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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 11/17/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: reference number 50 (see paragraph [0067]) does not appear in the drawings.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character not mentioned in the description: reference characters 32, 35a and 35b (see Fig. 2) do not appear in the specification.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the (1) heat isolation structure (claims 3 and 7) and the (2) more than one open hole H (claim 7) must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 appears to have a typographical error in the last line. The examiner respectfully suggests replacing “boding” with -- bonding --.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-8 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 “a heater formed in a center area of the respective membranes.” Because the membranes are spaced apart from each other, it is unclear whether or not the claim is reciting that the hydrogen sensor comprises two heaters. The examiner has interpreted the claim to mean that there are two heaters.
Claims 2-6 depend on claim 1 and are rejected for inheriting the same problem.
Claim 2 recites “(In the above equation … )” at the end of the claim. Because the phrases are in parentheses, it is unclear whether or not the phrases in the parentheses are required limitations of the claim. The examiner has interpreted the claim to require the phrases in the parentheses.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the membrane". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear to which membrane of the “two membranes” of claim 1 “the membrane” refers.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the heater". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear to which heater of the two heaters of claim 1 “the heater” refers.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "thereon". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “thereon” refers to the rear surface of the substrate, or the membrane, or on each of the sensing element and the reference element. Furthermore, the specification and drawings do not show or describe any specific heat isolation structures other than the membranes of the hydrogen sensor. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. The examiner has interpreted step S4 to mean that the substrate is etched to reveal the underside of the membrane (i.e. the underside of the membrane is the heat isolation structure).
Claim 7 recites “(In the above equation … )” at the end of the claim. Because the phrases are in parentheses, it is unclear whether or not the phrases in the parentheses are required limitations of the claim. The examiner has interpreted the claim to require the phrases in the parentheses.
Claim 8 depends on claim 7 and is rejected for inheriting the same problems.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the open hole". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear to which of the “more than one open hole H” of claim 7 “the open hole H” refers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 2005-0091281 by Lee et al. (“Lee”).
As for claim 1, Lee discloses a hydrogen sensor (Fig. 4) having an integrated structure comprising:
a housing (70, 80) in which a stem (70) and a cap (80) are bonded (see Fig. 4) to accommodate a chip (60) therein,
wherein the chip (60) includes:
a substrate (50);
two membranes (part of 52 above 56 in Fig. 5d) formed on the substrate (50) to be spaced apart from each other at a predetermined interval and configured to form a sensing element (60a) and a reference element (60b), respectively;
a heater (center part of 54 in Fig. 3a) formed in a center area of the respective membranes (see Fig. 3a) and configured to generate Joule heat through heating up to a sensing temperature;
an electrode pad (top end of 72) formed to be spaced apart from the membranes and the heater for a predetermined distance; and
at least one open hole (73) formed in a predetermined area of the stem corresponding to the sensing element so that the sensing element comes in contact with a gas.
As for claim 2, Lee discloses that a diameter D of the open hole H satisfies Equation 1 below:
[Equation 1] D <(a+2T) / (tan θ)
(In the above equation, D represents the diameter of the open hole, a represents a length of a membrane side of the sensing element, T represents a thickness of the substrate, and θ is an angle equal to or less than 90 degrees.)
When θ = 0 for the case that the membranes and substrate are parallel, the equation is satisfied.
As for claim 3, Lee discloses that the substrate has a structure in which a rear surface thereof is etched so that the sensing element and the reference element have a heat isolation structure (the undersides of the membranes above the cavities; see Fig. 4).
As for claim 4, Lee discloses that the membrane is a single-layer or multilayer thin film including at least one of silicon oxide (SiOx), silicon nitride (SiNx), and silicon oxynitride (SiOxNy) (see the paragraph beginning “First, as shown in Figure 5A, the membrane layer 52 is formed …”.
As for claim 6, Lee discloses that one or more of an air and an inert gas are injected into an inner area composed of the chip and the cap (see the paragraph beginning “Subsequently, although not shown, the carrier structure to be used as a reference part …”.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2005-0091281 by Lee et al. (“Lee”) in view of JP 2005-3384 by Komatsu et al. (“Komatsu”).
As for claim 5, Lee discloses the hydrogen sensor of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above) and that the heater is able to heat up (Lee: see the paragraph beginning “Figure 6 shows a simple circuit configuration …”).
Lee does not disclose that the temperature is equal to or greater than 400°C.
However, Komatsu discloses a temperature that is equal to or greater than 400°C (Komatsu: paragraph [0003]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the temperature of Lee to be equal to or greater than 400°C as disclosed by Komatsu in order to allow a gas to be detected.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0041347 by Matsukura et al. (“Matsukura”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0021716 by Lee et al. (“Lee ‘716”).
As for claim 7, Matsukura discloses a method for manufacturing a hydrogen sensor (Fig. 1) having an integrated structure, the method comprising:
(S1) forming a membrane (21) on a substrate (26);
(S2) forming a heater (20) on the membrane (21);
(S3) forming an electrode pad (23A) on the substrate (see Fig. 4);
(S4) forming a hollow in a rear surface of the substrate on which the membrane is not formed (paragraph [0056]) so that a sensing element (wire of 20) and a reference element (another wire of 20) have a heat isolation structure (27) thereon;
(S5) preparing a stem (7) having more than one open hole H (open area over 2 and open area over 3) in a predetermined area;
(S6) mounting a chip (3) on the stem (7); and
(S7) bonding (paragraph [0076]) the stem (7) and a cap together (5).
Matsukura does not disclose that the membrane is formed by depositing and then etching an insulation film, the heater is formed by forming and then etching a conductive thin film, the electrode is formed by depositing and then etching an electrode material and that the hollow is formed by etching the rear surface of the substrate.
However, Lee ‘716 discloses that a membrane is formed by depositing (paragraph [0054]) and then etching (paragraph [0061]) an insulation film (102), a heater (107) is formed by forming and then etching a conductive thin film (paragraph 0058]), an electrode (108) is formed by depositing and then etching an electrode material (paragraph [0058]) and that a hollow (112) is formed by etching a rear surface of a substrate (paragraph [0060]).
Matsukura and Lee ‘716 included each step claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the depositing, forming and etching steps of Lee ‘718 with the forming steps of Matsukura by using the depositing, forming and etching steps to form the membrane, heater and electrode as suggested by paragraphs [0054], [0058], [0060] and [0061] of Lee ‘716, and that in combination, the steps of Matsukura and Lee ‘716 merely perform the same functions as each does separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Matsukura by including the depositing, forming and etching steps of Lee ‘716 in order to achieve the predictable result of providing well-known methods for forming the membrane, the heater and the electrode.
As for claim 8, Matsukura as modified by Lee ‘716 discloses that a diameter D of the open hole H satisfies Equation 1 below:
[Equation 1] D <(a+2T) / (tan θ) (In the above equation, D represents the diameter of the open hole, a represents a length of a membrane side of the sensing element, T represents a thickness of the substrate, and θ is an angle equal to or less than 90 degrees.)
When θ = 0 for the case that the membrane and substrate are parallel, the equation is satisfied.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 11,226,303 issued to Mueller et al. (“Mueller”) is cited for all that it discloses including a hydrogen sensor including a substrate with two membranes.
U.S. Patent 6,840,103 issued to Lee et al. (“Lee ‘103”) is cited for all that it discloses including a gas sensor including a substrate with two membranes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN N OLAMIT whose telephone number is (571)270-1969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (Pacific).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JUSTIN N OLAMIT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853