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 Objections
The claims are objected to because they include reference characters which are not enclosed within parentheses.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 14 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 13. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “recevied” is spelled wrong and should be spelled as “received.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-19 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.
Independent claim 1 requires “the substrate 202 and the graphene analysis layer 201 are arranged in an analyte sensor 203. ” Are these elements, 201 & 202, part of the sensor or are they independent elements arranged near the sensor? As written, one can interpret the claim both ways. Further limitations in the claim do not clear this dilemma. Are the layers, 201 & 202, integral to the formation of the analyte sensor or are they ancillary to the function of the sensor? Can the sensor operate without elements 201 & 202? As the claim is written, this is not clear. Independent claims 7 & 17 have the same or substantially similar requirement and are thus rejected for the same reasons as listed above. Dependent claims 2-6, 8-16, & 18-19 not specifically addressed, are also rejected for the reasons above due to dependence on a rejected base claim. Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4, & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eisaman et al (U.S. PGPub # 2022/0119941) in view of Singh et al (Singh, Sandeep Kumar, et al. "Design of ZnO/N-doped graphene nanohybrid incorporated RF complementary split ring resonator sensor for ammonia gas detection." IEEE Sensors Journal 19.18 (2019): 7968-7975.).
Regarding Independent claim 1, Eisaman teaches:
An analyte probe 200 for determining water vapor transmission rate, the analyte probe 200 comprising:
a substrate 202 comprising a formation surface 208 for forming a graphene analysis layer 201 on the substrate 202 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1 step 108.);
a graphene analysis layer 201 disposed on the formation surface 208 of the substrate 202 and comprising an analytical interface 205 for receiving a test coating 204 and an n-dopant (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1 steps 102-106 & 114-118.), such that:
the substrate 202 and the graphene analysis layer 201 are arranged in an analyte sensor 203 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1-5.);
the graphene analysis layer 201 is n-doped with the n-dopant so that the graphene analysis layer 201 communicates charge carriers in response to …
the analytical interface 205 receives analyte 206 communicated through a test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.); and
the test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 of the graphene analysis layer 201 and comprising a probe surface 207 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.), such that:
the graphene analysis layer 201 is interposed between the substrate 202 and the test coating 204 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.);
the probe surface 207 receives analyte 206 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.); and
the test coating 204 has a transmission rate of the analyte 206 through the test coating 204 from the probe surface 207 to the analytical interface 205 that is determinable from the microwave frequency input signal 209 and the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the graphene analysis layer 201 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.).
PNG
media_image1.png
564
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
496
798
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Eisaman does not explicitly teach:
the analyte probe 200 being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal 209, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer 201 is directly proportional to an amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205;
the graphene analysis layer 201 changes the microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209, wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 is directly proportional to the amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205;
Singh teaches:
the analyte probe 200 being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal 209 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.), and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer 201 is directly proportional to an amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
the graphene analysis layer 201 changes the microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.), wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 is directly proportional to the amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Singh to the teachings of Eisaman such that the analyte probe being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer is directly proportional to an amount of analyte disposed on the analytical interface; the graphene analysis layer changes the microwave frequency input signal to microwave frequency response signal upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal, wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal to microwave frequency response signal is directly proportional to the amount of analyte disposed on the analytical interface because this technique can “provide high accuracy and easiness in structure implementation” and can enhance sensitivity. See Introduction page 7968 column 2.
Regarding claim 2, Eisaman & Singh teach all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Eisaman does not explicitly teach the analyte 206 comprises water.
Singh teaches the analyte 206 comprises water (Introduction page 7968 column 2.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Singh to the teachings of Eisaman such that analyte comprises water because water is such an important substance that it is always the subject to analysis. See Introduction page 7968 column 2.
Regarding claim 4, Eisaman & Singh teach all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Eisaman & Singh do not explicitly teach the graphene analysis layer 201 is epitaxially grown graphene.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have the graphene analysis layer be epitaxially grown graphene because epitaxial growth is a well-known, reliable, & dependable method of forming layers in small electrical devices sch as sensors, semiconductors, transistors and many other tools.
Regarding claim 6, Eisaman & Singh teach all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Eisaman & Singh do not explicitly teach the substrate 202 comprises silicon carbide.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have the substrate comprise silicon carbide because this is a substance commonly used in the formation of substrates in chipmaking and other semiconductor devices because of its “wide bandgap structure and high temperature capacity.”
Claims 7, 11, 13-14, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al (Singh, Sandeep Kumar, et al. "Design of ZnO/N-doped graphene nanohybrid incorporated RF complementary split ring resonator sensor for ammonia gas detection." IEEE Sensors Journal 19.18 (2019): 7968-7975.) in view of Eisaman et al (U.S. PGPub # 2022/0119941) & Lewis et al (U.S. Pat. # 6,150,645).
Regarding Independent claim 7, Singh teaches:
A vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 for determining water vapor transmission rate, the vapor transmission rate analyzer (See Fig. 1, 2, & 5. See Abstract, introduction and Section II D Gas sensing experimental setup on page 7971.) 211 comprising:
a microwave cavity 212 that receives an analyte probe 200 (See Fig. 5. See also Fig. 1 & 2. See Abstract, introduction and Section II D Gas sensing experimental setup on page 7971.) ;
the test coating 204 has a transmission rate of the analyte 206 through the test coating 204 from the probe surface 207 to the analytical interface 205 that is determinable from the microwave frequency input signal 209 and the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the graphene analysis layer 201 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
a microwave source 216 in communication with the microwave cavity 212 and that produces microwave frequency input signal 209 and communicates the microwave frequency input signal 209 to the microwave cavity 212 and receives the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the microwave cavity 212 (See Fig. 1, 2, & 5. See Abstract, introduction and Section II D Gas sensing experimental setup on page 7971.);
in response to the analyte probe 200 being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal 209, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer 201 is directly proportional to an amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (See Fig. 1, 2, & 5. See Abstract, introduction and Section II D Gas sensing experimental setup on page 7971.),
the graphene analysis layer 201 changes the microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.), wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 is directly proportional to the amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
PNG
media_image3.png
532
544
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
324
534
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
298
536
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Singh does not explicitly teach:
the analyte probe 200 comprising:
a substrate 202 comprising a formation surface 208 for a forming a graphene analysis layer 201 on the substrate 202;
a graphene analysis layer 201 diposed on the formation surface 208 of the substrate 202 and comprising an analytical interface 205 for receiving a test coating 204 and an n-dopant, such that:
the substrate 202 and the graphene analysis layer 201 are arranged in an analyte sensor 203;
the graphene analysis layer 201 is n-doped with the n- dopant so that the graphene analysis layer 201 communicates charge carriers in response to the analyte probe 200 being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal 209, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer 201 is directly proportional to an amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205;
the analytical interface 205 receives analyte 206 communicated through a test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205; and
the test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 of the graphene analysis layer 201 and comprising a probe surface 207, such that:
the graphene analysis layer 201 is interposed between the substrate 202 and the test coating 204;
the probe surface 207 receives analyte 206; and
a control unit 217 in communication with the microwave source 216, a positioner 218, and an analyzer 220, such that the control unit 217:
controls production of microwave frequency input signal 209 by the microwave source 216;
controls movement of positioner 218;
produces microwave data 228 from microwave feedback signal 225 recevied from the microwave source 216; and
communicates microwave data 228 to the analyzer 220;
the positioner 218 in communication with the control unit 217 and the analyte probe 200, such that the positioner 218 moves the analyte probe 200 relative to the microwave cavity 212 and adjusts the position of the analyte probe 200 in a microwave waveguide 213 of the microwave cavity 212 so that a selected portion of the analyte probe 200 is subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 and produces the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the microwave frequency input signal 209 in the microwave waveguide 213; and
the analyzer 220 in communication with the control unit 217 and that receives the microwave data 228 from the control unit 217 and produces a water vapor transmission rate 219 from analysis of the microwave data 228.
