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
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11 and 12, filed 7/8/2026, with respect to the amendments to claims 1, 13, and 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-3, 5-14, 16-19, and 23 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see page 12, filed 7/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 20 differs from the subject matter of claims 1, 13, and 14, because claims 1, 13, and 14, as amended, recite that the at least one first projection is arranged in at least one first cutout of a second structural unit of the object. Claim 20, however, merely recites that the material unit has a first material part and a second material part. Claims 13 and 14 include similar limitations to those of claim 1 and are allowable at least for the reasons indicated with respect to claim 1; however, claim 20 does not include similar limitations, and has been rejected, as described in detail, below.
Figure 6C of Thompson clearly illustrates that the material unit 666 includes a first material part (the comb-like portion at the bottom of the intermediary body 666) and a second material part (the bulk body of the intermediary body 666 other than the comb-like portion at the bottom of the intermediary body).
PNG
media_image1.png
258
421
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-14, 16-19, and 23 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 1; Thompson et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0215690 discloses a method for fastening an object (“sample” [Abstract]) to a movable manipulator (“sample manipulator” [Abstract]) in a particle beam apparatus (“within a charged particle systems” [Abstract]) and for moving the object in the particle beam apparatus (“the sample manipulator 108 is a mechanism in the microscope chamber 130 that is able to interact with the sample 108 such that the sample may be translated, angled, and/or rotated” [0025]), including the following method steps the method comprising: fastening a material unit (“intermediate body” [0123]) configured to hold the object to a manipulator using a particle beam of the particle beam apparatus (“milling, with the charged particle beam, portions of the intermediate body proximate to the probe, and wherein at least some of the removed intermediate body redeposits to form an attachment between the probe portion and the intermediate body” [0123]); fastening the object to the material unit using the particle beam of the particle beam apparatus (“When portions 668 of the intermediary body 666 proximate the sample 642 are milled away, at least some of the milled material redeposits to form attachment structures 670 between the sample 662 and the intermediary body 666” [0063]); and using the manipulator and/or an object stage on which the object is arranged moving to move the object that is fastened to the material unit (“the sample manipulator 108 is a mechanism in the microscope chamber 130 that is able to interact with the sample 108 such that the sample may be translated, angled, and/or rotated” [0025]). However, although Thompson generates a first structural unit having at least one first projection on the material unit using the particle beam of the apparatus (“portions 668 of the intermediary body 666 proximate the sample 642 are milled away” [0063]), and Thompson discloses a second structural unit 670 of the sample 662, on which the at least one first projection 668 is arranged (as illustrated in figure 6C), Thompson does not disclose that the at least one first projection, generated using the particle beam of the particle beam apparatus, is arranged in at least one first cutout of the second structural unit.
The prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest, in combination with the other claim limitations, a method for fastening an object to a movable manipulator in a particle beam apparatus and for moving the object in the particle beam apparatus, the method comprising: fastening the object to the material unit using the particle beam of the particle beam apparatus with at least one first projection of a first structural unit, generated before the object is fastened to a material unit that is fastened to a manipulator, being arranged in at least one first cutout of a second structural unit of the object.
Regarding independent claims 13 and 14; these claims include substantially similar limitations to those of independent claim 1 and are allowable at least for the reasons indicated with respect to independent claim 1.
Regarding dependent claims 2, 3, 5-12, 16-19, and 23; these claims are allowable at least for their dependence, either directly or indirectly, upon independent claims 1 and 14.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 20, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Thompson et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0215690.
Regarding claim 20, Thompson discloses a device for fastening and moving an object in a particle beam device, comprising: a movable manipulator (“sample manipulator” [Abstract]), and a material unit (“intermediate body” [0123]) for fastening an object, with the material unit being fastened to the manipulator (“When portions 668 of the intermediary body 666 proximate the sample 642 are milled away, at least some of the milled material redeposits to form attachment structures 670 between the sample 662 and the intermediary body 666” [0063]); and having a first material part and a second material part, wherein the first material part is arranged on the second material part:
PNG
media_image1.png
258
421
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, Thompson discloses that the device has one of the following features: the material unit has a structural unit, which can be arranged on the object; the material unit 666 has a structural unit with at least one projection 668, with the projection 668 being able to be arranged on the object 670 (as illustrated in figure 6C).
Regarding claim 22, Thompson discloses that the device has at least one of the following features: the material unit is in the form of a metal unit; the material unit is in the form of a metal unit including copper (“Specifically, a high sputter yield material, such as copper, may be attached to a sample manipulator within the chamber of a charged particle system, outside of such a chamber, or a combination thereof” [0056]); the material unit is made of copper; the material unit includes a first material part and a second material part, with the first material part being arranged on the second material part.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JASON L MCCORMACK whose telephone number is (571)270-1489. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM-5:00PM 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, 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.
/JASON L MCCORMACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights