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 Arguments
This office action is in response to “Remarks - 06/12/2026 - Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment” filed with “Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject - 06/12/2026 ”.
This office action considers claims 1-19 pending for prosecution, of which, non-elected claims 17-19 were withdrawn, and elected claims 1-16 are presented for further examination.
Applicant's arguments, Minet does not disclose “a resonant structure suspended within the cavity and mechanically supported by the cavity, the resonant structure comprising at least one end that is freely suspended within the cavity.” regarding claim 1 (remarks on pages 2), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in section 1, below.
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 of this title, 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 invention.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (110; Fig 3; [0051] or C 18, L 18-37)= (element 110; Figure No. 3; Paragraph No. [0051]) or Column No 18, Line Nos. 18-17. For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” or “Column No, Line Nos" shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. The cited numerals or paragraphs of primary reference, for example, Schoelkopf in this document, is not preceded with Schoelkopf. These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoelkopf, III; Robert J et al., (US 20150372217 A1) hereinafter Schoelkopf; in view of IAN; Hou et al., (US 20190034819 A1) hereinafter Ian
Regarding Claim 1. Schoelkopf teaches an electromagnetic resonator (300 or 400; Figs 3-4) comprising (see the entire document, Figs 3-4, along with subject matter referenced in other figures, specifically, as cited below):
PNG
media_image1.png
387
1164
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Schoelkopf Fig 3 is a cross section along line AA of Fig 4
a superconducting microwave cavity (trouh/110; Fig 3; [0051]); and
a resonant structure (310, labelled as stripline resonator) suspended (by 118) within the cavity (110/trough) and mechanically supported by (118) the cavity.
But,Schoelkopf is silent on “the resonant structure (310) comprising at least one end that is freely suspended within the cavity..
.However, in the analogous art. Ian teaches multi-band coupling for superconducting qubits ([002]) in a superconducting cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED) system ([0020]); he coupling geometry confines the resonators to be coplanar with the quantum devices and thus they are mostly striplines stripped off from coplanar waveguides patterned on the microscopic circuits ([0032)), wherein (Fig 1; [0022]) a cross-shape resonator (CSR) is placed in the central with two fluted ground planes surrounded. The CSR is coupled by a parallel conductor at each end of the two stubs in the horizontal direction capacitively. The Gaps between the CSR and the ground plane are all set up to be G as given in Table 1 ([0023). For performing a better coupling, the gap G is set up to be a relatively smaller value a resonant structure suspended within the cavity CSR structure comprising at least one end ( vertical L in Fig 1 and Horizondal L in Fig 7) that is freely suspended within the cavity QED over Gap G.
PNG
media_image2.png
252
783
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Ian Figs 1 and 7
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include Ian’s teaching into Schoelkopf’s resonant structure, and thereby the combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) resonant structure (310) comprising at least one end (of L of Ian) that is freely suspended within the cavity QED, as claimed; since, this inclusion, at least, a CSR structure, with which a qubit with different level spacings can be coupled to multi-mode electric waves (Ian []0040]).
Regarding Claim 2. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 1, wherein the resonant structure (310) comprises:
a first portion (Schoelkopf,118, fig 4; detailed in Fig 3 in view of strip-line 6 of Minet Fig 5) that extends from a first side of the cavity to a second side of the cavity, the second side opposing the first side; and a second portion (in view of Vertical L stubs of Ian Fig 1) that extends from the first portion and includes the at least one end that is freely suspended within the cavity.
Regarding Claim 3. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 2, further teaches, wherein the resonant structure (310) comprises, comprises a dielectric substrate.([0051]: silicon oxide or silicon nitride)
Regarding Claim 4. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 3, Schoelkopf further teaches, wherein the dielectric substrate comprises (sapphire and/or) silicon ([0008]: the plurality of substrates comprise a material with a crystalline structure, such as silicon) .
Regarding Claim 5. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 4, Schoelkopf further teaches, wherein the resonant structure comprises a thin film of a superconducting material coating ([0052] layer 112; for details, Fig 5I; [0065] : superconducting layer 510) the dielectric substrate .
Regarding Claim 6. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 5, Schoelkopf, further teaches, wherein the thin film completely superconducting layer (510; ([0065]: superconducting layer 510) covers the dielectric substrate.
Regarding Claim 7. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 5, Schoelkopf further teaches, the superconducting material (510) comprises aluminum ([0065]: aluminum).
Regarding Claim 8. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 1, further teaches, further comprising a non-linear superconducting element (Qubit 116; Fig 3; [0051] or Ian Qbit in Fig 1) arranged within the cavity (Trough/ Ian QED cavity).
Regarding Claim 9. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 8, further teaches, wherein the non-linear superconducting element comprises at least one Josephson junction ([0053]: superconducting qubits using Josephson junctions).
Regarding Claim 10. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 8, further teaches, wherein the non-linear superconducting element is a transmon qubit ([0051, 0053]: superconducting qubit 116, is a transmon qubit).
Regarding Claim 11. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the resonant structure (310) is coupled to the cavity via one or more dielectric elements (118).
Regarding Claim 12. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the resonant structure (310) contacts the cavity (trough ; Fig 3-4 in further view of Ian QED cavity Figs 1,7).
Regarding Claim 13. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the resonant structure (310) is planar (in view of Ian Fig 1 CSR).
Regarding Claim 14. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the resonant structure (310) comprises (in view of Ian Fis 1,7) a lower element (18) and an upper element (19) arranged over the lower element and separated from the lower element by a dielectric material (28).
Regarding Claim 15. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 14, further teaches, wherein (in view of Ian Figs 1-7) the lower element (19) comprises a circular portion (23) and wherein the at least one end (Vertical L of CSR; Fig 1) that is freely suspended within the cavity is arranged within the circular portion.
Regarding Claim 16. The combination of (Schoelkopf and Ian) as applied to the electromagnetic resonator of claim 14, further teaches, wherein the upper element (19) and the lower element (18) are both planar (in view of Ian CSR Fig 1. 7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOAZZAM HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7960. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8:30AM - 6:00 PM. EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Moazzam Hossain whose telephone number is (571)270-7960. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Thursday 8.30 A.M -5.00 P.M. 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, Julio J. Maldonado can be reached on 571-272-1864. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR to register user only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOAZZAM HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
July 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights