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.
Election/Restrictions
Claim(s) 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected device/method claim(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse of Group II, claim(s) 1-14 in the reply filed on 8/3/2026.
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 of this title, 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 1, 3-4, 6-8, 10-11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramaneti et al. (US publication 2019/0314766 A1), hereinafter referred to as Ramaneti, in view of Chowdhury et al. (US publication 2026/0250881 A1), hereinafter referred to as Chowdhury.
Regarding claim 1, Ramaneti teaches a method of fabricating a nanocrystalline diamond (NCD) film (fig. 1 and related text), the method comprising: loading a nanodiamond-seeded substrate into a microwave plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (MWPECVD) chamber ([0087-0092], fig. 1).
Ramaneti does not explicitly teach and processing the nanodiamond-seeded substrate with a plasma of C.sub.xH.sub.y (y≥x), CO.sub.2 and H.sub.2, at a temperature less than 300 degrees Celsius, to form a layer of nanocrystalline diamond thereon.
Chowdhury teaches and processing the nanodiamond-seeded substrate with a plasma of C.sub.xH.sub.y (y≥x), CO.sub.2 and H.sub.2, at a temperature less than 300 degrees Celsius, to form a layer of nanocrystalline diamond thereon ([0035])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ramaneti with that of Chowdhury so that and processing the nanodiamond-seeded substrate with a plasma of C.sub.xH.sub.y (y≥x), CO.sub.2 and H.sub.2, at a temperature less than 300 degrees Celsius, to form a layer of nanocrystalline diamond thereon so that diamond layer is grown with diamond grains configured to provide a degree of phase purity of not less than about 90% ([0035]).
Regarding claim 3, Chowdhury teaches wherein a stage temperature of a stage in the MWPECVD chamber is maintained between 150-250° C. throughout the processing of the nanodiamond-seeded substrate ([0035]).
Regarding claim 4, Ramaneti and Chowdhury do not explicitly teach wherein a gap between the stage and a plasma source of the MWPECVD chamber is greater than 10 mm. However, this value is a parameter that one must consider and decide upon when forming nanocrystalline diamond using plasma and will depend on plasma energy, temperature, growth rate etc. So, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to optimize this value to meet customer requirements, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re AIler, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 6, Chowdhury teaches wherein processing the nanodiamond-seeded substrate is performed at a power greater than 50 W ([0056-0057]).
Regarding claim 7, Chowdhury teaches wherein the plasma is a continuous wave plasma ([0056-0057]).
Regarding claim 8, Ramaneti teaches a method of fabricating a nanocrystalline diamond (NCD) film (fig. 1 and related text), the method comprising: loading a bare substrate that has been surface-treated and incubated into a microwave plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (CVD) chamber ([0087-0092], fig. 1).
Ramaneti does not explicitly teach and processing the bare substrate that has been surface-treated and incubated with a plasma of C.sub.xH.sub.y (y≥ x), CO.sub.2 and H.sub.2, at a temperature less than 300 degrees Celsius, to form a layer of nanocrystalline diamond thereon.
Chowdhury teaches and processing the bare substrate that has been surface-treated and incubated with a plasma of C.sub.xH.sub.y (y≥ x), CO.sub.2 and H.sub.2, at a temperature less than 300 degrees Celsius, to form a layer of nanocrystalline diamond thereon ([0035])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ramaneti with that of Chowdhury so that and processing the bare substrate that has been surface-treated and incubated with a plasma of C.sub.xH.sub.y (y≥ x), CO.sub.2 and H.sub.2, at a temperature less than 300 degrees Celsius, to form a layer of nanocrystalline diamond thereon so that diamond layer is grown with diamond grains configured to provide a degree of phase purity of not less than about 90% ([0035]).
Regarding claim 10, Chowdhury teaches wherein a stage temperature of a stage in the MWPECVD chamber is maintained between 150-250° C. throughout the processing of the bare substrate ([0035])
Regarding claim 11, Ramaneti and Chowdhury do not explicitly teach wherein a gap between the stage and a plasma source of the MWPECVD chamber is greater than 10 mm. However, this value is a parameter that one must consider and decide upon when forming nanocrystalline diamond using plasma and will depend on plasma energy, temperature, growth rate etc. So, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to optimize this value to meet customer requirements, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re AIler, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 13, Chowdhury teaches wherein processing the bare substrate is performed at a power greater than 50 W ([0056-0057]).
Regarding claim 14, Chowdhury teaches wherein the plasma is a continuous wave plasma ([0056-0057]).
Claim 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramaneti in view of Chowdhury, as applied to claim 1 or 8 above, and further in view of Schirmann et al. (US publication 2024/0208858 A1), hereinafter referred to as Schirmann.
Regarding claim 5, Ramaneti and Chowdhury disclose all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Ramaneti and Chowdhury do not explicitly disclose wherein the layer of nanocrystalline diamond has a surface roughness of less than 10 nm rms.
Schirmann discloses wherein the layer of nanocrystalline diamond has a surface roughness of less than 10 nm rms ([0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ramaneti and Chowdhury with that of Schirmann so that wherein the layer of nanocrystalline diamond has a surface roughness of less than 10 nm rms to allow for optically clear, smooth, and scratch resistant diamond coatings ([0004]).
Regarding claim 12, Ramaneti and Chowdhury disclose all the limitations of claim 18 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Ramaneti and Chowdhury do not explicitly disclose wherein the layer of nanocrystalline diamond has a surface roughness of less than 10 nm rms.
Schirmann discloses wherein the layer of nanocrystalline diamond has a surface roughness of less than 10 nm rms ([0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ramaneti and Chowdhury with that of Schirmann so that wherein the layer of nanocrystalline diamond has a surface roughness of less than 10 nm rms to allow for optically clear, smooth, and scratch resistant diamond coatings ([0004]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The claims contain limitations that none of the prior art of record discloses, teaches or fairly suggests, alone or in combinations when taken in combination with all other limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammed R Alam whose telephone number is 469-295-9205 and can normally be reached between 8:00am-6:00pm (M-F) or by e-mail via Mohammed.Alam1@uspto.gov.
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, Jacob Choi can be reached on 469-295-9060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMMED R ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
