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 .
Summary
Claims 1, 3-5, and 8-20 are pending. Claims 11-18 were previously withdrawn due to a Restriction Requirement. Claims 1, 3-5, 8-10, 19, and 20 are rejected herein. This is a Final Rejection as necessitated by the amendment and arguments (hereinafter “the Response”) dated 06 May 2026.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 06 May 2026. These drawings are accepted.
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) 1, 3-5, 8-10, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HAN et al. (US 2006/0263255) in view of NOH et al. (KR 101735207) and PARK et al. (US 2019/0097067). Please note that a machine translation of NOH was included with the office action dated 20 Feb 2026. All references to text in NOH are to the attached machine translation.
Regarding claims 1 and 3: HAN discloses: A hydrogen sensor (FIG. 1B) for detecting hydrogen gas (abstract), the hydrogen sensor comprising: a substrate (74); a sensing layer (72; para. 87) formed on the substrate (FIG. 1B) and containing semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes (para. 54, 87); and electrodes (75 on the left and unlabeled on the right. The right electrode is analogous to 3b in FIG. 1A.) spaced from each other (FIG. 1B), the electrodes formed on a first surface of the sensing layer (FIG. 1B), the first surface being a surface opposite to and not facing the substrate (FIG. 1B), or formed between the sensing layer and the substrate.
HAN does not disclose that the sensing layer further comprises a conjugated polymer, and the surface of the semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes is partially or entirely wrapped with the conjugated polymer.
NOH however does teach wrapping a single-walled carbon nanotube with a conjugated polymer (para. 18) as shown in FIG. 3. NOH also teaches at least two of the polymers listed in claim 3 (para. 8). NOH also teaches at least two of the polymers listed in claim 3 (para. 8).
One skilled in the art at the time the application was effectively filed would be motivated to wrap the SWCNT of HAN in a conjugated polymer as taught by NOH to improve performance of the device and increase uniformity of the layer of SWCNT (para. 6-7 of NOH). Please note that the devices of both HAN and NOH are transistors.
HAN discloses a heating element (para. 46), but does not specify where it is located on the device. Regarding the temperature of the substrate being maintained in a range of 30º C to 100º C, this is a statement of intended use and does not structurally limit the subject matter of this apparatus claim. Please note that HAN discloses an example where the sensor is heated to 200º C (para. 113).
PARK however teaches a second insulating layer (substrate 10 in FIG. 5) and a microheater (20), wherein the second insulating layer comprises a second insulator and is positioned on the substrate and under the sensing layer and the electrodes (FIG. 5), and the microheater is positioned between the substrate (barrier layer) and the second insulating layer (FIG. 5).
One skilled in the art at the time the application was effectively filed would be motivated to situate the heating element of HAN under the substrate as taught by PARK so that it will be far enough away from the sensor not to interfere with the functioning of the sensor, but close enough to supply the needed heat. Please note that heating semiconductor sensing elements so that they operate at their optimal sensing temperature is well known in the art, which is why HAN did not need to elaborate on how such a heating element would be situated in the device.
Regarding claim 4: HAN discloses: the surface of the hydrogen sensor is treated with one or more selected from the group consisting of ozone, ultraviolet, a surfactant, a self-assembled monolayer, a polymer coating (permeable polymer layer 78 in FIG. 1B), and a plasma.
Regarding claim 5: HAN discloses: a catalyst layer (palladium particles 7 in FIG. 1A) positioned on the sensing layer and the electrodes (FIG. 1A), the catalyst layer comprising a catalyst (specific to gas to be analyzed in para. 64).
Regarding claim 8: HAN discloses: the substrate comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a silicon (Si) substrate, a silicon/silicon dioxide (Si/SiO.sub.2) substrate (74 dielectric SiO2 in FIG. 1B), a silicon/silicon nitride (Si/SiN.sub.x) substrate, a glass substrate, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyimide (PI), polyethylene naphthalate (PEN), polyethersulfone (PES), polyacrylate, and polyetherimide.
Regarding claim 9: HAN discloses: the electrodes comprise one or more selected from the group consisting of a metal (“metal electrodes” in para. 38), an oxide, a conductive polymer, and a carbon compound.
Regarding claim 10: HAN discloses: the hydrogen sensor is a resistive hydrogen sensor in which a resistance value of the sensing layer changes in the presence of hydrogen gas (para. 83).
Regarding claim 19: HAN discloses: A method of detecting hydrogen, the method comprising: (1) bringing a gas from which hydrogen is required to be detected into contact with a sensing layer of the hydrogen sensor of claim 1 (“measurement of…molecular hydrogen as a constituent of air” in para. 9); and (2) detecting hydrogen gas by confirming a change in resistance or current value of the hydrogen sensor (para. 83; FIG. 5 shows sensor output upon repeated exposures to hydrogen as discussed in para. 115.).
Regarding claim 20: HAN discloses: the (1) bringing is performed in the air (para. 9).
Response to Amendment/Argument
The replacement drawings are acknowledged and the previous objection thereto are accordingly withdrawn.
The cancelation of claim 7 is acknowledged and the previous rejection thereto under 35 U.S.C. 112 is accordingly withdrawn.
The Applicant has argued (pages 8-10 of the Response) that one skilled in the art would not combine the teachings of HAN and PARK because HAN teaches room temperature sensing and PARK teaches using a heater to increase the temperature of the sensor. This argument is moot because maintaining the temperature of the sensor is a statement of intended use and is not within the scope of apparatus claim 1. Furthermore, HAN teaches using heating elements (para. 46), and conducts a test of their sensor at 200º C (para. 113), therefore the sensor of HAN is capable of being maintained in a range of 30º C to 100º C. Para. 117 of HAN (cited by the Applicant) states that embodiments of their sensor can be operated at room temperature and doing so has certain advantages. However this does not preclude the sensor from being operated at higher temperatures as hinted at in para. 46 by the mention of heating elements and stated explicitly in para. 113 wherein the sensor was heated to 200º C.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL J KOLB whose telephone number is (571)270-7601. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 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, Laura M Sweeney can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/NATHANIEL J KOLB/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights