DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are currently presented for examination.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 260. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “Kirchoff’s current law equations” multiple times without properly referring back to the first recitation in claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “Kirchoff’s current law equations” without properly referring back to the first recitation in claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “Kirchoff’s current law equations” without properly referring back to the first recitation in claim 11. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “Kirchoff’s current law equations” without properly referring back to the first recitation in claim 11. Appropriate correction is required.
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 6 and 16 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.
The following variables are not defined by the claim, rendering the metes and bounds of the claim unclear:
PNG
media_image1.png
78
45
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
52
56
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
37
39
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
39
56
media_image4.png
Greyscale
All claims dependent on a 112 rejected base claim are rejected based on their dependency
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 8-13, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. “Reservoir Computing with Neuro-memristive Nanowire Networks”, in view of Milano et al. “Connectome of memristive nanowire networks through graph theory.”
Regarding claim 1, Fu teaches selecting a number of nanowires representing the nanowire network structure, (Figure 1, Section 3A, a 100-nanowire network is used)
wherein each nanowire is simulated with a … length randomly drawn from a gamma distribution and an orientation selected from a uniform distribution; (Section 2A, the model simulates wires scattered on a plane with uniformly random distributions of orientations and positions and with lengths sampled from a gamma distribution)
distributing the nanowires on a plane; (Section 2A, Fig.1 and 3-4, the nanowires are distributed on a plane)
identifying intersection points between overlapping nanowires within the nanowire network structure, (Section 2A, Fig.1 and 3-4, the intersection points are noted on the graphs with dots)
wherein the intersection points form memristive junctions between touching nanowires; (Section 2A and 3A, Fig.1 and 3-4, the dots are used to note the junctions)
simulating a source electrode on a first location of the nanowire network structure for simulating an applied input voltage and a grounded drain electrode on a second location of the nanowire network structure; (Section 2A-3A, Fig.1 and 3-4, a voltage is applied at the green dot which is connected to the red dot grounded drain)
applying to the source electrode a time-varying input voltage having a fixed duration, (Section 2A-3A, Fig.1-4, a time varying input voltage signal is applied)
wherein the time-varying input voltage results in a current flow across the memristive junctions of the nanowire network structure so that the memristive junctions of the nanowire network structure develop a junction flux and a respective junction conductance; (Section 2A-3A, Fig.1-4, a current flows across the junctions and a junction flux and junction conductance is created)
solving Kirchoff s current law equations for the time-varying input voltage and the resulting current flow across the memristive junctions to obtain a time-dependent voltage function across the nanowire network structure; and (Section 2A and 3A, Figure 2, Kirchoff’s circuit law equations are solved at each time point to obtain the voltage function)
updating the junction flux and the junction conduction based on the time-dependent voltage function. (Section 2A-3A, Figures 2 and 3, the junction flux and junction conduction are updated at each timestep)
Fu does not explicitly recite mean length, representing the nanowire network structure with a graph representation in which the nanowires are represented as nodes and the intersection points are represented as edges;
Milano teaches mean length, (Section 2.1, a mean length of 40 micro meters is used)
representing the nanowire network structure with a graph representation in which the nanowires are represented as nodes and the intersection points are represented as edges; (Section 2.1, each NW represents a fundamental unit (node), while NW junctions are represented by links in between nodes (edges))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Fu with Milano as the references deal with nanowire simulation, in order to implement a system that uses a mean length of 40 micro meters and using node edge graph. Milano would modify Fu by using a mean length of 40 micro meters and using node edge graph. The benefit of doing so is the network capability to process spatio-temporal input signals can be exploited for the implementation of unconventional computing paradigms in memristive graphs that take into advantage the inherent relationship between structure and functionality as in biological systems. (Milano Abstract)
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 1. Fu also teaches wherein the number of nanowires in the nanowire structure is greater than 100. (Section 3B, a 700 nanowire simulation is run)
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 1. Fu does not explicitly recite wherein the mean length of each nanowire is between 5 μm and100 μm.
Milano teaches wherein the mean length of each nanowire is between 5 μm and100 μm. (Section 2.1, a mean length of 40 micro meters is used)
See motivation of claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 1. Fu also teaches wherein solving Kirchoff's current law equations for the time-varying input voltage comprises solving Kirchoff's current law equations for a plurality of time steps and updating the junction flux and the junction conduction for each time step to obtain a voltage time series. (Section 2A and 3A, Figure 2-3 and 5-7, Kirchoff’s circuit law equations are solved at each time point to obtain the voltage function, as well as the flux and conduction, to obtain the shown voltage time series)
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 8. Fu also teaches further comprising feeding the voltage time series to a linear output layer of an adaptive ML model. (Abstract, Section 1-2B, Figure 1, a neural like network is formed that feeds the voltage time series from node to node until it reaches the drain, including the output layer of the neural like network, the nanowire network is adaptive because it adjust its parameters in response to new data as the flux, resistance, and conductance changes as the voltage is applied from source to drain through each junction)
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 1. Fu also teaches wherein solving Kirchoff’s current law equations for the time-varying input voltage involves selecting one or more readout locations across the nanowire network structure and measuring a voltage drop and a current flow from each one of the one or more readout locations. (Sections 2B-3A, Figure 3, the voltage drop at each at each junction is measured)
In regards to claim 11, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 1 with similar limitations to claim 1, and is rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 1. The additional computer components are taught by at least Section 2A of Fu where Matlab is used.
In regards to claim 12, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 2 with similar limitations to claim 2, and is rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 2.
In regards to claim 13, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 3 with similar limitations to claim 3, and is rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 3.
In regards to claim 18, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 8 with similar limitations to claim 8, and is rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 8.
In regards to claim 19, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 9 with similar limitations to claim 9, and is rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 9.
In regards to claim 20, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 10 with similar limitations to claim 10, and is rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 10.
Claims 4-5 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu in view of Milano, and in further view of Zhu et al. “Information dynamics in neuromorphic nanowire networks.”
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 1. The combination of Fu and Milano does not explicitly recite wherein the orientation of each nanowire has a value between 0 and π.
Zhu teaches wherein the orientation of each nanowire has a value between 0 and π.(Page 9 Methods, orientation uniformly sampled from [0, π])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Fu and Milano with Zhu as the references deal with nanowire simulation, in order to implement a system that uses nanowire orientations between 0 and π, as well as a plan area close to 10 micrometers. As noted in MPEP2144.05, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Here the difference between 9 micrometers and 10 micrometers is 1 micrometer. This proportion is so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. MPEP 2144.05 Zhu would modify Fu and Milano by implementing a system that uses nanowire orientations between 0 and π, as well as a plan area close to 10 micrometers. The benefit of doing so is based on the information dynamics, we found that pre-initialisation enables these networks to achieve optimal performance in memory and learning tasks. Also, there exists an optimal range of network density for computation. (Zhu Page 9 Last paragraph of Discussion)
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Fu and Milano teach the limitations of claim 1. The combination of Fu and Milano does not explicitly recite wherein the plane has an area between 10 μm2 and 200 μm2
Zhu teaches wherein the plane has an area between 10 μm2 and 200 μm2(Page 9 Methods,a plane with an area of 9 μm2 is used)
See motivation of claim 4.
In regards to claim 14, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 4 with similar limitations to claim 4, and is such rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 4.
In regards to claim 15, it is the computer readable medium embodiment of claim 5 with similar limitations to claim 5, and is such rejected using the same reasoning found in claim 5.
Allowable Subject Matter
The closest prior art references of record are Fu, Milano and Zhu. These references alone or in combination do not disclose the limitations including the claimed equation and a junction conduction that varies with the junction flux as a result of a non-linear behavior due to ion diffusion and electron tunneling within the memristive junctions, in combination with the remaining limitations. Therefore, claims 6-7 and 16-17 as drafted, are rendered neither obvious nor anticipated by the prior art of the record and the available field of prior art. The claims would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 112 and 103 rejection of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kuncic et al. “Neuromorphic Information Processing with Nanowire Networks”: Also teaches the simulation of a nanowire network with a voltage applied from a source to drain and multiple memristive junctions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL COCCHI whose telephone number is (469)295-9079. The examiner can normally be reached 7:15 am - 5:15 pm CT Monday - Thursday.
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, Ryan Pitaro can be reached at 571-272-4071. 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.
/MICHAEL EDWARD COCCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2188
Prosecution Insights