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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 1/12/2026 does not put the application in condition for allowance.
Examiner withdraws all rejections in the prior office action due to the amendments.
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 1-5 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.
Regarding Claim 1, line 13, the limitation of “nanoparticles” is unclear if it is the same or different than “nanoparticles” in line 9.
In line 15, the limitation of “a dispersed state” is unclear if it is the same or different than “a dispersed state” in line 9.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Jones (US Pub No. 2021/0050801) and Mazzochette (US Pub No. 2012/0106111) are the closest prior art.
Jones et al. teaches a method for manufacturing a power generation element [0063-0064] that does not require a temperature difference between electrodes in converting thermal energy into electric energy [Abstract, 0085], the method comprising: forming a first electrode [120, Fig. 1A, 0057]; forming [130, Fig. 1A, 0045], on the first electrode [120, Fig. 1A, 0057], an intermediate portion [130, Fig. 1A, 0045] including an insulating layer being in a solid state [0007, 0074]; and of forming a second electrode [140, Fig. 1A, 0045] having a work function different from a work function of the first electrode [0057], wherein the intermediate portion includes nanoparticles fixed in a dispersed state in the insulating layer [0007, 0074].
Mazzochette et al. teaches an intermediate portion which can be made of an polymer [0042] and nanoparticles [0045, 0042-0045] can be cured to provide improved thermal conductivity [0043]
Modified Jones et al. teaches limitations of the claims but does not disclose the limitations of “the forming of the intermediate portion comprises: applying, to a surface of the first electrode, an insulating material in which nanoparticles are dispersed; and curing the insulating material to form the intermediate portion including the insulating layer in which the nanoparticles are fixed in a dispersed state.”
These references, nor any other reference or combination of references in the prior art suggest or render obvious the limitations of “the forming of the intermediate portion comprises: applying, to a surface of the first electrode, an insulating material in which nanoparticles are dispersed; and curing the insulating material to form the intermediate portion including the insulating layer in which the nanoparticles are fixed in a dispersed state.”
Therefore; claim 1 is allowed once the rejections under 35 USC 112 are overcome.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL Y SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-0557. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-7PM.
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, MATTHEW MARTIN can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/MICHAEL Y SUN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights