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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-10, 15, 16, 18 and 19 in the reply filed on 08 July 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 11-14 and 17 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08 July 2025.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The tables on pages 14, 17 and 20 include illegible text.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10, 15-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (WO 2020/015765 A1).
This rejection is over WO 2020/015765 A1 because the reference has an earlier publication date, however, the English language equivalent, US 2021/0305460 A1, will be cited below.
As to claim 1, Embodiment 1 of Wang et al. is a laminated structure of a 47 nm layer of Ag doped Ga2O3, and a 10 nm ITO layer. See paragraphs [0038]-[0044]. The ratio of the ITO layer thickness to the Ag doped gallium oxide layer thickness is 0.2. The layer structure has a transmittance of 92.68% and a sheet resistivity of 20.1 Ω/sq. See Table 1.
As to claim 16, Wang et al. teaches flash annealing the layer structure at a temperature of 600°C. See paragraphs [0038]-[0044]. Such an annealing does not crystallize the oxide layer. See paragraph [0025] of the instant specification. Therefore, the gallium oxide layer of Wang et al. is presumed to inherently be amorphous.
The index of refraction difference recited in claim 18 is presumed to be inherent to the layer structure of Embodiment 1 because Embodiment 1 is formed of the same materials as recited in claims 1 and 19.
As to claim 19, Embodiment 1 of Wang et al. includes gallium oxide. See paragraph [0043]-[0044].
As to claim 2, Wang et al. does not disclose the R2/R1 ratio (claims 2 or 3); the transmittance after annealing at 220°C (claim 4), the transmittance after annealing at 550°C (claim 5); or the index of refraction difference (claim 6). However, the layer structure of Li et al. is identical to the presently claimed layered structure. Therefore, the recited properties of the layered product of Wang et al. are presumed to be inherent to Embodiment 2.
As to claim 7, Embodiment 1 of Wang et al. includes gallium oxide. See paragraph [0043]-[0044].
As to claim 15, Wang et al. teaches flash annealing the layer structure at a temperature of 600°C. See paragraphs [0038]-[0044]. Such an annealing does not crystallize the oxide layer. See paragraph [0025] of the instant specification. Therefore, the gallium oxide layer of Wang et al. is presumed to inherently be amorphous.
As to claim 8, Wang et al. teaches a double layer structure comprising indium tin oxide (ITO) and almost (less than the Ag) 100 mol% Ga2O3. See paragraphs [0038]-[0044]. Embodiment 1 of Wang et al. is a laminated structure of a 47 nm layer of Ag doped Ga2O3, and a 10 nm ITO layer. See paragraphs [0038]-[0044]. The ratio of the ITO layer thickness to the Ag doped gallium oxide layer thickness is 0.2. The layer structure has a transmittance of 92.68% and a sheet resistivity of 20.1 Ω/sq. See Table 1.
As to claim 10, Wang et al. teaches flash annealing the layer structure at a temperature of 600°C. See paragraphs [0038]-[0044]. Such an annealing does not crystallize the oxide layer. See paragraph [0025] of the instant specification. Therefore, the gallium oxide layer of Wang et al. is presumed to inherently be amorphous.
Claims 2-8, 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN 101841003)(cited on the IDS filed 03 October 2023).
As to claim 2, Li et al. teaches a double layer structure comprising indium tin oxide (ITO) and 100 mol% Ga2O3. See the abstract.
Li et al. does not disclose the R2/R1 ratio (claims 2 or 3); the transmittance after annealing at 220°C (claim 4), the transmittance after annealing at 550°C (claim 5); or the index of refraction difference (claim 6). However, the layer structure of Li et al. is identical to the presently claimed layered structure. Therefore, the recited properties of the layered product of Li et al. are presumed to be inherent to Li et al.
As to claim 7, Li et al. teaches the oxide layer contains Ga. See the abstract.
As to claim 8, Li et al. teaches a double layer structure comprising indium tin oxide (ITO) and 100 mol% Ga2O3. See the abstract. The ITO layer is 15 to 29 nm and the thickness of the gallium oxide film is 30-60 nm. Id. Thus, the ratio of the ITO layer thickness to the gallium oxide layer thickness is less than 1.
As to claims 10 and 15, Li et al. does not teach annealing the coated article. See paragraphs [0012]-[0013]. The formed oxide film is amorphous. See paragraph [0025] of the instant specification. Therefore, the oxide coating of Li et al. is presumed to inherently be amorphous.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Katsuragawa (US 2002/0197824 A1) teaches a SiO2/TiO2/SiO2 layer structure having a transmittance of 91% and sheet resistivity of 30 Ω/sq. See paragraphs [0036]-[0040]. Adib et al. discloses a layer structure of ITO on silica having a transmittance of greater than 90% and sheet resistivity of less than 30 Ω/sq. See Examples 2F and 2G, and paragraphs [0135] and [0143].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Sample whose telephone number is (571)272-1376. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7AM to 3:30 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-0604. 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.
/David Sample/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784