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.
Claim(s) 11-16, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Perovskite-Nanosheet Sensitizer for Highly Efficient Organic X-ray Imaging Scintillator” (Wang).
PNG
media_image1.png
76
418
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Wang disclose a nanocomposite (100) that transforms X-ray radiation into visible light by scintillating, the nanocomposite comprising:
perovskite nanosheets (page 11, second paragraph, “CsPbBr3 nanosheet”); and
plural organic chromophores (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine β-diketonate (A) with TADF”),
wherein the plural organic chromophores interact with the perovskite nanosheets through F-Pb bonds (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”), and
wherein the perovskite nanosheets are selected to absorb the X-ray radiation and emit first light centered on 510 nm (CsPbBr3 nanosheet), and the plural organic chromophores are selected to absorb second light between 400 and 600 nm, with a peak at 510 nm, and emit the visible light in 500 to 800 nm range (difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate).
Regarding claim 12, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 11, wherein there are two F-Pb bonds between each organic chromophore and a corresponding perovskite nanosheet (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”).
Regarding claim 13, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 11, wherein the perovskite is CsPbBrs (page 11, second paragraph, “CsPbBr3 nanosheet”).
Regarding claim 14, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 13, wherein the organic chromophore is difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (A) with TADF”).
Regarding claim 15, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 11, wherein a distance between a perovskite nanosheet and an organic chromophore of the plural organic chromophores is about 1 nm (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”).
Regarding claim 16, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 11, further comprising: a polymer material that encapsulated the perovskite nanosheets and the plural organic chromophores (Fig. 2, PMMA).
Regarding claim 18, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 11, wherein the plural organic chromophores are selected to have a thermally activated delayed fluorescence character (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (A) with TADF”).
Regarding claim 19, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 11, wherein the nanocomposite has an imagining resolution of about 135 µm (abstract, “a high imaging resolution of 135 µm”).
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) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of as applied to claim 16, and in further view of “High-Z Sensitized Plastic Scintillators: A Review” (Hajagos).
Regarding claim 17, Wang disclose the nanocomposite of Claim 16, but is silent with respect to the weight by percentage of the plural organic chromophores relative to ta total mass of the nanocomposite, thereby allowing for that which is known in the art.
Hajagos disclose primary dye loadings are typically in the arrange of 1-5wt.% in plastic scintillators (section 2.2 “Organic Scintillator Photophysics” second paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to optimize the concentration of the organic chromophore disclosed by Wang with the convention 1-5wt% range, including about 2 wt%, as result-effective variable in order to balance light yield, energy-transfer efficiency, and avoidance of concentration quenching. wherein a weight by percentage of the plural organic chromophores is about 2% relative to a total mass of the nanocomposite. Such optimization represents nothing more than routine experimentation within the well-known range, consistent with KSR and MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 10, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Perovskite-Nanosheet Sensitizer for Highly Efficient Organic X-ray Imaging Scintillator” (Wang) in view of US 2017/0322323 (Fischer).
Regarding claim 1, Wang disclose an X-ray imagining film that transforms X-ray radiation into visible light by scintillating, the X-ray imagining film comprising:
a nanocomposite, wherein the nanocomposite includes perovskite nanosheets (page 11, second paragraph, “CsPbBr3 nanosheet”) and plural organic chromophores (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (A) with TADF”) that interact with the perovskite nanosheets through F-Pb bonds (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”),
wherein the perovskite nanosheets are selected to absorb the X-ray radiation and emit first light centered on 510 nm (CsPbBr3 nanosheet), and the plural organic chromophores are selected to absorb second light between 400 and 600 nm, with a peak at 510 nm, and emit the visible light in 500 to 800 nm range (difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate).
Wang fails to explicitly teach the nanocomposite is formed on a substrate.
Fischer disclose perovskite nanocomposite formed on a substrate, in particular for X-ray radiation [0058].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the nanocomposite on a substrate to provide mechanical support, improved film uniformity, optical coupling, and device integration.
Regarding claim 2, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, wherein there are two F-Pb bonds between each organic chromophore and a corresponding perovskite nanosheet (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”).
Regarding claim 3, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, wherein the perovskite is CsPbBr3 (page 11, second paragraph, “CsPbBr3 nanosheet”).
Regarding claim 4, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 3, wherein the organic chromophore is difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (A) with TADF”).
Regarding claim 5, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, wherein a distance between a perovskite nanosheet and an organic chromophore of the plural organic chromophores is about 1 nm (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”).
Regarding claim 6, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, further comprising: a polymer material that encapsulated the perovskite nanosheets and the plural organic chromophores (Fig. 2a, PMMA).
Regarding claim 7, Wang disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 6, wherein the perovskite nanosheets and the plural organic chromophores are uniformly distributed within the polymer material (Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 9, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, wherein the plural organic chromophores are selected to have a thermally activated delayed fluorescence character (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (A) with TADF”).
Regarding claim 10, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, wherein the nanocomposite has an imagining resolution of about 135 µm (abstract, “a high imaging resolution of 135 µm”).
Regarding claim 20, Wang disclose an X-ray imagining system that transforms incoming X-ray radiation into visible light, the X-ray imagining system comprising:
an X-ray source configured to generate first X-rays (Fig. 2a, wherein a source is required to emit x-rays); and
an X-ray imagining film configured to receive second X-rays that have passed through a target and to generate an image of the target by transforming the second X-rays into the visible light by scintillation (shown in Fig. 4),
wherein the X-ray imagining film includes, a nanocomposite, wherein the nanocomposite includes perovskite nanosheets (page 11, second paragraph, “CsPbBr3 nanosheet”) and plural organic chromophores (page 11, second paragraph, “difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate (A) with TADF”) that interact with the perovskite nanosheets through F-Pb bonds (page 11, second paragraph, “TADF molecules contain two fluorine atoms that could form strong bonds with lead atoms (F-Pb) with the CsPbBr3 nanosheet”),
wherein the perovskite nanosheets are selected to absorb the X-ray radiation and emit first light centered on 510 nm (CsPbBr3 nanosheet), and the plural organic chromophores are selected to absorb second light between 400 and 600 nm, with a peak at 510 nm, and emit the visible light in 500 to 800 nm range (difluoroboron 1,3-diphenylamine B-diketonate).
Wang fails to explicitly teach the nanocomposite is formed on a substrate.
Fischer disclose perovskite nanocomposite formed on a substrate, in particular for X-ray radiation [0058].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the nanocomposite on a substrate to provide mechanical support, improved film uniformity, optical coupling, and device integration.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Fischer as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of “High-Z Sensitized Plastic Scintillators: A Review” (Hajagos).
Regarding claim 8, Wang in view of Fischer disclose the X-ray imagining film of Claim 1, but is silent with respect to the weight by percentage of the plural organic chromophores relative to ta total mass of the nanocomposite, thereby allowing for that which is known in the art.
Hajagos disclose primary dye loadings are typically in the arrange of 1-5wt.% in plastic scintillators (section 2.2 “Organic Scintillator Photophysics” second paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to optimize the concentration of the organic chromophore disclosed by Wang with the convention 1-5wt% range, including about 2 wt%, as result-effective variable in order to balance light yield, energy-transfer efficiency, and avoidance of concentration quenching. wherein a weight by percentage of the plural organic chromophores is about 2% relative to a total mass of the nanocomposite. Such optimization represents nothing more than routine experimentation within the well-known range, consistent with KSR and MPEP 2144.05.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANI FOX whose telephone number is (571)272-3513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5.
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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/DANI FOX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884