Eisaman teaches:
the analyte probe 200 comprising:
a substrate 202 comprising a formation surface 208 for a forming a graphene analysis layer 201 on the substrate 202 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1 step 108.);
a graphene analysis layer 201 diposed on the formation surface 208 of the substrate 202 and comprising an analytical interface 205 for receiving a test coating 204 and an n-dopant (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1 steps 102-106 & 114-118.), such that:
the substrate 202 and the graphene analysis layer 201 are arranged in an analyte sensor 203 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1-5.);
the graphene analysis layer 201 is n-doped with the n- dopant so that the graphene analysis layer 201 communicates charge carriers … (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.);
the analytical interface 205 receives analyte 206 communicated through a test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.); and
the test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 of the graphene analysis layer 201 and comprising a probe surface 207 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.), such that:
the graphene analysis layer 201 is interposed between the substrate 202 and the test coating 204 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.);
the probe surface 207 receives analyte 206 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.); and
PNG
media_image1.png
564
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Singh & Eisaman do not explicitly teach:
a control unit 217 in communication with the microwave source 216, a positioner 218, and an analyzer 220, such that the control unit 217:
controls production of microwave frequency input signal 209 by the microwave source 216;
controls movement of positioner 218;
produces microwave data 228 from microwave feedback signal 225 recevied from the microwave source 216; and
communicates microwave data 228 to the analyzer 220;
the positioner 218 in communication with the control unit 217 and the analyte probe 200, such that the positioner 218 moves the analyte probe 200 relative to the microwave cavity 212 and adjusts the position of the analyte probe 200 in a microwave waveguide 213 of the microwave cavity 212 so that a selected portion of the analyte probe 200 is subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 and produces the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the microwave frequency input signal 209 in the microwave waveguide 213; and
the analyzer 220 in communication with the control unit 217 and that receives the microwave data 228 from the control unit 217 and produces a water vapor transmission rate 219 from analysis of the microwave data 228.
Lewis teaches:
a control unit 217 (Fig. 2 Element 54.) in communication with the microwave source 216 (See Fig. 15 and all appropriate elements connected.), a positioner 218 (Fig. 15 element stepper motor.), and an analyzer 220 (Fig. 1 Element 54.), such that the control unit 217:
controls production of microwave frequency input signal 209 by the microwave source 216 (Fig. 1 Element 54. See associated text in column 1 lines 45-61.);
controls movement of positioner 218 (Fig. 1 Element 54 & Fig. 15 element stepper motor.);
produces microwave data 228 from microwave feedback signal 225 recevied from the microwave source 216 (Fig. 1 Element 54 & See associated text in column 1 lines 45-61.); and
communicates microwave data 228 to the analyzer 220 (Fig. 1 Element 54 & See associated text in column 1 lines 45-61.);
the positioner 218 in communication with the control unit 217 and the analyte probe 200, such that the positioner 218 moves the analyte probe 200 relative to the microwave cavity 212 and adjusts the position of the analyte probe 200 in a microwave waveguide 213 of the microwave cavity 212 so that a selected portion of the analyte probe 200 is subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 and produces the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the microwave frequency input signal 209 in the microwave waveguide 213 (Fig. 1 Element 54 & See associated text in column 1 lines 45-61.); and
the analyzer 220 in communication with the control unit 217 and that receives the microwave data 228 from the control unit 217 and produces a water vapor transmission rate 219 from analysis of the microwave data 228 (Fig. 1 Element 54 & See associated text in column 1 lines 45-61.).
PNG
media_image6.png
518
568
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
470
738
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
510
712
media_image8.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Singh to the teachings of Eisaman such that the analyte probe comprises: a substrate comprising a formation surface for a forming a graphene analysis layer on the substrate; a graphene analysis layer diposed on the formation surface of the substrate and comprising an analytical interface for receiving a test coating and an n-dopant, such that: the substrate and the graphene analysis layer are arranged in an analyte sensor; the graphene analysis layer is n-doped with the n- dopant so that the graphene analysis layer communicates charge carriers in response to the analyte probe being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer is directly proportional to an amount of analyte disposed on the analytical interface; the analytical interface receives analyte communicated through a test coating disposed on the analytical interface; and the test coating disposed on the analytical interface of the graphene analysis layer and comprising a probe surface, such that: the graphene analysis layer is interposed between the substrate and the test coating; the probe surface receives analyte; and because this would be using the sensor disclosed in Eisaman in the system disclosed in Fig. 5 of Singh. It is simply the placement of a specific sensor into a specific type of sensing system. These combined devices would “provide high accuracy and easiness in structure implementation” and can enhance sensitivity. See Introduction page 7968 column 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Lewis to the teachings of Singh & Eisaman such that a control unit in communication with the microwave source, a positioner, and an analyzer, such that the control unit: controls production of microwave frequency input signal by the microwave source; controls movement of positioner; produces microwave data from microwave feedback signal received from the microwave source; and communicates microwave data to the analyzer; the positioner in communication with the control unit and the analyte probe, such that the positioner moves the analyte probe relative to the microwave cavity and adjusts the position of the analyte probe in a microwave waveguide of the microwave cavity so that a selected portion of the analyte probe is subjected to the microwave frequency input signal and produces the microwave frequency response signal from the microwave frequency input signal in the microwave waveguide; and the analyzer in communication with the control unit and that receives the microwave data from the control unit and produces a water vapor transmission rate from analysis of the microwave data because all of these are well-known means of moving elements in experimental or highly sensitive setups so that as many variables can be effectively controlled to maximize experimental or other output data or other information.
Regarding claim 11, Singh & Eisaman teach all elements of claim 7, upon which this claim depends.
Singh teaches the analyte 206 comprises water (See Introduction page 7968 column 2.).
Regarding claim 13, Singh & Eisaman teach all elements of claim 7, upon which this claim depends.
Singh & Eisaman do not explicitly teach the graphene analysis layer 201 is epitaxially grown graphene.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have the graphene analysis layer be epitaxially grown graphene because epitaxial growth is a well-known, reliable, & dependable method of forming layers in small electrical devices sch as sensors, semiconductors, transistors and many other tools.
Regarding claim 14, Singh & Eisaman teach all elements of claim 7, upon which this claim depends.
Singh & Eisaman do not explicitly teach the graphene analysis layer 201 is epitaxially grown graphene.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have the graphene analysis layer be epitaxially grown graphene because epitaxial growth is a well-known, reliable, & dependable method of forming layers in small electrical devices sch as sensors, semiconductors, transistors and many other tools.
Regarding claim 16, Singh & Eisaman teach all elements of claim 7, upon which this claim depends.
Singh & Eisaman do not explicitly teach the substrate 202 comprises silicon carbide.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have the substrate comprise silicon carbide because this is a substance commonly used in the formation of substrates in chipmaking and other semiconductor devices because of its “wide bandgap structure and high temperature capacity.”
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al (Singh, Sandeep Kumar, et al. "Design of ZnO/N-doped graphene nanohybrid incorporated RF complementary split ring resonator sensor for ammonia gas detection." IEEE Sensors Journal 19.18 (2019): 7968-7975.) in view of Eisaman et al (U.S. PGPub # 2022/0119941).
Regarding claim 17, Singh teaches:
A process for determining water vapor transmission rate, the process comprising:
receiving, by a microwave cavity 212 of a vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 (See Fig. 1, 2, & 5. See Abstract, introduction and Section II D Gas sensing experimental setup on page 7971.), an analyte probe 200 (See Fig. 5 Element sensor.), the analyte probe 200 comprising:
the test coating 204 has a transmission rate of the analyte 206 through the test coating 204 from the probe surface 207 to the analytical interface 205 that is determinable from the microwave frequency input signal 209 and the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the graphene analysis layer 201 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
subjecting the analyte probe 200 to microwave frequency input signal 209 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
producing, by the analyte probe 200, microwave frequency response signal 210 from the microwave frequency input signal 209 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.); and
analyzing the microwave frequency response signal 210 relative to the microwave frequency input signal 209 to determine the water vapor transmission rate 219 of the test coating 204 of the analyte probe 200 (Fig. 5 Element VNA and associated text. Introduction page 7968 column 2.).
the graphene analysis layer 201 changes the microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.), wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 is directly proportional to the amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Introduction page 7968 column 2.);
the analytical interface 205 receives analyte 206 communicated through a test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Fig. 5 Element sensor. Introduction page 7968 column 2.); and
PNG
media_image3.png
532
544
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
324
534
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
298
536
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Singh does not explicitly teach:
a substrate 202 comprising a formation surface 208 for a forming a graphene analysis layer 201 on the substrate 202;
a graphene analysis layer 201 diposed on the formation surface 208 of the substrate 202 and comprising an analytical interface 205 for receiving a test coating 204 and an n-dopant, such that:
the substrate 202 and the graphene analysis layer 201 are arranged in an analyte sensor 203;
the graphene analysis layer 201 is n-doped with the n- dopant so that the graphene analysis layer 201 communicates charge carriers in response to the analyte probe 200 being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal 209, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer 201 is directly proportional to an amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205;
the graphene analysis layer 201 changes the microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209, wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal 209 to microwave frequency response signal 210 is directly proportional to the amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205;
the analytical interface 205 receives analyte 206 communicated through a test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205; and
the test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 of the graphene analysis layer 201 and comprising a probe surface 207, such that:
the graphene analysis layer 201 is interposed between the substrate 202 and the test coating 204; and
the probe surface 207 receives analyte 206; and
Eisaman teaches:
a substrate 202 comprising a formation surface 208 for a forming a graphene analysis layer 201 on the substrate 202 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1 step 108.);
a graphene analysis layer 201 diposed on the formation surface 208 of the substrate 202 and comprising an analytical interface 205 for receiving a test coating 204 and an n-dopant (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1 steps 102-106 & 114-118.), such that:
the substrate 202 and the graphene analysis layer 201 are arranged in an analyte sensor 203 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1-5.);
the graphene analysis layer 201 is n-doped with the n- dopant so that the graphene analysis layer 201 communicates charge carriers in response to the analyte probe 200 being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal 209, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer 201 is directly proportional to an amount of analyte 206 disposed on the analytical interface 205 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.);
the test coating 204 disposed on the analytical interface 205 of the graphene analysis layer 201 and comprising a probe surface 207 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.), such that:
the graphene analysis layer 201 is interposed between the substrate 202 and the test coating 204 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.); and
the probe surface 207 receives analyte 206 (Paragraphs 0006-0010, 0032-0038. See Fig. 1.); and
PNG
media_image1.png
564
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Eisaman to the teachings of Singh such that a substrate would comprise a formation surface for a forming a graphene analysis layer on the substrate; a graphene analysis layer would be diposed on the formation surface of the substrate and comprising an analytical interface for receiving a test coating and an n-dopant, such that: the substrate and the graphene analysis layer are arranged in an analyte sensor; the graphene analysis layer is n-doped with the n- dopant so that the graphene analysis layer communicates charge carriers in response to the analyte probe being subjected to a microwave frequency input signal, and the communication of charge carriers by the graphene analysis layer is directly proportional to an amount of analyte disposed on the analytical interface; the graphene analysis layer changes the microwave frequency input signal to microwave frequency response signal upon being subjected to the microwave frequency input signal, wherein the change from microwave frequency input signal to microwave frequency response signal is directly proportional to the amount of analyte disposed on the analytical interface; the analytical interface receives analyte communicated through a test coating disposed on the analytical interface; and the test coating would be disposed on the analytical interface of the graphene analysis layer and comprising a probe surface, such that: the graphene analysis layer is interposed between the substrate and the test coating; and the probe surface receives analyte because this would be using the sensor disclosed in Eisaman in the system disclosed in Fig. 5 of Singh. It is simply the placement of a specific sensor into a specific type of sensing system. These combined devices would “provide high accuracy and easiness in structure implementation” and can enhance sensitivity. See Introduction page 7968 column 2.
Regarding claim 18, Singh & Eisaman teach all elements of claim 17, upon which this claim depends.
Singh teaches changing a portion of the analyte probe 200 subjected to the microwave frequency input signal 209 in the microwave cavity 212 by changing a position of the analyte probe 200 in the microwave cavity 212 (See Fig. 5 Elements sensor and VNA. See Introduction page 7968 column 2.).
Regarding claim 19, Singh & Eisaman teach all elements of claim 17, upon which this claim depends.
Singh & Eisaman do not explicitly teach forming the graphene analysis layer 201 on the substrate 202 by epitaxial growth of graphene on the substrate 202; and forming the test coating 204 on the analytical interface 205 of the graphene analysis layer 201.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to form the graphene analysis layer on the substrate by epitaxial growth of graphene on the substrate; and form the test coating on the analytical interface of the graphene analysis layer because epitaxial growth is a well-known, reliable, & dependable method of forming layers in small electrical devices sch as sensors, semiconductors, transistors and many other tools.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 8-10, 12,& 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art listed does not anticipate alone or combine in an obvious manner to teach the invention claimed by applicant.
Regarding claim 3, Eisaman & Singh teach all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Eisaman & Singh do not explicitly teach the analyte 206 is reversibly physisorbed to 1000ºC on the graphene analysis layer 201.
Regarding claim 5,
The analyte probe 200 of claim 1, wherein the substrate 202 comprises an electrical conductivity that is 7 orders of magnitude less electrically conductive than the graphene analysis layer 201.
Regarding claim 8,
The vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 of claim 7, wherein the microwave cavity 212 comprises: a microwave waveguide 213 that receives the microwave frequency input signal 209, the analyte probe 200 via opening 229, communicates the microwave frequency input signal 209 to the analyte probe 200; receives the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the analyte probe 200; and communicates the ref a microwave frequency response signal 210 to an output microwave coupler 215; an input microwave coupler 215 that receives the microwave frequency input signal 209 from the microwave source 216 and communicates the microwave frequency input signal 209 to the microwave waveguide 213 via a first cavity wall 214; the first cavity wall 214 in communication with the input microwave coupler 215 and the microwave waveguide 213 and that receives the microwave frequency input signal 209 from the input microwave coupler 215 and communicates the microwave frequency input signal 209 to the microwave waveguide 213;a second cavity wall 214 opposing the first cavity wall 214 and in communication with the output microwave coupler 215 and the microwave waveguide 213 and that receives the microwave frequency response signal 210 from the microwave waveguide 213 and communicates the microwave frequency response signal 210 to the output microwave coupler 215; and the output microwave coupler 215 that receives the microwave frequency input signal 209 from the microwave waveguide 213 via the second cavity wall 214 and communicates the microwave frequency response signal 210 to the microwave source 216.
Regarding claim 9,
The vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 of claim 7, wherein the control unit 217 produces and communicates a microwave control signal 224 to the microwave source 216 to control production of the microwave frequency input signal 209 by the microwave source 216.
Regarding claim 10,
The vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 of claim 7, wherein the microwave source 216 produces and communicates a microwave feedback signal 225 to the control unit 217, and the control unit 217 produces microwave data 228 from the microwave feedback signal 225 to produce the microwave data 228 from the microwave feedback signal 225.
Regarding claim 12,
The vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 of claim 7, wherein the analyte 206 is reversibly physisorbed to 1000ºC on the graphene analysis layer 201.
Regarding claim 15,
The vapor transmission rate analyzer 211 of claim 7, wherein the substrate 202 comprises an electrical conductivity that is 7 orders of magnitude less electrically conductive than the graphene analysis layer 201.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art listed but not cited represents the previous state of the art and analogous art that teaches some of the limitations claimed by applicant.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW whose telephone number is (469)295-9025. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6-4:30.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached on 571-270-5628. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858