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. 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 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 1 -10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang ( X. Wang, Silicon/Hematite Core/Shell Nanowire Array Decorated with Gold Nanoparticles for Unbiased Solar Water Oxidation , Nano Letters, 2014 (14), pp. 18-23 ; supplemental information was attached ) in view of Zhang ( L. Zhang, MoS 2 -wrapped silicon nanowires for photoelectrochemical water reduction , Nano Research 2015 (8), pp. 281-287 ) , and further in view of Toe (C.Y. Toe, Recent advances and the design criteria of metal sulfide photocathodes and photoanodes for photoelectrocatalysis , J. Mater. Chem. A, 2021(9), pp. 20277-20319) . Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a photoelectrocatalyst ([Abstract]: three-dimensional (3D) silicon/hematite core/shell nanowire arrays decorated with gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) for sunlight-driven solar water splitting ) , comprising: a substrate, formed of a semiconductor material, the substrate having an upper surface (Fig. 1(a): Silicon; the silicon substrate having a top surface) , the semiconductor material having a first conductive type (Fig. 1(b): p-Si ; Fig. 1 (a), 2 (a) : indicating the substrate and the p-SiNW has the same semiconductor material, Si ) ; a plurality of nanowires (Fig. 1(a): SiNW) , formed of the semiconductor material (Fig. 1(b): the SiNW array comprising p- Si) and formed on the upper surface of the substrate (Fig. 1(a): the nanowire array formed on the top surface of the Si substrate) ; a plurality of metal nanoparticles (Fig. 1(a): gold nanoparticles) , being formed on the plurality of nanowires ( Supplemental, Fig. S3: inner configuration ) , each nanowire thereon existing a few of the plurality of metal nanoparticles (Fig. 1(a) ; Fig. S3 : each nanowire having a few of the plurality of the gold nanoparticles formed thereon). Wang does not teach a transition metal compound film, formed to overlap the plurality of nanowires and the plurality of metal nanoparticles, the transition metal compound film being formed of a transition metal sulfide , the transition metal compound film has a second conductive type . However, Zhang teaches molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) wrapped semiconductor nanowires (NWs) as a well-defined MoS 2 /TiO 2 /Si coaxial NW heterostructure, which yield photocurrent density up to 15 mA/cm 2 with good stability ([Abstract]). The integration of MoS 2 is highly desired to minimize the overpotential for the solar-powered hydrogen evolution reaction ([Abstract]). The photocurrent of the coaxial MoS 2 /TiO 2 /Si NW structure remained at approximately 21 mA/cm 2 for 75 min without degradation (Fig. 4), and the faradaic efficiency for hydrogen evolution to H 2 was found to be ~100% (p. 285, col. 2, last para.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang by substituting the hematite with the molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) as taught by Zhang because it would yield stable photocurrent density and achieve high efficiency for hydrogen evolution (Zhang, Fig. 4 ; p. 285, col. 2, last para. ). Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). And the substitution of one known element for another would yield nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2141(III)(B). Wang does not teach the photoelectrocatalyst is heterostructured or the second conductive type (of the transition metal compound film) is different from the first conductive type (of the substrate semiconductor material) . However, Toe teaches design criteria of metal sulfide photocathodes and photoanodes for photoelectrocatalysis (title). While n-type materials are used as photoanodes for oxidation reaction, p-type materials are made into photocathodes for reduction reaction. Under certain circumstances, a p-type semiconductor will be coupled with an n-type semiconductor, forming a p-n junction to optimize the charge separation efficiency (p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang by utilizing a heterostructure with p-n junction as taught by Toe because it would optimize the charge separation efficiency ( Toe, p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1) . As a result, the second conductive type would be different from the first conductive type. Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Regarding claim 2, Wang teaches wherein the plurality of metal nanoparticles are formed of gold (Fig. 1(a) , 2(a); Fig. S3 : gold nanoparticles). Regarding claim 3 , Wang in view of Zhang and Toe teaches the first conductive type is a p-type (Wang, Fig. 1(b): p-SiNW), the second conductive is an n-type (as described in claim 1, the second conductive is different from the first conductive type, i.e., a n-type, which is the outer transition metal compound film of the photo electrode and appropriate to be a photoanode ( Wang, p. 18, col. 2, para. 2 : photoanode ; Zhang, [Abstract]: MoS 2 ; Toe, p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1 )). Regarding claim 4 , Wang , Zhang , and Toe disclose all limitations of 2 . Wang does not disclose the first conductive type is an n-type. However, Zhang teaches the MoS 2 /TiO 2 /Si coaxial NW heterostructure is designed to be a photocathode ([Abstract]). In order to achieve a positive photovoltage, a heavily doped n + emitter layer was diffused into the surface region of Si NWs using arsenic (As) as an n-type dopant to form a MoS 2 /TiO 2 /n + p-Si NW coaxial heterostructure (p. 285, col. 1, para. 2), making the first conductive type a n-type. Further, Toe teaches n-type materials are used as photoanodes for oxidation reaction, p-type materials are made into photocathodes for reduction reaction (p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang by switching the p-type Si NWs into n-type as taught by Zhang to be used as a photocathode (Zhang, [Abstract]) instead of a photoanode (Wang, p. 18, col. 2, para. 2) as appropriate (Toe, p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1 ) . Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Further, there are only two types of the semiconductor conductivity, so c hoosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2141(III)(E). Wang, Zhang, and Toe do not disclose the second conductive is a p-type or the transition metal compound film is formed of Ag 2 S. However, Toe teaches design criteria of metal sulfide photocathodes and photoanodes for photoelectrocatalysis (title). While n-type materials are used as photoanodes for oxidation reaction, p-type materials are made into photocathodes for reduction reaction. Under certain circumstances, a p-type semiconductor will be coupled with an n-type semiconductor, forming a p-n junction to optimize the charge separation efficiency (p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). Toe further discloses the most attractive features of metal sulfide materials is their tailorable semiconducting type, i.e., n- or p-type (p. 20279, col. 1, para. 2) , and Ag 2 S is an appropriate material for photoelectrode material (bridging sentence of pp. 20292-20293) . Thus, to design a photocathode and using n-type Si NWs of the combined Wang and Zhang would necessarily require the outer transition metal compound film, e.g., Ag 2 S, to be p-type as suggested by Toe and result in a heterostructure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang, Zhang, and Toe by forming a photocathode using n-type Si NWs ( Zhang, [Abstract] ; p. 285, col. 1, para. 2) and a Ag 2 S outer transition metal compound film (Toe, bridging sentence of pp. 20292-20293 ) that is p-type as suggested because the metal sulfide materials has tailorable semiconducting type, i.e., n- or p-type (p. 20279, col. 1, para. 2) and choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2141(III)(E). Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Regarding claim 5, Wang , Zhang , and Toe disclose all limitations of claim 2. Wang further discloses wherein a height of each nanowire ranges from 0.5 µm to 15 µm ( Fig. 3(a): the height is about 5 µm ) . Wang, Zhang, and Toe do not disclose a diameter of each nanowire ranges from 10 nm to 100 nm . However, Wang disclose the SiNWs have diameter of 30-200 nm (p. 20, col. 2, para. 1), which overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang, Zhang, and Toe by adjusting the diameter of the nanowire within the claimed range because they are suitable nanowire dimension for loading photoelectrocatalyst. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim , 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I). Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner , 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . MPEP 2144.05(I). Wang, Zhang, and Toe do not disclose a particle size of each metal nanoparticle ranges from 5nm to 50 nm . However, Wang disclose a particle size of AuNPs about 4 nm (Fig. 3(c)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang, Zhang, and Toe do by adjusting the AuNP size within the claimed range because they are suitable dimension of AuNPs to be load ed on the SiNWs . In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim , 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I). Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner , 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . MPEP 2144.05(I). Regarding claim 6 , Wang teaches a method of fabricating a photoelectrocatalyst ([Abstract]: three-dimensional (3D) silicon/hematite core/shell nanowire arrays decorated with gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) for sunlight-driven solar water splitting) , comprising the steps of: preparing a substrate, wherein the substrate is formed of a semiconductor material (Fig. 1(a): Silicon substrate) and has a first conductive type (Fig. 1(b): p-Si; Fig. 1(a), 2(a): indicating the substrate and the p-SiNW has the same semiconductor material, Si) ; partially etching the upper surface of the substrate downwards (p. 20, col. 2, para. 1: SiNWs arrays were prepared on Si wafers by means of the metal-catalyzed electroless etching (MCEE) method) to form a plurality of nanowires (Fig. 1(a): SiNW) ; depositing a plurality of metal nanoparticles (Fig. 1(a): gold nanoparticles) on the plurality of nanowires (Supplemental, Fig. S3: inner configuration) , wherein each nanowire thereon exists a few of the plurality of metal nanoparticles (Fig. 1(a); Fig. S3: each nanowire having a few of the plurality of the gold nanoparticles formed thereon) . Wang does not teach forming a transition metal compound film to overlap the plurality of nanowires and the plurality of metal nanoparticles, wherein the transition metal compound film is formed of a transition metal sulfide , the transition metal compound film has a second conductive type. However, Zhang teaches molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) wrapped semiconductor nanowires (NWs) as a well-defined MoS 2 /TiO 2 /Si coaxial NW heterostructure, which yield photocurrent density up to 15 mA/cm 2 with good stability ([Abstract]). The integration of MoS 2 is highly desired to minimize the overpotential for the solar-powered hydrogen evolution reaction ([Abstract]). The photocurrent of the coaxial MoS 2 /TiO 2 /Si NW structure remained at approximately 21 mA/cm 2 for 75 min without degradation (Fig. 4), and the faradaic efficiency for hydrogen evolution to H 2 was found to be ~100% (p. 285, col. 2, last para.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang by substituting the hematite with the molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) as taught by Zhang because it would yield stable photocurrent density and achieve high efficiency for hydrogen evolution (Zhang, Fig. 4; p. 285, col. 2, last para.). Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). And the substitution of one known element for another would yield nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2141(III)(B). Wang does not teach the photoelectrocatalyst is heterostructured or the second conductive type (of the transition metal compound film) is different from the first conductive type (of the substrate semiconductor material) . However, Toe teaches design criteria of metal sulfide photocathodes and photoanodes for photoelectrocatalysis (title). While n-type materials are used as photoanodes for oxidation reaction, p-type materials are made into photocathodes for reduction reaction. Under certain circumstances, a p-type semiconductor will be coupled with an n-type semiconductor, forming a p-n junction to optimize the charge separation efficiency (p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang by utilizing a heterostructure with p-n junction as taught by Toe because it would optimize the charge separation efficiency (Toe, p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). As a result, the second conductive type would be different from the first conductive type. Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Regarding claim 7 , Wang teaches wherein the plurality of metal nanoparticles are formed of gold (Fig. 1(a), 2(a); Fig. S3: gold nanoparticles). Regarding claim 8 , Wang in view of Zhang and Toe teaches wherein the first conductive type is a p-type (Wang, Fig. 1(b): p-SiNW) , the second conductive is an n-type, the transition metal compound film is formed of MoS 2 ( as described in claim 1, the second conductive is different from the first conductive type, i.e., a n-type, which is the outer transition metal compound film of the photoelectrode and appropriate to be a photoanode (Wang, p. 18, col. 2, para. 2: photoanode; Zhang, [Abstract]: MoS 2 ; Toe, p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1) ). Regarding claim 9 , Wang, Zhang, and Toe disclose all limitations of 7 . Wang does not disclose the first conductive type is an n-type. However, Zhang teaches the MoS 2 /TiO 2 /Si coaxial NW heterostructure is designed to be a photocathode ([Abstract]). In order to achieve a positive photovoltage, a heavily doped n + emitter layer was diffused into the surface region of Si NWs using arsenic (As) as an n-type dopant to form a MoS 2 /TiO 2 /n + p-Si NW coaxial heterostructure (p. 285, col. 1, para. 2), making the first conductive type a n-type. Further, Toe teaches n-type materials are used as photoanodes for oxidation reaction, p-type materials are made into photocathodes for reduction reaction (p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang by switching the p-type Si NWs into n-type as taught by Zhang to be used as a photocathode (Zhang, [Abstract]) instead of a photoanode (Wang, p. 18, col. 2, para. 2) as appropriate (Toe, p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Further, there are only two types of the semiconductor conductivity, so c hoosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2141(III)(E). Wang, Zhang, and Toe do not disclose the second conductive is a p-type or the transition metal compound film is formed of Ag 2 S. However, Toe teaches design criteria of metal sulfide photocathodes and photoanodes for photoelectrocatalysis (title). While n-type materials are used as photoanodes for oxidation reaction, p-type materials are made into photocathodes for reduction reaction. Under certain circumstances, a p-type semiconductor will be coupled with an n-type semiconductor, forming a p-n junction to optimize the charge separation efficiency (p. 20279, col. 2, para. 1). Toe further discloses the most attractive features of metal sulfide materials is their tailorable semiconducting type, i.e., n- or p-type (p. 20279, col. 1, para. 2), and Ag 2 S is an appropriate material for photoelectrode material (bridging sentence of pp. 20292-20293). Thus, to design a photocathode and using n-type Si NWs of the combined Wang and Zhang would necessarily require the outer transition metal compound film, e.g., Ag 2 S, to be p-type as suggested by Toe and result in a heterostructure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang, Zhang, and Toe by forming a photocathode using n-type Si NWs (Zhang, [Abstract]; p. 285, col. 1, para. 2) and a Ag 2 S outer transition metal compound film (Toe, bridging sentence of pp. 20292-20293) that is p-type as suggested because the metal sulfide materials has tailorable semiconducting type, i.e., n- or p-type (p. 20279, col. 1, para. 2) and choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2141(III)(E). Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Regarding claim 10 , Wang, Zhang, and Toe disclose all limitations of claim 7 . Wang further discloses wherein a height of each nanowire ranges from 0.5 µm to 15 µm (Fig. 3(a): the height is about 5 µm). Wang, Zhang, and Toe do not disclose a diameter of each nanowire ranges from 10 nm to 100 nm. However, Wang disclose the SiNWs have diameter of 30-200 nm (p. 20, col. 2, para. 1), which overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang, Zhang, and Toe by adjusting the diameter of the nanowire within the claimed range because they are suitable nanowire dimension for loading photoelectrocatalyst. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim , 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I). Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner , 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . MPEP 2144.05(I). Wang, Zhang, and Toe do not disclose a particle size of each metal nanoparticle ranges from 5nm to 50 nm. However, Wang disclose a particle size of AuNPs about 4 nm (Fig. 3(c)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang, Zhang, and Toe do by adjusting the AuNP size within the claimed range because they are suitable dimension of AuNPs to be loaded on the SiNWs. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim , 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I). Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner , 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . MPEP 2144.05(I). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CAITLYN M SUN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6788 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F: 8:30am - 5:30pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Luan Van can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-8521 . 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. /C. SUN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795