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 .
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 13 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.
The recitation in claim 13, line 1 of “A quantum memory” renders the claim indefinite. It appears that this should recite “A quantum memory apparatus”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Dial (US 10529909).
Dial teaches an apparatus for spin microwave coupling (quantum bits on the microwave cavity; abstract, col. 3, lines 35-45, col. 10, lines 27-35) comprising a microwave resonator cavity with frequency posts made of a superconductor material (col. 3, lines 30-65). The posts appear to meet the limitation of a galvanic element (aluminum superconductor is able to conduct DC current; col. 3, lines 30-65). Additionally , Dial teaches qubits in proximity to the resonator posts (qubits meet the limitation of a spin element; col. 3, lines 35-45, col. 10, lines 27-35).
Regarding claim 3, it appears that the posts of Dial meet the limitation of including a geometrical current concentration feature as current would be concentrated about the post absent a showing to the contrary. Dial additionally teaches that the spin element is in proximity with the posts. See Dial at col. 3, lines 35-45, col. 10, lines 27-35.
Regarding claims 4-5, Dial teaches that the cavity and the posts (galvanic elements) are superconducting (col. 3, lines 30-65).
Regarding claim 9, it appears that the post of Dial is disposed at an electric field node as an electric field node is a result of the use of the apparatus (i.e. the node is variable).
Regarding claim 10, Dial teaches that the posts and the qubits are integrated on the same substrate (cavity) See fig. 5, #10, 40 of Dial.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dial.
Regarding claim 2, it would have been obvious to modify Dial with proportion parameters of claim 2 as changing proportions/size is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2144.04 (IV) (A).
Regarding claims 6-7, Dial teaches a system of qubits (col. 3, lines 30-65). However, it would have been obvious to provide single qubit system or ensemble of systems as duplication of parts is prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 8, it would have been obvious to provide the posts and the cavity as a single element as integration of parts is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2144.04 (V) (B).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dial in view of Bishop (US 2017/0227795).
Dial teaches a product as described above in claim 10, but fails to teach an optical resonator disposed on the common substrate and coupled to the spin element wherein quantum microwave optical transduction is provided.
Bishop, however, teaches a transducer (abstract) wherein an optical resonator is disposed on the microwave cavity for the purpose of making use of the Pockels effect (para. 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an optical resonator on the microwave cavity (common substrate) in order to make use of the Pockels effect as taught by Bishop.
Additionally, it appears that the prior art of record would necessarily provide quantum microwave optical transduction.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dial in view of Dial in view of Faron (US 2021/0302767).
Dial teaches a product as described above in claim 1, but fails to teach a quantum memory including the apparatus of claim 1.
Faron, however, teaches an quantum memory apparatus (para. 0027) comprising a microwave cavity (abstract; para. 0015).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Dial as part of a quantum memory apparatus in order to provide a configuration known in the art as taught by Faron.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest indium bump bonds between the common substrate and the microwave cavity resonator in combination with the limitations of claims 1 and 10-11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL A WARTALOWICZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am - 5 pm.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights