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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 6/17/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al. (US 2011/0315988, hereinafter, Yu.) (See also the disclosed written office opinion of the international report disclosed by the Applicant on 4/23/24.)
In regard to claim 1, in figs. S2A AND S2B, Yu discloses a pixelated electronic sensor, comprising:
a CMOS sensor and a plurality of receptors (para [0156]);
wherein multiple receptors are positioned within each pixel of the CMOS sensor (the CMOS image sensor, para. 0268 and fig. W2A..
An image sensor comprises a plurality of pixels, each pixel of which has at least a nanostructure 1 in a form of a nanowire that can convert light impinging thereon to electrical signals, para. [0182]. A pixel S710 (fig. S7A) including three nanopillars (receptors) R, G, B, having different sizes configured to absorb and/or detect red, green, and blue light, respectively, according to an embodiment, para. [0212]. Thus, nanopillars hereby function as claimed "receptors" as they are configured to absorb light).
Regarding claim 2, Yu discloses the sensor of claim 1, wherein each receptor is a nano-material (A pixel S710 including three nanopillars R, G, B, having different sizes configured to absorb and/or detect red, green, and blue light, respectively, according to an embodiment, para. 0212).
Regarding claim 3, Yu discloses the sensor of claim 2, wherein each nano-material is positioned within one wavelength from another nano-material (light at different wavelengths may be detected nanopillars at different locations and with different sizes. A three- or four-nanopillar pixel may be fabricated. Of course, pixels having additional pillars are also possible, para. 0210).
Regarding claim 4, Yu further discloses wherein the wavelength corresponds to a range from infrared to ultraviolet light (the nanowires can also be made to have a strong absorption in wavelengths not in the visible spectrum, such as in the ultraviolet (UV) or infrared (IR) spectra. In an embodiment, each nanowire can have transistor therein or thereon, para. 0363).
Regarding claim 10, Yu further discloses wherein, among the multiple receptors positioned within each pixel of the CMOS sensor, no photons are wasted (An image sensor comprises a plurality of pixels, each pixel of which has at least a nanostructure 1 in a form of a nanowire that can convert light impinging thereon to electrical signals, para. [0182]. The front side photodiode is not for photo absorption, but rather for collecting the charges coming from the nanostructure 1 and from the backside substrate where photon absorption takes place. The nanostructure 1 could have a dielectric layer (cladding layer) surrounding the NW and two vertical photogates, one for the switch and the other for controlling the potential in the NW, para. 0388).
Regarding claim 11, Yu further discloses wherein each incident photon within the wavelength is absorbed by one of the receptors within the pixel (An image sensor comprises a plurality of pixels, each pixel of which has at least a nanostructure 1 in a form of a nanowire that can convert light impinging thereon to electrical signals, para. 0182. Impinging photons in the nanostructure 1 are converted to electron hole pairs and in one implementation are subsequently separated by the electric fields generated by the p-n junction along the length of the nanostructure 1, para. 0288).
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(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Farrow et al. (US 2017/0334717, hereinafter, Farrow.)
Regarding claim 5, Yu fails to explicitly disclose the sensor of claim 2, wherein the nano-material comprises functionalized carbon nanotubes (CNTs). Farrow, in figs. 1A-1B, discloses an analogous device including the CMOS imaging fabricated by incorporating the vertical carbon nanotube sensors into a CMOS addressing architecture (para. [0028]) and teaches the nano-material comprises functionalized carbon nanotubes (CNTs) (within the array are pixels consisting of an access transistor and a vertical carbon nanotube, para. 0029. The carbon nanotubes may be functionalized to provide chemical information about a sample, para. 0006). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time application was filed to modify the sensor of Yu to include the nano-material comprises functionalized carbon nanotubes (CNTs) as taught. The motivation being to provide an exemplary imaging device that requires no traditional optics but uses an addressable array of vertically oriented carbon nanotubes (para. [0006]).
Regarding claim 8, Yu fails to explicitly disclose, wherein each of the functionalized carbon nanotubes associated within a single pixel is operable to absorb a different wavelength of light. Farrow teaches each of the functionalized carbon nanotubes associated within a single pixel is operable to absorb a wavelength of light (each nanoscale pixel includes a vertical carbon nanotube, which is accessed through a transistor, called an access transistor. An image can be resolved down to the nanoscale in real time. In one embodiment, an individual pixel is read by activating the pixel's access transistor via raising the corresponding row line to high, para. 0030. The carbon nanotubes may be functionalized to provide chemical information about a sample. The technique relies on the ability to reduce the nearest neighbor spacing between the carbon nanotubes to less than the wavelength of light used in traditional optical microscopes. The nanoscope can have a resolution of less than 100 nm in one embodiment, para. 0006). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application was filed to modify the sensor of Yu to include each of the functionalized carbon nanotubes associated within a single pixel is operable to absorb a different wavelength of light as taught by Farrow. The motivation being to provide an exemplary imaging device that requires no traditional optics but uses an addressable array of vertically oriented carbon nanotubes (para. 0006).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu and Farrow as applied to claim 1, 5, and 8 above, and further in view of Hyman (US 8,921,473.)
