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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-4 and 8-10 recite a microscope “configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to a surface of a sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample” in the preamble. Examiner considers this preamble to be functional, rather than intended use, and therefore includes the structures for applying a first AC voltage to a surface of a sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample, those structures being a probe with tip and a power supply.
Claims 5-7 recite “using an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to the surface of the sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample”. It is considered that this refers to a single step of applying a voltage to the surface of the sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample.
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.
Claims 5-7 are 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 5 recites a method “for mapping an amount of ESM response at a surface of a sample by using an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) … ”. It is unclear whether “using an electrochemical strain microscope …” is intended as a process step or meant to further describe the mapping function.
Claims 5-7 are 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 5 recites “using an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to the surface of the sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample”. This appears to refer to a single step of applying a first AC voltage to the surface of the sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample. Such a step already requires both the structures of an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response, those being a probe with a tip and a power supply. It is therefore unclear what is added by the preface “using an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated”
Claims 5-7 are 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 5 recites “in the mapping, superimposing a second AC voltage on the first AC voltage”. It is unclear what it means for the superimposing to occur “in the mapping”. Mapping the amount of local ESM response is the function of the overall method, and does not occur at particular step, time, or structure, so there is nothing to be “in”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by US 2014/0223614 (Fukuma et al.).
Regaridng claim 1, Fukuma et al. discloses a high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to a surface of a sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample (fig. 3, elements 101 & 104), the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope comprising: an AC voltage source configured to apply a second AC voltage to be superimposed on the first AC voltage and having a frequency higher than a frequency of the first AC voltage (fig. 3, element 102, wherein ‘According to this configuration, the potential measurement device applies, as a bias voltage, a voltage obtained by superimposing two alternating-current voltages of different frequencies, between the probe electrode and the sample.’ P 35).
Regarding claim 2, Fukuma et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 1, wherein the frequency of the second AC voltage is from two times to 1016 times the frequency of the first AC voltage (intended use, AC power supplies are generally able to set the frequencies as desired).
Regarding claim 3, Fukuma et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 1, wherein the frequency of the second AC voltage is from 1 MHz to 10 THz (intended use, AC power supplies capable of these frequencies are generally known).
Regarding claim 4, Fukuma et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 1, wherein the frequency of the first AC voltage is from 1 mHz to 10 MHz (intended use, AC power supplies capable of these frequencies are generally known).
Regarding claim 5, Fukuma et al. discloses a High-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscopy for mapping an amount of ESM response at a surface of a sample by using an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to the surface of the sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample (‘a first power supply applying a first voltage between the electrode and sample;’ abstract), the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscopy comprising: in the mapping, superimposing a second AC voltage on the first AC voltage, the second AC voltage having a frequency higher than a frequency of the first AC voltage (‘a second power supply adding, to the first voltage, a second voltage having a different frequency than the first voltage, and applying the added voltage;’ abstract).
Regarding claim 8, Fukuma et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 2, wherein the frequency of the second AC voltage is from 1 MHz to 10 THz (intended use, AC power supplies capable of these frequencies are generally known).
Regarding claim 9, Fukuma et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 8, wherein the frequency of the first AC voltage is from 1 mHz to 10 MHz (intended use, AC power supplies capable of these frequencies are generally known).
Regarding claim 10, Fukuma et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 2, wherein the frequency of the first AC voltage is from 1 mHz to 10 MHz (intended use, AC power supplies capable of these frequencies are generally known).
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by US 2012/0125783 (Kalinin et al.).
Regarding claim 1, Kalinin et al. discloses a high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to a surface of a sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample (“In one embodiment, a high-frequency periodic voltage Vac is applied to the tip to measure ionic currents resulting from the local redistribution of lithium ions at the LiCoO2 surface (indicated as VAC in FIG. 3C). As previously described, the electric field generated by the application of the periodic voltage VAC alters the local electrochemical potential of the lithium ions within the LiCoO2 surface of sample 16.” P 49), the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope comprising: an AC voltage source configured to apply a second AC voltage to be superimposed on the first AC voltage and having a frequency higher than a frequency of the first AC voltage (‘The application of the periodic single frequency, multiple frequency, or band excitation voltage’ P 49).
Regarding claim 2, Kalinin et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscope according to claim 1, wherein the frequency of the second AC voltage is from two times to 1016 times the frequency of the first AC voltage (intended use, AC power supplies are generally able to set the frequencies as desired).
Regarding claims 3-4 & 8-10, Kalinin et al. discloses the claimed invention, where the specific frequency ranges claimed are intended use. Kalinin et al. also specifically states that the use of many frequencies in the claimed ranges (‘The AC voltage frequency can range from about 1 kHz to about 10 MHz’).
Regarding claim 5, Kalinin et al. discloses a High-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscopy for mapping an amount of ESM response at a surface of a sample by using an electrochemical strain microscope (ESM) configured to map an amount of local ESM response generated by applying a first AC voltage to the surface of the sample with a tip portion of a probe brought into contact with the surface of the sample, the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscopy comprising: in the mapping, superimposing a second AC voltage on the first AC voltage, the second AC voltage having a frequency higher than a frequency of the first AC voltage (“In one embodiment, a high-frequency periodic voltage Vac is applied to the tip to measure ionic currents resulting from the local redistribution of lithium ions at the LiCoO2 surface (indicated as VAC in FIG. 3C). As previously described, the electric field generated by the application of the periodic voltage VAC alters the local electrochemical potential of the lithium ions within the LiCoO2 surface of sample 16. The application of the periodic single frequency, multiple frequency, or band excitation voltage VAC changes the local concentration of the lithium ions, causing the lithium ions to diffuse through the solid, which changes the lattice volume of the LiCoO2 surface at a contact region or area between tip 26 and the LiCoO2 surface ("tip-surface contact").” P 49).
Regarding claim 6, Kalinin et al. discloses the high-frequency enhanced electrochemical strain microscopy according to claim 5, wherein the sample is an ion conductor (‘The specific embodiments described herein relate to the methodology employed to enable real space mapping of ionic diffusion and electrochemical reactivity in Li-ion batteries and in oxygen-ion conductive solid surfaces.’ P 36).
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(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2012/0125783 (Kalinin et al.).
Regarding claim 7, Kalinin et al. discloses the claimed invention except for a insulating sample. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of Kalinin et al. to an insulator if mapping an amount of ESM response of such a sample were desired.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0223614 (Fukuma et al.).
Regarding claim 6, Fukuma et al. discloses the claimed invention except it does not specify the use of an ion conductor for a sample. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of Fukuma et al. to an ion conductor if mapping an amount of ESM response of such a sample were desired.
Regarding claim 7, Fukuma et al. discloses the claimed invention except it does not specify the use of an insulator for a sample. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to apply the method of Fukuma et al. to an insulator if mapping an amount of ESM response of such a sample were desired.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART whose telephone number is (571)270-5782. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6pm Pacific Time M-F.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881