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 § 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.
Claims 10, 13, 26, and 28 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 10 recites the limitation "the electrode insulator" in the first bullet point. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the electrode insulator" in the first bullet point. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the electrode insulator" in the first bullet point. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "the electrode insulator" in the first bullet point. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 24, 25, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lehovec (3473032).
Regarding claim 1, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector, comprising:- a substrate (1, Fig. 1; Col. 3, line 6) made of semiconductor material; - an electric field generating layer on a first face of the substrate (following); - a first electrical contact (14, Fig. 1; Col 3, line 23) on the first face of the substrate and next to the electric field generating layer; and - a second electrical contact (2, Fig. 1, 5; Col 3, line 7) on the second face of the substrate and opposite to the electric field generating layer; wherein the electric field generating layer comprises;- an inducing electrode (4/10, Fig. 1, 5; Col 3, lines 9, 17); and - an electrode insulator layer (3/9, Fig. 1, 5; Col 3, lines 15-16) between the substrate and the inducing electrode.
Regarding claim 4, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the electrode insulator layer (3/9, Fig. 1, 5) comprises at least one of: A12O3, SiO2 (Col 7, line 47).
Regarding claim 5, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the inducing electrode (4/10, Fig. 5) comprises a plurality of layers (Col. 3, lines 16-17).
Regarding claim 8, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the substrate (1, Fig. 1) comprises at least one of the following: Silicon, Germanium, III-V semiconductor, and/or II-VI semiconductor (Col. 7, line 3).
Regarding claim 12, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the electrode insulator layer (3/9, Fig. 1, 5) comprises at least one of a ferroelectric, ferroelectret, and/or electret material (Col. 7, line 47).
Regarding claim 13, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the detector is configured so that an electric field induced inversion layer (12, Fig. 1; Col. 3, lines 21-22) is formed under the electrode insulator (3/9, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: the first electrical contact (14, Fig. 1) comprises contact doping in the substrate (Col 3, line 21).
Regarding claim 15, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the first electrical contact (14, Fig. 1) comprises a front contact doping well (13, Fig. 1) in the substrate, and - the detector is configured so that a current flow path is formed between the electric field induced inversion layer (12, Fig. 1) and the front contact doping well for conducting the radiation induced current (Col. 3, lines 21, 23, 24).
Regarding claim 16, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the first electrical contact (4/10, Fig. 5) is located around the electrode insulator layer (3/9, Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 17, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein: - the detector is configured so that a PN junction (16/17, Fig. 1) is induced in the substrate by the electric field generating layer (Col 3, lines 25-26).
Regarding claim 24, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector further comprising: - a photodiode having an induced PN junction (16, Fig. 1), a diode voltage of the photodiode being between the first electrical contact (14, Fig. 1) and the second electrical contact (2, Fig. 1) and across the induced PN junction (Col. 3, lines 18-25, 27-29).
Regarding claim 25, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein the detector is configured so that a radiation induced current flows along a current flow path between the second electrical contact (2, Fig. 1) and the first electrical contact (14, Fig. 1), the current flow path comprising:- a contact doping of the second electrical contact (7, Fig. 1; Col 3, lines 13-14); - a portion of the substrate (1, Fig. 1); and - a contact doping of the first electrical contact (13, Fig. 1; Col. 3, line 23).
Regarding claim 26, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein said portion of the substrate comprises:- the electric field induced inversion layer (12, Fig .1) induced by the electric field generating layer (3/4/9/10, Fig. 1, 5) in a surface layer (Fig. 1) of the substrate (1, Fig. 1) under the electrode insulator (3, Fig. 1); and - a volume of the substrate between the electric field induced inversion layer and the contact doping (7, Fig. 1) of the second electrical contact (2, Fig. 1), which volume comprises a depletion region (Col. 6, lines 27-50).
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, 6, 23, 27, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehovec in view of Jo et al. (2019/0157491, hereafter Jo).
Regarding claim 2, Lehovec fails to disclose a radiation detector wherein: - the inducing electrode comprises graphene.
However, Jo teaches a radiation detector wherein: - the inducing electrode (14/15, Fig. 1) comprises graphene (par. 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Lehovec with Jo by providing an inducing electrode with graphene because the thickness provides near total radiation transparency while offering high carrier mobility for signal induction.
Regarding claim 6, Lehovec fails to disclose a radiation detector wherein: - the plurality of layers, -together with the electrode insulator layer -below the inducing electrode, forms at least one of: an antireflection coating, an optical band-pass, and/or a band-stop filter.
However, Jo teaches a radiation detector wherein: - the plurality of layers, -together with the electrode insulator layer -below the inducing electrode (13/14/15, Fig. 1), forms at least one of: an antireflection coating, an optical band-pass, and/or a band-stop filter (par. 0051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Lehovec with Jo by providing layers that form either an antireflection coating, optical band-pass, or band-stop filter in order to block undesirable electromagnetic noise from reaching the active region.
Regarding claim 23, Lehovec fails to disclose a radiation detector wherein: - the detector is configured to received detected radiation through a radiation entrance window, the radiation entrance window comprising at least a portion of the electrode insulator layer.
However, Jo teaches a radiation detector wherein: - the detector is configured to received detected radiation through a radiation entrance window (16, Fig. 1, par. 0054), the radiation entrance window comprising at least a portion of the electrode insulator layer (13, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Lehovec with Jo by providing a radiation window over a portion of the insulator layer in order to eliminate dead zones and ensure electric field continuity.
Regarding claim 27, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector, comprising:- a substrate (1, Fig. 1) made of semiconductor material; - an electric field generating layer (following) on a first face of the substrate, the electric field generating layer comprising an inducing electrode (4/10, Fig. 5) and an electrode insulator layer (3/9, Fig. 5) between the substrate and the inducing electrode; - a first electrical contact (14, Fig. 1) on the first face of the substrate and next to the electric field generating layer; and - a second electrical contact (2, Fig. 1) on the second face of the substrate and opposite to the electric field generating layer; and wherein the detector is configured to, in response to the received radiation, cause a radiation induced current flow along a current flow path between the second electrical contact and the first electrical contact through a portion of the substrate (Col. 3, lines 18-25).
Lehovec fails to disclose a radiation detector wherein the detector is configured to receive radiation through a radiation entrance window, the radiation entrance window comprising at least a portion of the electrode insulator layer.
However, Jo teaches a radiation detector wherein the detector is configured to receive radiation through a radiation entrance window (16, Fig. 1, par. 0054), the radiation entrance window comprising at least a portion of the electrode insulator layer (13, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Lehovec with Jo by providing a radiation window over a portion of the insulator layer in order to eliminate dead zones and ensure electric field continuity.
Regarding claim 28, Lehovec discloses a radiation detector wherein the portion of the substrate comprises: - the electric field induced inversion layer (12, Fig. 1) induced by the electric field generating layer in a surface layer of the substrate under the electrode insulator (3/9, Fig. 5); and - a volume of the substrate between the electric field induced inversion layer and the second electrical contact (2, Fig. 1), which volume comprises a depletion region (Col. 6, lines 27-50).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehovec in view of Kub et al. (2012/0141799, hereafter Kub).
Regarding claim 7, Lehovec fails to disclose a radiation detector wherein: - the resistivity of the substrate is more than 10kOhm cm.
However, Kub teaches a radiation detector wherein: - the resistivity of the substrate is more than 10kOhm cm (par. 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Lehovec with Kub by providing a substrate with high resistivity in order to achieve full depletion, minimize electronic noise, and reduce signal loss.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES M BRECHT whose telephone number is (571)272-9634. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30am - 5pm.
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, Marlon Fletcher can be reached at (572) 272-2063. 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.
/C.M.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/MARLON T FLETCHER/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights