Detailed Action
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 21-30 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 21, the claim recites “one of the two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer” in line 10 and “the other of the two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer” in line 12 however there is no antecedent basis for “the two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer” but rather for “two adjoining sides of the first portion of the first superconducting layer” so that it is unclear if this limitation is meant to require --two adjoining sides of the first portion of the first superconducting layer-- or any --two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer—for the purpose of examination either interpretation will be considered valid. Examiner suggest amending to clarify --covering and disposed directly on only a first portion of the tunnel barrier layer that is directly on the other of the two adjoining sides of the top surface of the first superconducting layer and covering and disposed directly on a second portion of the tunnel barrier layer that is directly on the one of the two adjoining sides that extends from a top surface to a bottom surface of the first superconducting layer—so as to properly refer consistently to previous limitations in the claim .
Regarding claim 21, the claim recites “an other of the two adjoining sides” in line 10 and “the other of the two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer” in line 15 however it is unclear which adjoining sides are being referred to for example whether the claim is referring to the two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer or the first superconducting layer, examiner suggest amending the claim to recite –a sidewall of the first portion of the tunnel barrier layer-- so as to properly refer consistently to previous limitations in the claim.
Regarding claims 22-30, the claims are dependent on and require all the limitations of claim 21 and are therefore rejected for the same reason as claim 21.
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 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.
Claims 21, 23-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yascovits et. Al. (US 20190042967 A1 hereinafter Yascovits) and further in view of Awaji et. Al. (US 5034374 A hereinafter Awaji).
Regarding claim 21, Yascovits teaches in Fig. 3C with associated text a device, comprising: a substrate 302; a first superconducting layer 310 directly adjacent and on the substrate (Fig. 3C, [0065]), the first superconducting layer having a first portion (portion near 314) and a second portion (portion near 316); a tunnel barrier layer 311 on the first portion of the first superconducting layer (Fig. 3C [0066]); and a second superconducting layer 312 having a third portion (portion at 314) covering and disposed directly on only a portion of one of two adjoining sides of the tunnel barrier layer (top of the tunnel barrier) on the top surface of the first superconducting layer (Fig. 3C) and covering and disposed directly on the second portion of an other of the two adjoining sides (side surface interfacing second superconducting layer) of the tunnel barrier layer on the side between the top surface and the bottom surface of the first superconducting layer (Fig. 3C) and the second superconducting layer having a fourth portion (portion near 316) on the second portion of the first superconducting layer (Fig 3C, [0068]), with a gap (space between the third and fourth portions of the second superconducting layer) between the fourth portion and another of two adjoining sides (Fig. 3C).
Yascovits does not specify the tunnel barrier layer is on two adjoining sides of the first portion of the first superconducting layer, and wherein the one of the two adjoining sides extends from a top surface to a bottom surface of the first superconducting layer.
Awaji discloses in Figs. 9 with associated text a josephson junction element similar to that of Yascovits wherein a tunnel barrier layer 63 is on two adjoining sides (upper and side surfaces of 62) of a first portion of a first superconducting layer 62, and wherein the one of the two adjoining sides extends from a top surface to a bottom surface of the first superconducting layer (Fig. 9, column 8, lines 52- column 9, line 10)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a structure similar to that of Awaji for the josephson junction of Yascovits because according to Awaji such a structure is suitable to provide a Josephson element composed of lower and upper superconductor thin films, and an insulator film therebetween not having pin-holes (column 2, lines 5-8).
Regarding claim 23, Yascovits teaches the first portion of the first superconducting layer, the tunnel barrier layer, and the third portion of the second superconducting layer form a primary Josephson junction 314 [0071].
Regarding claim 24, Yascovits teaches the tunnel barrier layer comprises a protected portion of the tunnel barrier layer (portion covered by 312 Fig. 3C).
Regarding claim 25, Yascovits teaches the third portion of the second superconducting layer and the fourth portion of the second superconducting layer are discontinuous (Fig. 3C).
Regarding claim 26, Yascovits teaches the first portion and the second portion (here the second portion of the first superconductor layer is interpreted to be the separate portion of 306 on the right) of the first superconducting layer are discontinuous (Fig. 3C).
Regarding claim 27, Yascovits teaches the second superconducting layer having a fifth portion on a third portion of the first superconducting layer (Fig. 3C).
Regarding claim 30, Yascovits teaches one or more circuit elements (wiring 320) coupled to the second superconducting layer (Fig. 3C) and the first superconducting layer on a first side of the one or more circuit elements and disposed on the substrate on a second side of the one or more circuit elements (Fig. 3C).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) s 21-30 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 AARON J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-7629. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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, Toledo Fernando can be reached at 5712721867. 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.
/AARON J GRAY/Examiner, Art Unit 2897