality of gates defining an operating point of the system, the pair of quantum dots being in one charge state selected from a charge state {2,0}, a charge state {1,1} and a charge state {0,2}, and both charged particles adopting a two-particle spin state selected from: either a spin state selected from (i) a product spin state denoted "ud" or "du", with u representing an "up" spin state and d representing a "down" spin state corresponding, in the charge state { 1,1}, to one of the two charged particles being in an "up" spin state and the other of the two charged particles being in a "down" spin state, (ii) a singlet spin state S in a ground state or a plurality of excited states, (iii) a triplet spin state TO, and (iv) a triplet spin state T+/T- (See Maune).
However, Maune does not explicitly teach nor render obvious all of the limitations above and additionally a step of initialising the system in a reading operating point associated with a fully isolated regime and the charge state {2,0} and the singlet spin state S; a step of modifying the operating point so as to reach an additional operating point to be characterised, said modifying being non-adiabatically carried out so as to cause a coherent oscillation of the spin state of the charged particles as a function of the tunnel coupling between both quantum dots at the additional operating point to be characterised; a step of waiting, under microwave excitation applied to the system by the microwave source, at the additional operating point to be characterised for a randomly chosen duration in the interval
1
f
R
a
b
ⅈ
m
a
x
,
1
f
R
a
b
i
m
i
n
,so as to let the spin state of the charged particles freely oscillate in a coherent manner, where
f
R
a
b
ⅈ
m
a
x
is the maximum oscillation speed between the singlet spin state S and the triplet spin state TO and/or the triplet spin state T+/T- and
f
R
a
b
i
m
i
n
is the minimum oscillation speed between the singlet spin state S and the triplet spin state TO and/or the triplet spin state T+/T-;- a spin/charge conversion step using a conversion operating point; and- a step of determining a converted charge state resulting from the spin/charge conversion step by measuring, using the electrometer, the charge state of the first quantum dot and/or the second quantum dot at using the reading operating point in the fully isolated regime in which, for a reference duration, no exchange of charged particles is possible between the quantum dots of the pair of quantum dots; said steps being repeated for a plurality of additional operating points to be characterised and a plurality of times for each of these additional operating points so as to determine, for each of these additional operating points, the probability of measuring a singlet state S; the method then comprising:- a step of identifying at least one line of excited states in a stability diagram of the pair of quantum dots; the preceding steps being repeated for a plurality of operating points located on a same line perpendicular to the line of excited states and passing through said line of excited states and for a plurality of frequencies of the microwave excitation so as to characterise the line of excited states due to the microwave excitation and its course as a function of the frequency of the microwave excitation applied to the system; the method then comprising:- a step of determining, from this course, the conversion factor between the voltage applied to the plurality of gates of the system and the potential difference s between both quantum dots of the pair of quantum dots, and- a step of applying, based on the determined conversion factor, at least one voltage to the plurality of gates of the system so as to set the pair of quantum dots to a target operating point corresponding to a target value of the potential difference s, and performing, at the target operating point, at least one of: (i) a measurement of a charge state of the first quantum dot and/or the second quantum dot using the electrometer; and (ii) a manipulation of the first quantum dot and/or the second quantum dot using the plurality of gates and/or the microwave source.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIGITTE A PATERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1752. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, William Kraig can be reached at 571-272-8660. 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.
BRIGITTE A. PATERSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896
/BRIGITTE A PATERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights