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 Group I (claims 1-18) in the reply filed on 06/01/2026 is acknowledged.
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 2, 12-13, and 18 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 the sample carrier includes a base member and “wherein the base member includes a slide member configured to slidably engage the sample stage, wherein the slide member includes a stop”. However, the specification states “The sample carrier 204 can slide to a secured position, e.g., by having a surface 214 that contacts a surface 216 of a stop 218” (9:18-19) and Fig. 2C shows stop 218 as part of the sample carrier receiver 206, which described as being “mounted to or part of the movement stage 112,” rather than part of the sample carrier base member. Thus, it is unclear whether the claimed “stop” is part of the slide member/base member of the sample carrier or part of the sample carrier receiver/sample stage that stops movement of the sample carrier.
Claim 12 recites “wherein at least one of the conductive paths is coupled…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites similar “stop” language as claim 2 and therefore raises the same ambiguity regarding whether the stop if part of the sample carrier or part of the sample carrier receiver. In addition, claim 13 recites “wherein the electrical engaging portion is situated at the stop”. Claim 13 ultimately depends from claim 7, which recites “the sample carrier includes an electrical engaging portion”. However, the specification describes two mating electrical engaging portions: one located on the sample carrier (Fig.1-128 and Fig. 2B-242) and the other located on the sample carrier receiver (Fig. 1-130 and Fig. 2B-244) (also see Spec. 7:25-30 and 10:18-23). Thus, it is unclear whether the “electrical engaging portion” of claim 13 refers to the sample-carrier-side electrical engaging portion or the receiver/stage-side electrical engaging portion.
Claim 18 recites “wherein the base member is configured to engage a sample stage within a microscope chamber.” However, claim 17 already recites a “base member” of the sample carrier receiver, while claim 18 introduces a sample carrier having its own base member. Therefore, it is unclear whether “the base member” in claim 18 refers to the base member of the sample carrier receiver recited in claim 17 or the base member of the sample carrier introduced in claim 18. It is unclear if “the base member” refers to the base member of the sample carrier receiver recited in claim 17 (from which claim 18 dependent on), or the base member of a sample carrier introduced by claim 18.
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, 3-7, 9-12 and 14-16 are are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2022/0277923 Al [hereinafter Haneda]
Regarding Claim 1:
Haneda teaches an apparatus (Figs. 1/2/3: a sample holder, Figs.1-3 are different view of the first embodiment of the sample holder), comprising:
a sample carrier (Figs. 1/2/3: sample holder HL) including
a base member (Figs. 1/2: base 1) and
a sample support assembly coupled to the base member (see annotated Fig. 2 below),
PNG
media_image1.png
766
659
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the sample support assembly includes a holder having opposing first (Figs. 1/2: insulating member 3a+electrode 5+ electrode 4a) and second holder portions (Figs. 1/2: insulating member 3b + electrode 4b) configured to compress a sample (Figs.2/3: sample SAM) within a holder receiving portion,
wherein the base member is configured to engage a sample stage (Fig. 3 – sample stage 26) within a microscope chamber (Fig. 3- SEM observation chamber 29) (para. [0065]: “the sample holder HL …is mounted on the stage 26 of the observation chamber 29,” e.g., via the base 1).
Regarding Claim 3:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Haneda further teaches wherein each of the first and second holder portions includes a first holder electrical contact (Figs. 1/2- electrode 5) and second holder electrical contact (Fig. 1/2- electrode 4b), respectively, that faces the sample to engage a respective sample electrode (para. [0039]: the sample SAM can be held so as to be sandwiched between the fixed electrode 4b and the movable electrode 5”).
Regarding Claim 4:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 3. Haneda further teaches wherein the first holder portion includes a compressive actuator (Figs. 1/2- pressure applying member 6) that applies a compressive force to the sample (para. [0072]: “the movable electrode 5 is movable in the horizontal direction (X direction) by the pressure applying member 6, a desired pressure can be applied to the sample SAM”).
Regarding Claim 5:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 4. Haneda further teaches wherein the compressive actuator is a piezo-electric actuator (para. [0037]: “the pressure applying member 6 may be a member … by adjusting … voltage applied to a piezoelectric element”).
Regarding Claim 6:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Haneda further teaches wherein the first and second holder portions comprise a vise (the electrode 4b and electrode 5 defines opposing jaws/pressing members, and pressure applying member 6 moves one jaw toward the other to clamp/compress the sample, thereby forming a vise-type mechanism).
Regarding Claim 7:
The Specification describes the “electrical engaging portion” as “electrical engaging portion 242,” which “can be arranged at the surface 214.” According to Figs 2A-2C, surface 214 is a surface of base member 208, therefore, the claimed “electrical engaging portion” is interpreted as the surface of base member that electrically coupled to the sample stage via one or more electrically conductive path.
PNG
media_image2.png
696
1019
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 4. Haneda further teaches wherein the sample carrier includes an electrical engaging portion (see annotated Fig. 3(partial) above) that is configured to become electrically coupled to the sample stage with the base member engaged with the sample stage within the microscope chamber (Figs 2/3 and paras. [0045, 0066]: the sample base is electrically connected to the sample stage 26 via the wring 11 and connecting terminal 31 of the stage 26).
Regarding Claim 9:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 7. Haneda further teaches wherein the electrical engaging portion includes engaging contact pins or receiving holes configured to provide the electrical coupling to the sample stage (Figs. 1/3 and para. [0044]: base 1 has a plurality of holes penetrating the base and the wiring member 10/wiring 11 go through those holes to electrically couple the base to the sample stage).
Regarding Claim 10:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 7. Haneda further teaches wherein the sample carrier includes at least one conductive path electrically coupling at least a portion of the first holder portion to the electrical engaging portion (Figs. 2/3 and para. [0045]: the electrode 4b of the supporting portion 3b is electrically connected to the base 1 via wiring member 10 and wire 11).
Regarding Claim 11:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 7. Haneda further teaches wherein the sample carrier includes:
a first conductive path of the first holder portion, the first conductive path electrically coupling the first holder electrical contact to the electrical engaging portion (Fig. 2 and para. [0045]: wiring 11 and wring member 10 connecting electrode 5 and the electrical engaging surface of base 1);
a second conductive path of the first holder portion, the second conductive path electrically coupling the compressive actuator to the electrical engaging portion (Fig. 2 and paras. [0036 and 0045]: wiring 11 and wring member 10 connecting electrode 4a and the electrical engaging surface of base 1, since the pressure applying member 6 is provided in the electrode 4a, the electrical connection to fixed electrode 4a provides at least a conductive connection associated with the pressure applying member 6); and
a first conductive path of the second holder portion, the first conductive path electrically coupling the second holder electrical contact to the electrical engaging portion (Fig. 2 and para. [0045]: wiring 11 and wring member 10 connecting electrode 4b and the electrical engaging surface of base 1);
Regarding Claim 12:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 10. Haneda further teaches wherein at least one of the conductive paths is coupled from the sample support assembly to the electrical engaging portion through the base member (all three conductive paths coupled from the sample holder HL to electrical engaging surface of the base member through the base member).
Regarding Claim 14:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Haneda further teaches wherein the second holder portion is fixed in relation to the base member (para. [0036]: since the electrode 4b is a fixed electrode provided via the supporting portion 3b, the supporting portion 3b is also fixed to the base member).
Regarding Claim 15:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Haneda further teaches wherein the first and second holder portions are configured to hold a coin cell or solid-state battery for testing within the microscope chamber (para. 0033]: “a sample SAM is an electronic material such as a secondary battery, and specifically is an all-solid-state battery such as a lithium ion secondary battery”).
Regarding Claim 16:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Haneda further teaches wherein the microscope chamber is a SEM chamber, a FIB chamber, a FIB-SEM chamber, a laser and SEM chamber, or a three-beam SEM/PFIB/laser microscope chamber (para. [0061]: “The charged particle beam apparatus CRD according to the first embodiment is, for example, a scanning electron”).
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.
Claims 2, 8, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haneda in view of US 2023/0386779 Al [hereinafter Pfeifer].
Regarding Claim 2:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. However, Haneda does not specially note wherein the base member includes a slide member configured to slidably engage the sample stage, wherein the slide member includes a stop that causes the sample carrier to stop at a slidably engaged position within the microscope chamber.
Pfeifer teaches wherein the base member includes a slide member configured to slidably engage the sample stage, wherein the slide member includes a stop that causes the sample carrier to stop at a slidably engaged position within the microscope chamber (Figs. 1b, Fig. 2a-2b, and para. [0064]: Pfeifer teaches a complementary slide engagement between the sample holder 100 and the loading device/sample holder 200, including a fixing arrangement 140 on the sample holder and the first recess 230 on the loading device, so that the fixing arrangement 140 “allows the sample holder to be fixed in the instrument (e.g., in a sample stage) or on the loading device 200,” and the first recess 230 and second recess 240 of the loading device 200 can be “used to guide (a sliding movement of) the sample holder 100 towards the second portion with the second recess 240, until it is in contact with the stopping surface area 235 (“stop”). Fig. 2a shows the loading device without the slidably engaging sample holder 100 and Fig. 2b shows the loading device after sample holder 100 sided into its recess and pressed against the stooping surface 235).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify Haneda’s sample stage mounting with Pfeifer’s guided sliding engagement, because a sliding engagement is more flexible comparing to a mounting mechanism and would provide repeatable mechanical alignment of sample holder on the stage and prevent over-insertion or mispositioning of the holder during mounting.
Regarding Claim 8:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 7. Haneda teaches the sample stage is electrically coupled to the base via electrical engaging portions. However, Haneda does not teach such coupling is realized by the surface of base and corresponding mating contact surfaces of the sample stage slidably contacting each other.
Pfeifer teaches sliding the sample holder into a recess of the sample stage until the sample holder reaches a stopping/aligned position. As such, modify Haneda with Pfeifer would entail the sample stage electrically coupled to the base through a slidable contact between the electrical engaging portion of the base and its corresponding mating contact surface of the sample surface, as recited in claim 8.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to configure Haneda’s electrical engaging portion and the stage terminal as slidable contact surface. Doing so would allow Haneda’s conductive path to remain electrically coupled to the stage while the holder is inserted and seated by the guide/stop structure, and would avoid relying on a vertical contact arrangement that is less suitable for a lateral slide-in mounting path.
Regarding Claim 13:
Haneda teaches the apparatus of claim 1. However, Haneda does not specially note wherein the base member includes a slide member configured to slidably engage the sample stage, wherein the slide member includes a stop that causes the sample carrier to stop at a slidably engaged position within the microscope chamber; wherein the electrical engaging portion is situated at the stop to electrically couple at least one of the conductive paths to the sample stage through the stop when the sample carrier is at the engaged position.
Pfeifer teaches wherein the base member includes a slide member configured to slidably engage the sample stage, wherein the slide member includes a stop that causes the sample carrier to stop at a slidably engaged position within the microscope chamber, as discussed in claims 2 and 8.
As such, the combine references teach wherein the electrical engaging portion is situated at the stop to electrically couple at least one of the conductive paths to the sample stage through the stop when the sample carrier is at the engaged position. In the combined apparatus Haneda’s electrical interface would be arranged at the Pfeifer stopping/contact surface rather than only through a vertical base-to-stage contact, so that the conductive path is electrically coupled to the stage when the sample holder reaches the stop.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify Haneda’s vertical base-to-stage electrical contact so that the electrical contact is provided at Pfeifer’s topping surface, because once the holder is changed from a vertical mount-on-stage arrangement to a lateral slide-in engagement, a bottom vertical contact would be disadvantageous because the bottom surfaces would rub during insertion and could wear, scrape, or misalign the electrical contact before the holder is fully seated.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 2824448 A1 [hereinafter Goran] in view of US 2013/0146784 A1 [hereinafter Nackashi].
Regarding Claim 17:
Goran teaches an apparatus, comprising:
a sample carrier receiver (Figs 3 and 4- sample holder 10) including a support having
a base member (Figs. 3 and 4 -connecting member 28) that couples to a stage within a microscope chamber (para. [0037]: “The connecting member 28 is configured for being connected to a stage of an EM”) and having a receiving portion (Figs. 3 and 4- tip portion 14) coupled to the base member,
wherein the receiving portion that extends at an oblique angle relative to the base member to receive and secure a sample carrier in relation to a sample stage within the microscope chamber (paras. [0033, 0040]: “The sample holder 10 comprises a tip portion 14 and may be configured to fix the sample 12 or the sample carrier in a form-locking and/or force-locking manner at or in the tip portion 14; The sample holder 10 may comprise a seat 16, which may form a contact plane 18 to receive the sample 12 or the sample carrier 13.” “An angle between a centre axis 46 of the pin stub 29 and the contact plane 18 may be greater than 90° and less than 180°”).
However, Goran does not specifically note that the receiving portion includes a slide mount, the receiving portion secure a sample carrier through slidable engagement with the slide mount, and wherein the receiving portion includes an electrical engaging portion that couples to an electrical engaging portion of the sample carrier to provide an electrically conductive path from the sample carrier through the stage.
Nackashi teaches a specimen holder for specimen support devices for insertion in electron microscopes. As shown in Figs. 2a and 2c, the specimen holder 200 has a mounting surface 10800 (“receiving portion”), where the specimen supporting device (“sample carrier”) loaded into the specimen holder 200 via slidable engagement with the mounting surface (para. [0042]: “To mount the device… The device is …slid underneath the clip along the mounting surface using the guide screws and depth stop as guidance”)
In addition, Nackashi teaches wherein the receiving portion includes an electrical engaging portion that couples to an electrical engaging portion of the sample carrier to provide an electrically conductive path from the sample carrier through the stage (para. [0040]: “When a device is completely loaded, the depth stop (10600) provides a means both to align the electrical contacts of the specimen holder (10700) to electrical leads of a device (20100)”).
As such, modify Goran with Nackashi would entail the receiving portion of the tip portion of Goran be modified so that the sample support/carrier is slid along a surface using a guide screw/depth stop and, when loaded, the receiver’s electrical contacts are aligned with and contact the carrier’s electrical leads.
Goran teaches an EM stage-coupled sample holder having an angled tip portion for receiving and fixing a sample carrier in a form-locking and/or force locking manner. Nackashi teaches a specimen support device can be loaded into a specimen holder by sliding the device along a mounting surface and the holder and the device are electrically aligned.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify Goran’s form-locking/force locking tip with Nackashi’ sliding mounting surface and depth-stop arrangement because the guided insertion path in Nackashi brings the specimen support device into a repeatable seated position and aligns the holder contacts with the device loads when fully loaded. Applying this to Goran would improve the loading of the sample carrier into Goran’s angle tip portion by guiding the carrier into the form-locking/force locking position, rather than replying only on manual placement at the tip, and would ensure that the carrier is mechanically secured and electrically engaged at the same final seated position.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goran in view of Nackashi, and further in view of Haneda.
Regarding Claim 18:
Goran in view of Nackashi teaches the apparatus of claim 17. However, the combined references do not specifically note that the apparatus further comprising a sample carrier including a base member and a sample support assembly coupled to the base member, wherein the sample support assembly includes a holder having opposing first and second holder portions configured to compress a sample within a holder receiving portion, wherein the base member is configured to engage a sample stage within a microscope chamber.
Haneda teaches a sample carrier including a base member and a sample support assembly coupled to the base member, wherein the sample support assembly includes a holder having opposing first and second holder portions configured to compress a sample within a holder receiving portion, wherein the base member is configured to engage a sample stage within a microscope chamber, as discussed in claim 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to configure the sample carrier in Goran/ Nackashi with Haneda, as using a known sample carrier configuration to carry sample transportation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2504. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:00.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/JING WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights