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 § 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 1-13 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “wherein the readout element is configured for its dissipation to be fixedly or tunably dominated by the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters for the readout of the first quantum state.” However, it is unclear what is being dissipated and therefore this renders the claim indefinite. Is the dissipation referring to electrons, thermal energy, amplitude of the signal, etc.? Neither the claims nor the disclosure provide context for what is dissipating. For the purposes of examination this will be treated as functional language. Therefore, the claims are rejected as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2-3, 5-6 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “wherein the resonance circuit has a first quality factor indicating the intrinsic dissipation of the resonator and a second quality factor indicating the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters, the second quality factor being smaller than the first quality factor” The claim is indefinite because while claim 2 begins by reciting an apparatus, claim 2 further includes properties of the apparatus that are contingent upon how it is operated and therefore require a method of using the structure. The claim is not considered a product by process claim because the claim does not state that any feature was made using the method.
A single claim that includes both an apparatus and a method of using the apparatus is indefinite (See MPEP 2173.05(p)(II)). It is unclear if infringement would occur when the device is created as an apparatus or when the device is operated in order to have the required Q factors. For the purposes of examination the process limitation will be treated as an intended result limitation (i.e. the apparatus must be capable of having the relative Q factors).
Claim 3 recites “wherein the resonator of the first readout element has a first resonance frequency and the second readout resonator has a second resonance frequency different from the first resonance frequency” The claim is indefinite because while claim 3 begins by reciting an apparatus, claim 3 further includes properties of the apparatus that are contingent upon how it is operated and therefore require a method of using the structure. The claim is not considered a product by process claim because the claim does not state that any feature was made using the method.
A single claim that includes both an apparatus and a method of using the apparatus is indefinite (See MPEP 2173.05(p)(II)). It is unclear if infringement would occur when the device is created as an apparatus or when the device is operated in order to have the required resonance frequencies. For the purposes of examination the process limitation will be treated as an intended result limitation (i.e. the apparatus must be capable of having the relative resonance frequencies).
Claim 5 recites “wherein the output signal for determining the first quantum state is provided from the one or more calorimeters based on the magnitude of the thermal energy” The claim is indefinite because while claim 5 begins by reciting an apparatus, claim 5 further includes a method of operation whereby the output signal is based on the magnitude of the thermal energy. The claim is not considered a product by process claim because the claim does not state that any feature was made using the method.
A single claim that includes both an apparatus and a method of using the apparatus is indefinite (See MPEP 2173.05(p)(II)). It is unclear if infringement would occur when the device is created as an apparatus or when the device is operated in the claimed manner. For the purposes of examination the process limitation will be treated as an intended result limitation (i.e. the apparatus must be capable of being operated in this manner).
Claim 6 recites “wherein the output signal for determining the first quantum state is provided from the one or more calorimeters based on the timing of the conversion of the readout signal into thermal energy” The claim is indefinite because while claim 6 begins by reciting an apparatus, claim 6 further includes a method of operation whereby the output signal is based on the timing of the conversion od the readout signal into thermal energy. The claim is not considered a product by process claim because the claim does not state that any feature was made using the method.
A single claim that includes both an apparatus and a method of using the apparatus is indefinite (See MPEP 2173.05(p)(II)). It is unclear if infringement would occur when the device is created as an apparatus or when the device is operated in the claimed manner. For the purposes of examination the process limitation will be treated as an intended result limitation (i.e. the apparatus must be capable of being operated in this manner).
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-7, 9-10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Donvil, Brecht & Muratore-Ginanneschi, Paolo & Pekola, Jukka & Schwieger, Kay. (2018). A model for calorimetric measurements in an open quantum system (Donvil).
Re claim 1, Donvil teaches a quantum-state readout arrangement comprising:
a first solid-state qubit (transmon qubit Fig. 1(a)) for providing a first quantum state;
a readout element (resonance circuit and NIS junction Fig. 1(a)) for determining the first quantum state, the readout element comprising:
a readout actuator (resonator section II) for facilitating a readout signal to be provided from the first solid-state qubit for readout of the first quantum state; and
one or more calorimeters (calorimeter within the normal metal in NIS junction Fig. 1(a)) arranged to receive the readout signal and convert at least a part of the readout signal into thermal energy for providing an output signal for determining the first quantum state (section II);
wherein the readout element is configured for its dissipation to be fixedly or tunably dominated by the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters for the readout of the first quantum state (this is functional language and the disclosure links this function to the claimed structure, the structure required to provide this function readout element comprises the resonator and calorimeter which is taught in Donvil Fig. 1(a) sections II-IV, the structure is the same as that claimed therefore the ordinary skilled artisan would expect the same structure to act the same way MPEP 2112.01 (I)).
Re claim 2, Donvil teaches wherein the readout actuator comprises a resonator (resonator section II), coupled to the one or more calorimeters and the first solid-state qubit for forming a resonance circuit for the readout of the first quantum state (section II Fig. 1(a)) and wherein the resonance circuit has a first quality factor indicating the intrinsic dissipation of the resonator and a second quality factor indicating the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters, the second quality factor being smaller than the first quality factor (this limitation is treated as functional language as this is a device claim, however, the circuit is constructed such that a signal passes from the qubit to the resonator and then to the calorimeter (Fig. 1 (a)-(b)) therefore it is to be expected that due to this configuration the Q factor after the resonator would be higher than the Q factor after the calorimeter).
Re claim 3, Donvil teaches comprising a second solid- state qubit for providing a second quantum state and a second readout element for determining the second quantum state; wherein the second readout element comprises a second resonator, for readout of the second quantum state and wherein the resonator of the first readout element has a first resonance frequency and the second readout resonator has a second resonance frequency different from the first resonance frequency (while Donvil models a single qubit-calorimeter integrated circuit, examiner takes official notice that quantum computers require multiple qubits to perform substantive operations).
Re claim 5, Donvil teaches wherein the output signal for determining the first quantum state is provided from the one or more calorimeters based on the magnitude of the thermal energy (the structure is capable of this operation due to the presence of and wiring of the claimed components).
Re claim 6, Donvil teaches wherein the output signal for determining the first quantum state is provided from the one or more calorimeters based on the timing of the conversion of the readout signal into thermal energy (the structure is capable of this operation due to the presence of and wiring of the claimed components).
Re claim 7, Donvil teaches wherein the one or more calorimeters comprise one or more electron temperature calorimeters (free electron gas within the normal metal connected to phonon bath section II).
Re claim 9, Donvil teaches wherein the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters is tunable (functional language met by the resonance circuit elements such as the capacitors between qubit and calorimeters Fig. 1(a) section II-IV).
Re claim 10, Donvil teaches comprising a tunable reactance coupled to the one or more calorimeters for tuning the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters (functional language met by the resonance circuit elements such as the capacitors between qubit and calorimeters Fig. 1(a) section II-IV).
Re claim 14, Donvil teaches a method for quantum-state readout comprising:
providing a readout signal correlated with a quantum state of a solid-state qubit (transmon qubit) for readout of the quantum state (section II-IV);
receiving in one or more calorimeters (calorimeters) the readout signal for readout of the quantum state (section II-IV); and
converting at least a part of the readout signal in the one or more calorimeters into thermal energy for providing an output signal for determining the quantum state (electron-phonon interactions section II-IV);
wherein the dissipation for the quantum-state readout is fixedly or tunably dominated by the dissipation stemming from the one or more calorimeters for the readout of the quantum state this is functional language and the disclosure links this function to the claimed structure, the structure required to provide this function readout element comprises the resonator and calorimeter which is taught in Donvil Fig. 1(a) sections II-IV, the structure is the same as that claimed therefore the ordinary skilled artisan would expect the same structure to act the same way MPEP 2112.01 (I)).
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.
The factual inquiries 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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donvil, Brecht & Muratore-Ginanneschi, Paolo & Pekola, Jukka & Schwieger, Kay. (2018). A model for calorimetric measurements in an open quantum system (Donvil) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Eyob A. Sete, John M. Martinis, and Alexander N. Korotkov. (2015) Quantum theory of a bandpass Purcell filter for qubit readout (Sete).
Re claim 8, Donvil teaches the arrangement according to claim 1, and Donvil further teaches an input line for providing an input signal for providing the readout signal (Fig. 1(a)) however, Donvil does not teach one or more Purcell- filters coupled between the input line and the one or more calorimeters for suppressing the decay of the first quantum state due to the one or more calorimeters.
Sete teaches an arrangement of transmon superconductive qubits having input and output including readout circuitry wherein Purcell filters are placed between the qubit and the readout (Fig. 2 section II).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to add Purcell filters between the qubit and readout of the transmon superconducting circuit of Donvil.
The motivation to do so is that Purcell filters provide the predictable result of impeding propagation of the photon emitted at the qubit frequency thus lowering the Purcell rate y order of magnitude (section I).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIGITTE A PATERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1752. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, William Kraig can be reached at 571-272-8660. 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.
BRIGITTE A. PATERSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896
/BRIGITTE A PATERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights