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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/9/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 7-12, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zafar (US 2022/0328285 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zafar discloses an apparatus (Fig.2), including:
a) a gas cell body 214 with a first end and a second end;
b) a light source 212 coupled to the first end of the gas cell body 214, where the light source 212 is configured to emit EM radiation through the gas cell body 214;
c) a photonic detector system 210 coupled to the second end of the gas cell body 214;
d) a housing 200 around the gas cell body 214 that is temperature controlled, where the photonic detector system 210 is outside the housing 200 (Fig.2); and
e) a temperature sensor 211 configured to measure a temperature of the photonic detector system 210 or a temperature of the gas cell body 214 (par.0034).
With respect to claim 4, Zafar further discloses that the photonic detector system 210 includes an IR photodetector (par.0030).
With respect to claim 7, Zafar further discloses that the apparatus is an NDIR sensor (par.0002).
With respect to claim 8, Zafar further discloses a heater configured to heat the housing (par.0033).
With respect to claim 9, Zafar further discloses that the temperature sensor 211 is a RTD or a thermocouple (par.0034).
With respect to claim 10, Zafar further discloses that the photonic detector system further includes a controller 102, where the controller 102 is configured to use a temperature measurement from the temperature sensor 211 to calibrate an intensity signal to account for one or both of leakage current or background radiation (step 406, Fig.4).
Regarding claim 11, Zafar discloses a method for generating a calibrated intensity signal (Figs.2 and 4), including:
a) flowing a gas through a sensor that includes a temperature sensor 211 on a photodetector system 210 of the sensor (Fig.2);
b) detecting an intensity signal with the sensor (step 404); and
c) calibrating the intensity signal by applying a calibration model to the intensity signal to produce the calibrated intensity signal, where the calibration model depends at least partially on a temperature measured by the temperature sensor 211 (step 406).
With respect to claim 12, Zafar further discloses converting the calibrated intensity signal to a concentration of a species in the gas (step 406).
With respect to claim 17, Zafar further discloses that the sensor is configured for operation with IR radiation (par.0002).
Regarding claim 18, Zafar discloses a method for controlling a flow of a gas into a chamber (Figs.1, 2 and 4), including:
a) flowing the gas through an ampule 202 (Fig.2) to the chamber (Fig.1);
b) monitoring a concentration of a species in the gas with a photonic sensor 210 that includes one or more temperature sensors 211 to control for effects of leakage current and/or background radiation in the photonic sensor 210 (Fig.2, also see steps 404-406); and
c) changing a temperature of the ampule 202 to maintain the concentration of the species in the gas in response to deviations of the concentrations of the species in the gas detected by the photonic sensor 210 (step 408).
With respect to claim 20, Zafar further discloses that the photonic sensor 210 is a NDIR sensor (par.0002).
Claims 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Merilainen (US 5,542,285).
Regarding claim 11, Merilainen discloses a method for generating a calibrated intensity signal (Figs.3 and 6), including:
a) flowing a gas through a sensor that includes a temperature sensor 6 on a photodetector system 9 of the sensor (Fig.3; col.1, lines 32-41);
b) detecting an intensity signal with the sensor (Figs.3 and 6); and
c) calibrating the intensity signal by applying a calibration model to the intensity signal to produce the calibrated intensity signal, where the calibration model depends at least partially on a temperature measured by the temperature sensor 6 (Figs.3 and 6; col.7, lines 11-44).
With respect to claim 12, Merilainen further discloses converting the calibrated intensity signal to a concentration of a species in the gas (col.1, lines 42-45).
With respect to claim 13, Merilainen further discloses a second temperature sensor 7 on a gas cell body 2 of the sensor (Fig.3), where the calibration model at least partially depends on a temperature measured by the second temperature sensor (Fig. 6; col.7, lines 11-44; col.9, lines 47-50).
With respect to claim 14, Merilainen further discloses that the calibration model is a non-linear mathematical function of the temperatures measured by the temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor (col.8, lines 42-52).
With respect to claim 15, Merilainen further discloses that the calibration model includes a cross-correlation term corresponding to the temperature measured by the temperature sensor and the temperature measured by the second temperature sensor (inherent insofar as both temperatures are used to determine the change in temperature compensation, see at least col.7, lines 25-44 and col.9, lines 47-50).
With respect to claim 16, Merilainen further discloses that the calibration model is a linear function (col.8, lines 42-47).
With respect to claim 17, Merilainen further discloses that the sensor is configured for operation for IR radiation (col.1, lines 42-45).
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 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.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zafar, as applied to claim 1 above.
With respect to claim 5, Zafar does not specifically disclose that the inlet is proximate to the first end of the gas cell body (defined in claim 1 that the light source is coupled to the first end of the gas cell body) and that the outlet is proximate to the second end (defined in claim 1 that the photodetector sensor is coupled to the second end of the gas cell body). Zafar teaches the opposite arrangement, where the light source is at the end proximate to the gas outlet and the photodetector is at the end proximate to the gas inlet (Fig.2).
However, the skilled artisan readily appreciates the fact that either arrangement will be able to measure the concentration of the precursors in the gas flow within the gas cell body with substantially the same level of accuracy and precision with a reasonable expectation of success and without any undue experimentation (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Zafar to have the gas inlet proximate to the first end and the gas outlet proximate to the second end as a functionally-equivalent means of measuring the concentration of the precursor species in the gas cell body with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation.
With respect to claim 6, Zafar further discloses that the inlet is fluidically coupled to an ampule 202 (Fig.2), and that the outlet is fluidically coupled to a processing chamber (Fig.1).
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zafar, as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, respectively, in view of Merilainen (US 5,542,285).
With respect to claim 2, Zafar does not specifically disclose a second temperature sensor. Zafar teaches that the temperature sensor 211 may measure both the temperature of the detector and the temperature of the housing (par.0034), without any specifics.
Merilainen teaches the practice of providing separate temperature sensors, a temperature sensor 6 for the photodetector 9, and a temperature sensor 7 for the gas cell body 2. In this manner, the concentration of a precursor species within the gas flow is more precisely determined by further taking into account the temperature of the measured gas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Zafar to have a second temperature sensor for measuring the temperature of the gas cell body in order to improve the precision of the precursor measurement, as suggested by Zafar and taught by Merilainen.
With respect to claim 19, Zafar further discloses a first temperature sensor 211 configured to measure a temperature of a photonic sensor 210.
Zafar does not specifically disclose that the first temperature sensor 211 measures a temperature of a heat sink of the photonic sensor 210.
However, the skilled artisan readily appreciates the fact that heat sinks are common locations for temperature feedback measurements for IR detectors which are notoriously sensitive to temperature fluctuations.
Additionally, Merilainen teaches that the location of the temperature sensor 6 for measuring the temperature of the photonic sensor 9 may be placed adjacent to the reference detector 17 which is mounted on the PCB (Fig.4), or may be placed externally on the housing 4 (Fig.3, most likely on a heat sink due to the statement that the temperature of the housing is substantially the same as the temperature within the detector: col.5, lines 45-48 and 56-66). Merilainen teaches that either location for the temperature sensor 6 is suitable for determining temperature fluctuations of the photonic detector 9 so long as the temperature measurements consistently track the temperature of the reference detector 17, where the external (heat sink) location is simpler in construction and less intrusive to the photonic detector operation (col.5, line 66, through col.7, line 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Zafar to place the first temperature sensor on the heat sink of the photonic sensor, as suggested by both Zafar and Merilainen, and as recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art, in order to provide a useful and non-intrusive measure of the photonic detector temperature for feedback to the calibration model, as taught by both Zafar and Merilainen.
Further regarding claim 19, Zafar does not specifically disclose a second temperature sensor. Zafar teaches that the temperature sensor 211 may measure both the temperature of the detector and the temperature of the housing (par.0034), without any specifics.
Merilainen teaches the practice of providing separate temperature sensors, a temperature sensor 6 for the photodetector 9, and a temperature sensor 7 for the gas cell body 2. In this manner, the concentration of a precursor species within the gas flow is more precisely determined by further taking into account the temperature of the measured gas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Zafar to have a second temperature sensor for measuring the temperature of the gas cell body in order to improve the precision of the precursor measurement, as suggested by Zafar and taught by Merilainen.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zafar, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Sabry (US 2023/0014558 A1).
With respect to claim 3, Zafar does not specifically disclose the location of the temperature sensor 211 on the detector 210.
Zafar does schematically show the detector 211 on at the back of the sensor 210, and the skilled artisan readily appreciates the fact that feedback temperature sensors are often placed on the heat sinks of IR detectors due to the reliable and cost-effective manner of monitoring the temperature fluctuations of the IR detector.
Further, Sabry teaches the common practice of providing a temperature feedback sensor on a PCB of an IR detector in order to provide a reliable in situ temperature of the IR detector (par.0098).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Zafar to place the temperature sensor on the PCB for an accurate measure of the detector temperature, as recommended by Sabry, or on the heat sink, as suggested by Zafar and recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art, for the same purpose.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see attached PTO-892 unless otherwise stated):
US PG-pub to Simonin et al. teaches the practice of providing a temperature sensor on the PCB of a UV photonic sensor for correcting the output of the UV sensor for more precise measurements (par.0048); and
The remaining cited prior art are either US family members of previously-cited art, or are commonly-owned US patent documents claiming related but different aspects of the overall invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS R ARTMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2485. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-6:30pm.
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 on 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.
THOMAS R. ARTMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/THOMAS R ARTMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884