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Yu and Farrow fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the functionalized carbon nanotubes are functionalized with molecules selected from a group consisting of: C60, Poly(3-hexylthiophene-2,5-diyl) (P3HT)), and nanodots. Hyman is in the field of carbon nanotubes (col. 11, lines 23-24) and teaches the functionalized carbon nanotubes are functionalized with nanodots (Examples are photonic crystals formed with nanomaterials like carbon nanotubes or CNTs. These might be grown from catalytic nickel nanoparticles or nanodots, col. 11, lines 22-25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application was filed to modify the sensor of Yu to include the functionalized carbon nanotubes are functionalized with molecules selected from a group consisting of nanodots. The motivation being to provide photonic crystal desirable for use in images for efficient photoluminescence at room-temperature (Hyman, col. 11, lines 19-21).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu, Farrow and Hyman as applied to claims 1, 5, and 8 above, and further in view of WO 2018/026830 to Agilome Inc. (hereinafter, "Agilome").
Regarding claim 7, the above combination fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the nanodots substantially comprise tungsten disulfide (WS2). Agliome is in the field of a CMOS sensor array (para. [0226]) and teaches the nano-materials substantially comprise tungsten disulfide (WS2) (2D nanomaterial may be a graphene layer, silicone, molybdenum disulfide, black phosphorous (phosphorene), borophene, tungsten disulfide, para. 0312). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the sensor of Yu to include the nanodots substantially comprise tungsten disulfide (WS2) as taught by Agliome. The motivation being to provide one-dimensional and two-dimensional nanomaterial-based field effect transistors useful for chemical and biological analysis (Agliome, para. 0002).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overYu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2018/026830 to Agilome Inc. (hereinafter, "Agilome").
Regarding claim 9, Yu fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the nano-material comprises transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs). Agliome teaches the nano-material comprises transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) (the 2D nanomaterial may be composed of one or more of graphene, molybdenum disulfide (M0S2), MoSe2, phosphorene (black phosphorous), silicene, borophene, tungsten disulfide (WS2), boron nitride, WSe2, stanene (2D tin), graphane, germanane, nickel HITP, Mxenes (Ti2C, (Ti0.5,Nb0.5), V2C, Nb2C, Ti3C2, Ti3CN, Nb4C3, Ta4C3), and/or transition metal dichalcogenides, para. 0387). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application was filed to modify the sensor of Yu to include the nano-material comprises transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) as taught by Agliome. The motivation being to provide one-dimensional and two-dimensional nanomaterial-based field effect transistors useful for chemical and biological analysis (Agliome, para. 0002).
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ram et al. (US 2016/0290958, hereinafter, Ram.)
Regarding claim 12, Yu discloses all of the claimed limitations as mentioned above except, wherein the receptors are integrated with the CMOS integrated circuit by the use of low temperature post-processing. RG is in the field of the nanoelectronic sensor pixel (para. 0001) and teaches the receptors are integrated with the CMOS integrated circuit by the use of low temperature post-processing (The pixel array could be fabricated in a CMOS process with pre-processing and post-processing steps using a complete SOI CMOS process, where the top silicon layer is used as an active CMOS layer. In that case, the only post-processing is needed for the counter electrode, the reference electrode and the passivation layer, para. 0111. Si/ZnO hetero nanostructures were synthesized with a known protocol using low temperature ALD at growth temperature of 100 to 150° C, para. 0189).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application was filed to modify the sensor of Yu to include the receptors are integrated with the CMOS integrated circuit by the use of low temperature post-processing as taught in order to provide an optoelectronic sensor and wearable-patch sensor based on the array of the optoelectronic pixels (para. 0026).
Regarding claim 13, modified Yu fails to disclose, wherein low temperature comprises a temperature below that which would be required to chemically change either the CMOS sensor, receptor, or the spatial relationship between the CMOS sensor and the receptor. Ram teaches low temperature comprises a temperature below that which would be required to chemically change either the CMOS sensor, receptor, or the spatial relationship between the CMOS sensor and the receptor (The pixel array could be fabricated in a CMOS process with pre-processing and post-processing steps using a complete SOI CMOS process, where the top silicon layer is used as an active CMOS layer. In that case, the only post-processing is needed for the counter electrode, the reference electrode and the passivation layer, para. 0111. Si/ZnO hetero nanostructures were synthesized with a known protocol using low temperature ALD at growth temperature of 100 to 150° C, para. 0189).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application was filed to modify the sensor of Yu to include low temperature comprises a temperature below that which would be required to chemically change either the CMOS sensor, receptor, or the spatial relationship between the CMOS sensor and the receptor as taught in order to provide an optoelectronic sensor and wearable-patch sensor based on the array of the optoelectronic pixels (para. 0026).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN W HA whose telephone number is (571)272-1707. The examiner can normally be reached M-T: 8:00AM-6:00PM.
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, WAEL FAHMY can be reached at (571)-272-1705. 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.
/NATHAN W HA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2814
