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 § 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.
Claims 34, 35, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hunt et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0167374 A1, hereinafter “Hunt”).
In reference to claim 34, Hunt discloses a structure which meets the claim. Fig. 1-3, 6a-7, and 10a-12 of Hunt discloses a nanoelectronic component structure which comprises a substrate (Si, SiO2) having at least one cavity formed in it. At least one nanostructure (24) at least partially spans the at least one cavity. There are contact electrodes (18, 20). Fig. 6b, 10a, and 10b show that at least one arm (14, 16) partially traverses the at least one cavity at least on one side of the at least one cavity so that a gap is formed above the at least one cavity and the at least one nanostructure (24) disposed on the at least one arm (14, 16). A gap is formed above the at least one cavity and the at least one nanostructure (24) disposed on the at least one arm (14, 16). The at least one nanostructure (24) spans the gap and is fixed between the at least one arm (14, 16) and the contact electrodes (18, 20) each formed on either side of the gap. Fig. 6b, 10a, and 10b show that the at least one arm (14, 16) with an arm end that is curved and projects over the at least one cavity. Fig. 2 and 3 of Hunt show that the tension or stress of the at least one nanostructure (24) is tunable by an RF bias (p. 2, paragraph 16, p. 3, paragraphs 42-43). Thus the at least one nanostructure (24) is tensioned.
With regard to claim 35, fig. 2 and 3 of Hunt show the at least one nanostructure (24) is mechanically tensioned (p. 2, paragraph 16, p. 3, paragraphs 42-43) between the contact electrodes (18, 20).
In reference to claim 37, fig. 12 shows that there is at least one control electrode (28) disposed in the at least one cavity.
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.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt in view of Nakamura et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2005/0099092 A1, hereinafter “Nakamura”) and further in view of Inaba et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0102217 A1, hereinafter “Inaba”).
In reference to claim 38, fig. 12 of Hunt discloses that the at least one nanostructure (24) is one of a plurality of nanostructures (24). At least two of the nanostructures (24) have different lengths. Hunt discloses adjusting the space between the control electrode (28) in the bottom of the cavity and the nanostructure (24) in order to tune the resonant frequency (p. 5, paragraph 55).
Hunt does not explicitly disclose adjusting the depth of the cavity to tune the frequency. However Nakamura discloses implementing a plurality of resonators with different cavity depths in order to have resonators with different resonating frequencies (p. 3, paragraph 35, p. 5, paragraph 60). Nakamura discloses that such a method has the benefit of any easy manufacturing process (p. 1, paragraph 12, p. 3, paragraph 34). In view of Nakamura, it would therefore be obvious to use different cavity depths in the Hunt device.
Hunt does not disclose that the nanostructures (24) are aligned in different spatial directions. However Hunt discloses using the nanostructures/sensors (24) as a force detection sensor (p. 5, paragraph 55). Inaba discloses that using multiple sensors aligned in different directions provides the benefits of increased sensitivity and precision (p. 6, paragraph 99). In view of Inaba, it would therefore be obvious to implement a plurality of force detecting nanostructures (24) that are aligned in different spatial directions.
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt in view of Vossough et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2018/0186623 A1, hereinafter “Vossough”).
In reference to claim 43, Hunt does not explicitly disclose that at least one mass body is disposed on the at least one nanostructure (24). However Vossough discloses providing a mass body at the end of a cantilever in order to detect signals with appropriate frequency and sensitivity for force sensing such as acceleration and inertia (p. 3, paragraphs 32 and 34). Hunt discloses implementing the at least one nanostructure (24) as a cantilever force sensor (p. 5, paragraph 55). Furthermore Hunt discloses that increased force sensitivity is desirable in the art (p. 1, paragraph 6). In view of the above, it would therefore be obvious to dispose a mass body on the end of the at least one nanostructure/cantilever disclosed by Hunt.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 30, 33, 46, 48-50, 52, and 56 are allowed.
Claim 40 and 41 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: in the examiner’s opinion, it would not be obvious to implement a nanoelectronic component structure or its method of production with at least one nanostructure which at least partially spans at least one cavity in a substrate, a contact electrode, at least one arm on at least one side of the at least one cavity which partially traverses the at least one cavity with a gap formed above the at least one cavity in combination with the at least one nanostructure having a predetermined breaking point and the cavity being at least partially filled with a sacrificial material with the contact electrode on the least one nanostructure as described by the applicant in claims 30 and 46. In the examiner’s opinion, it would not be obvious to implement a nanoelectronic component structure with at least one tensioned nanostructure which at least partially spans at least one cavity in a substrate, contact electrodes, at least one arm on at least one side of the at least one cavity which partially traverses the at least one cavity with a gap formed above the at least one cavity with the at least one arm end being curved/shrunken in combination with the arm end in a filler material in the cavity as specified by the applicant in claims 40 and 41.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN QUINTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1920. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9-5:30.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at 571-270-3042. 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.
/KEVIN QUINTO/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights