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 . 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.
Response to Amendment / Arguments
The response and amendments, filed 1/29/2026, has been entered. Claims 1, 3-8, 10-18, and 20 are pending upon entry of this Amendment. Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art rejections of claims have been fully considered but are moot as amendments necessitated new ground of rejection. However, Examiner respectfully holds that the instant application discloses surface micromachining process used to form a cap layer, therefore, “surface micro-machined” is not a property or label of surface itself, and listed prior art of record teaching deposition over and removal of sacrificial layer is teaching surface micromachining process and the surface formed by this process.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 15 are objected. “surface micro-machined cap layer” should be corrected to read as “a cap layer formed using a surface micromachining process”.
Claim 8 is objected. Terms ”located the second” should be corrected to “located in the second”.
Appropriate action is required.
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.
Claims 1 , 3-5,14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ali, US 20220404300 A1 in view of Arndt, US 20050025215 A1, and Hierold, US 5596219 A.
Claim 1
Ali in figs.1 and 3 teaches:
A thermal conductivity sensor (e.g.,¶0146) for measuring a concentration of a gas, the sensor comprising:
a substrate portion (11);
a dielectric layer (10) comprising a dielectric membrane (4: e.g., ¶0177), wherein the dielectric membrane (4A) is provided with a heater (2A: e.g.,¶0177);
and
a first gap (not labeled but shown gap between 4A and 11 in fig.3) between the substrate portion 11 and the dielectric membrane 4A wherein the dielectric membrane 4A is located above the first gap (not labeled but shown gap between 4A and 11, fig.3) and a cap layer 110.
Ali does not specifically teach a surface micro-machined cap layer; a sacrificial layer between the cap layer and the dielectric layer, wherein a second gap is located in the sacrificial layer.
In the similar field of endeavor, Arndt in e.g., figs.1-3d teaches: A thermal conductivity sensor for measuring a concentration of a gas (e.g., ¶0014), the sensor comprising: a substrate portion (2,lowe8);a dielectric layer (1 ) provided with a heater 3,5;a first gap 6 between the substrate portion 2,8 and the dielectric layer 1 wherein the dielectric membrane 1 is located above the first gap 6; and a surface micro-machined cap layer (upper 8);a sacrificial layer 22 between the cap layer 8 and the dielectric layer 1, wherein a second gap 4 is located between the cap layer 8 and the dielectric membrane 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Arndt‘s sacrificial layer to form Ali‘s cap layer and the modified Ali’s surface micro-machined cap layer; the modified Ali’s sacrificial layer between the cap layer and the modified Ali’s dielectric layer, wherein the modified Ali’s second gap is located in the base. One of ordinary skill in the art knows benefits of this type of sensors would have been motivated to make this modification in order to avoid convective heat transfer through the gas or gas mixture to be measured (¶0014).
The modified Arndt thermal conductivity sensor does not specifically teach wherein a second gap is located in the sacrificial layer.
In the similar field of endeavor, Hierold in fig. 1 teaches a thermal sensor and surface micromachining (e.g., Abstract) which a gap 4 is located in the sacrificial layer 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Hierold‘s gap for Ali‘s sacrificial layer and the modified Ali’s second gap is located in the modified sacrificial layer. One of ordinary skill in the art knows surface micromachining is a method for manufacturing micromechanical structures and sacrificial layers that only serve the purpose of structuring and are entirely or partially removed during the course of the process would have been motivated to make this modification in order to construct a silicon chip (e.g., col.4 L.51-57 of Hierold) and it is a design choice to fully remove and have a larger cavity or partially or selectively removed to help controlling thermal isolation (e.g., col.5 L.36-46 of Hierold).
Claim 3
Ali in view of Arndt and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, wherein the cap layer 110 comprises at least one of a dielectric material and a metal (¶0105).
Claim 4
Ali in view of Arndt and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, wherein the cap layer comprises at least one of silicon and polysilicon(¶0105).
Claim 5
Ali in view of Arndt and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, wherein part of the cap layer 110 is in direct contact (shown in fig.3) with the dielectric layer 10.
Claim 14
Ali in view of Arndt and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, comprising a pressure sensor (¶0201).
Claims 1, 6-8, 10, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arndt, US 20050025215 A1 in view of Ali, US 20220404300 A1 and Hierold, US 5596219 A.
Claim 1
Arndt in e.g., figs.1-3d teaches:
A thermal conductivity sensor for measuring a concentration of a gas (e.g., ¶0014), the sensor comprising:
a substrate portion (2,lowe8);
a dielectric layer (1 ) provided with a heater 3,5;
a first gap 6 between the substrate portion 2,8 and the dielectric layer 1 wherein the dielectric membrane 1 is located above the first gap 6; and
a surface micro-machined cap layer (upper 8);
a sacrificial layer 22 between the cap layer 8 and the dielectric layer 1, wherein a second gap 4 is located between the cap layer 8 and the dielectric membrane 1.
Arndt does not specifically teach:
comprising a dielectric membrane wherein the dielectric membrane is provided with a heater (although diaphragm 1 inherently should have an dielectric membrane between heaters and silicon 2)
a second gap is located in the sacrificial layer.
Regarding limitation 1
In the similar field of endeavor, Ali in figs.1 and 3 teaches: A thermal conductivity sensor (e.g.,¶0146) for measuring a concentration of a gas, the sensor comprising: a substrate portion (11);a dielectric layer (10) comprising a dielectric membrane (4: e.g., ¶0177), wherein the dielectric membrane (4A) is provided with a heater (2A: e.g.,¶0177).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ali‘s dielectric and dielectric membrane for Arndt‘s thermal conductivity sensor . One of ordinary skill in the art knows without a membrane heat flows in silicon not gas would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the conducting heat to gas not the base.
Regarding limitation 2
In the similar field of endeavor, Hierold in fig. 1 teaches a thermal sensor and surface micromachining (e.g., Abstract) which a gap 4 is located in the sacrificial layer 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Hierold‘s gap for Arndt‘s sacrificial layer and the modified Arndt’s second gap is located in the modified sacrificial layer. One of ordinary skill in the art knows surface micromachining is a method for manufacturing micromechanical structures and sacrificial layers that only serve the purpose of structuring and are entirely or partially removed during the course of the process would have been motivated to make this modification in order to construct a silicon chip (e.g., col.4 L.51-57 of Hierold) and it is a design choice to fully remove and have a larger cavity or partially or selectively removed to help controlling thermal isolation (e.g., col.5 L.36-46 of Hierold).
Claim 6
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, but does not teach wherein a thickness of the second gap is 20 μm or less, Nonetheless, the skilled artisan would know too that thickness of gap would affect the sensitivity. The specific claimed 20 μm or less, absent any criticality, is only considered to be the “optimum” disclosed by Ali that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to determine using routine experimentation (see In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)) based, among other things, on the desired sensitivity, manufacturing costs, etc. (see In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), and neither non-obvious nor unexpected results, i.e. results which are different in kind and not in degree from the results of the prior art, will be obtained as long as the 20 μm or less is used, as already suggested by Ali. Since the applicant has not established the criticality (see next paragraph) of theses thicknesses stated and since these 20 μm or less are in common use in similar devices in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use these values in the device of Ali. Please note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed 20 μm or less or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim 7
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, does not teach wherein a thickness of the cap layer is 5 μm or less, Nonetheless, the skilled artisan would know too that these thickness would affect the sensitivity of sensor. The specific claimed 5 μm or less, absent any criticality, is only considered to be the “optimum” disclosed by Ali that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to determine using routine experimentation (see In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)) based, among other things, on the desired sensitivity, manufacturing costs, etc. (see In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), and neither non-obvious nor unexpected results, i.e. results which are different in kind and not in degree from the results of the prior art, will be obtained as long as the 5 μm or less is used, as already suggested by Ali. Since the applicant has not established the criticality (see next paragraph) of the stated thickness and since these thicknesses are in common use in similar devices in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use these values in the device of Ali. Please note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed 5 μm or less or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim 8
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, comprising a second sacrificial layer 22 between the dielectric membrane 1 and the substrate portion 8,wherein the first gap 6 is further located in the base, but combination with Hierold teaches wherein the first gap 6 is further located in the sacrificial layer based on obviousness for the same reason and motivation as cited above .
Claim 10
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, wherein the first gap 6 comprises an etched portion of the substrate portion 2.
Claim 15
Arndt in figs.1-3d teaches:
A thermal conductivity sensor for measuring a concentration of a gas (e.g., ¶0014), the sensor comprising:
a substrate portion (2,lower 8);
a dielectric layer 1 provided with a primary heater 3,5;
a primary first gap 6 between the substrate portion 2,8 and the primary dielectric layer 1, wherein the primary dielectric layer 1 is located above the first primary gap 6;
a surface micro-machined cap layer (upper 8);
a sacrificial layer 22 between the cap layer 8 and the primary dielectric layer 1,
wherein a second primary gap 4 is located in the layer 2.
Arndt does not specifically teach:
comprising a primary dielectric membrane
wherein a second primary gap is located in the sacrificial layer
a pressure sensor
Regarding limitation 1 and 3
Ali in figs.1 and 3 teaches: A thermal conductivity sensor (e.g.,¶0146) for measuring a concentration of a gas, the sensor comprising: a substrate portion (11);a dielectric layer (10) comprising a dielectric membrane (4: e.g., ¶0177), wherein the dielectric membrane (4A) is provided with a heater (2A: e.g.,¶0177).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ali‘s dielectric and dielectric membrane for Arndt‘s thermal conductivity sensor . One of ordinary skill in the art knows without a membrane heat flows in silicon not gas would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the conducting heat to gas not the base.
Ali also teaches Ali teaches a pressure sensor (¶0201), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ali‘s pressure sensor for the modified Arndt‘s thermal conductivity sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to use it in feedback circuit(¶0201).
Regarding limitation 2
In the similar field of endeavor, Hierold in fig. 1 teaches a thermal sensor and surface micromachining (e.g., Abstract) which a gap 4 is located in the sacrificial layer 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Hierold‘s gap for Arndt‘s sacrificial layer and the modified Arndt’s second gap is located in the modified sacrificial layer. One of ordinary skill in the art knows surface micromachining is a method for manufacturing micromechanical structures and sacrificial layers that only serve the purpose of structuring and are entirely or partially removed during the course of the process would have been motivated to make this modification in order to construct a silicon chip (e.g., col.4 L.51-57 of Hierold) and it is a design choice to fully remove and have a larger cavity or partially or selectively removed to help controlling thermal isolation (e.g., col.5 L.36-46 of Hierold).
Claims 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arndt, US 20050025215 A1 in view of Ali, US 20220404300 A1.
Claim 17
Arndt in figs.1-3d teaches:
A method of manufacturing a thermal conductivity sensor for measuring a concentration of a gas (e.g., ¶0014), the method comprising:
forming a dielectric layer 1 on a substrate portion (2 and lower 8);
providing the dielectric layer 1 with a heater 3,5;
forming a first gap 6 between the substrate portion 2,8 and the dielectric layer 1, and the dielectric layer is located above the first gap 6 between the dielectric layer 1 and the substrate portion 2,8; and
forming a cap layer (upper 8) and a second gap 4 above the layer 1, such that a the second gap 4 is located between the cap layer 8 and the dielectric layer 1;
wherein forming the cap layer 8 comprises surface micro-machining the cap layer 8 forming the cap layer comprising:
forming a sacrificial layer 22 on the dielectric layer 1;
forming the cap layer 8 on the sacrificial layer 22; and removing a portion of the sacrificial layer 22 to form the second gap 6.
Arndt does not teach so as to form a dielectric membrane in the dielectric layer, wherein the dielectric membrane is provided with the heater.
Ali in figs.1 and 3 teaches the method of manufacturing a thermal conductivity sensor for measuring a concentration of a gas, the method comprising: forming a dielectric layer 10 on a substrate portion 11; providing the dielectric layer 10 with a heater 2; forming a first gap (not labeled but shown gap between 4A and 11 in fig.3) between the substrate portion 11 and the dielectric layer 10, so as to form a dielectric membrane 4A in the dielectric layer 10, wherein the dielectric membrane 4A is provided with the heater 2A and the dielectric membrane 4A is located above the first gap (not labeled but shown gap between 4A and 11 in fig.3) between the dielectric membrane 4A and the substrate portion 11. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ali‘s dielectric and dielectric membrane for Arndt‘s thermal conductivity sensor . One of ordinary skill in the art knows without a membrane heat flows in silicon not gas would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the conducting heat to gas not the base.
Claim 20
Arndt in view of Ali teaches the method according to claim 17, Alrdnt further teaches comprising removing a portion of the substrate portion 2 to form the first gap (6).
Claims 11-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arndt, US 20050025215 A1 in view of Ali, Hierold, US 5596219 A and Mueller, US 20200348252 A1.
Claim 11
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, but the modified Arndt does not teach wherein the cap layer comprises a cap opening .
In the similar field of endeavor, Mueller I fig.1 teaches wherein the cap layer 20 comprises a cap opening (in 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Mueller‘s opening for the modified Arndt‘s cap layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to conduct gas in the cavity.
Claim 12
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 1, but the modified Arndt does not teach wherein the dielectric membrane is a primary dielectric membrane, and wherein the thermal conductivity sensor further comprises: a reference dielectric membrane provided with a reference heater wherein the reference dielectric membrane is located over a reference gap; wherein the primary dielectric membrane is exposed to the external atmosphere; and wherein the reference dielectric membrane is disposed in sealed chamber. Mueller in fig.3 teaches wherein the dielectric membrane 2 is a primary dielectric membrane, and wherein the thermal conductivity sensor 1 further comprises: a reference dielectric membrane 4 provided with a reference heater 24 wherein the reference dielectric membrane 4 is located over a reference gap 16; wherein the primary dielectric membrane 12 is exposed to the external atmosphere; and wherein the reference dielectric membrane 4 is disposed in sealed chamber (16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use reference‘s dielectric and chamber for the modified Arndt‘s thermal conductivity sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art knows evaluation electronics units which is used for measuring a resistance change of the analysis heating element caused by the analysis gas in relation to an electrical resistance of the reference heating element (Mueller’s ¶0008) and would have been motivated to make this modification in order to cancel out everything except for effect of gas thermal conductivity.
Claim 13
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold and Mueller teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 12, Mueller in fig.3 further teaches wherein the primary dielectric membrane 2 is disposed in a primary chamber 12,14 , and wherein the reference dielectric membrane 4 is disposed in a reference chamber 16;wherein the thermal conductivity sensor 1 comprises: a primary cavity 12, the primary cavity 12 being in fluid communication with the primary chamber 12,14; and a reference cavity 16, the reference cavity 16 being in fluid communication with the reference chamber 16 and above 4 for the same reason and motivation as cited above.
Claim 16
Arndt in view of Ali and Hierold teaches the thermal conductivity sensor according to claim 15, but the modified Arndt does not teach wherein the dielectric layer further comprises a reference dielectric membrane, the thermal conductivity sensor further comprising a reference first gap between the reference dielectric membrane and the substrate portion; a reference second gap between the cap layer and the reference dielectric membrane; and a reference pressure sensor; wherein the reference dielectric membrane is located over the reference first gap between the reference dielectric membrane and the substrate portion.
Mueller teaches wherein the dielectric layer further comprises a reference dielectric membrane 4, the thermal conductivity sensor further comprising a reference first gap (16, above part shown by18 )between the reference dielectric membrane 4 and the substrate portion 8; a reference second gap 18 between the cap layer 20 and the reference dielectric membrane 4; and a reference pressure equalization (¶0028); wherein the reference dielectric membrane 4 is located over the reference first gap 16,18 between the reference dielectric membrane 4 and the substrate portion 8.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use reference‘s dielectric and chamber for the modified Arndt‘s thermal conductivity sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art knows evaluation electronics units which is used for measuring a resistance change of the analysis heating element caused by the analysis gas in relation to an electrical resistance of the reference heating element (Mueller’s ¶0008) and would have been motivated to make this modification in order to cancel out everything except for effect of gas thermal conductivity. Regarding pressure sensor, Examiner holds that it is would have been obvious to use pressure sensor along with pressure equalization of Mueller in reference chamber.one of ordinary skill in the art knows pressure variations may interduce error and having a sensor can help to verify actual conditions and there is no unexpected results if a pressure sensor added to pressure equilibration of Mueller.
Claims 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arndt, US 20050025215 A1 in view of Ali, US 20220404300 A1 and Hierold, US 5596219 A.
Claim 18
Arndt in view of Ali teaches the method according to claim 17, comprising:
forming the dielectric layer 1 on a second sacrificial layer 22, the second sacrificial layer 22 being located between the dielectric layer 1 and the substrate portion 2,lower 8; and
removing the second sacrificial layer 22 to form the first gap 6.
Ardent does not teach removing a portion of sacrificial layer.
Hierold in fig. 1 teaches a thermal sensor and surface micromachining (e.g., Abstract) which a gap 4 is located in the sacrificial layer 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Hierold‘s gap for Arndt‘s sacrificial layer and the modified Arndt’s second gap is located in the modified sacrificial layer. One of ordinary skill in the art knows surface micromachining is a method for manufacturing micromechanical structures and sacrificial layers that only serve the purpose of structuring and are entirely or partially removed during the course of the process would have been motivated to make this modification in order to construct a silicon chip (e.g., col.4 L.51-57 of Hierold) and it is a design choice to fully remove and have a larger cavity or partially or selectively removed to help controlling thermal isolation (e.g., col.5 L.36-46 of Hierold).
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 Fatemeh E. Nia whose telephone number is (469)295-9187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 4:00 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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/FATEMEH ESFANDIARI NIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights