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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A in the reply filed on 8/17/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 7-9, 11 and 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. The examiner notes that claims 9, 11 and 12 are withdrawn for being directed toward unelected species X, Y and Z, respectively.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 8/19/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
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 2, 4 and 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.
Claim 2 recites that the predefined minimum conductivity… is tunable in at least one of several ranges of values. These ranges of values are provided in units of mS (milliSiemens). However, Siemens are units of conduction rather than conductivity; therefore it is unclear what characteristic of the gas-sensing element is claimed to be tunable.
Claim 4 describes that the conductivity of the inert element changes in the presence of gas. This appears to mean that the inert element is reactive rather than inert; therefore, it is unclear how the term “inert” describes the element.
Claim 19 depends on claim 1. It is unclear whether the elements of claim 19 are the same as those of claim 1. For example, claim recites “a base” in line 3, but claim 1 also recites a base (in line 3 of claim1). It is unclear whether or not the base of claim 19 is the same as that of claim 1. Similar problems exist for all the other structures recited in claim 19.
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 (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 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, 3-6, 10 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0317036 by Sankarraj et al. (“Sankarraj”).
As for claim 1, Sankarraj discloses a gas-sensing element (Fig.1) for a gas sensor, the gas-sensing element comprising:
a base (12) comprising a metal oxide semiconductor formed of a first metal (paragraph [0032]);
a gas-sensing surface disposed on the base (see Fig. 1), and comprising:
a metal oxide semiconductor (14) formed of the first metal (paragraph [0032]) and at least one dopant having at least one of a second metal (e.g. platinum; paragraph [0032]) and at least one compound (a mixed metal oxide; paragraph [0032]), and
at least one inert conducting element (16, e.g. gold; Abstract) disposed between the base and the gas-sensing surface (see Fig. 1),
wherein the at least one inert conducting element is adapted to maintain a predefined minimum conductivity of the gas-sensing element (i.e. the gas sensing element will have a conductivity that is defined, at least in part, by the at least one inert conducting element).
As for claim 3, Sankarraj discloses that the at least one inert conducting element (16) is adapted to maintain the predefined minimum conductivity of the gas-sensing element based on conductivity of the at least one inert conducting element (because gold has a conductivity), and wherein the conductivity of the at least one inert conducting element is varied (the examiner notes that this limitation describes the intended use of the conducting element or the process of making the gas sensing element and does not structurally distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art) based on at least one of:
a geometric pattern of material deposition of the at least one inert conducting element,
a thickness of material deposition of the at least one inert conducting element,
a width of material deposition of the at least one inert conducting element,
a thickness of the base underneath the at least one inert conducting element, and
an overlapping area between the material deposition of the at least one inert conducting element, the base, and electrodes of the gas sensor.
As for claim 4, Sankarraj discloses that the conductivity of the at least one inert conducting element (16) is higher in presence of the gas than in the absence of the gas (because it is gold; i.e. the same material disclosed in the instant specification; see paragraph [0051]), wherein the conductivity of the at least one inert conducting element is constant in the absence of gas (because it is gold; i.e. the same material disclosed in the instant specification; see paragraph [0051]).
As for claim 5, Sankarraj discloses that the conductivity of the at least one inert conducting element is proportional to the thickness of material deposition of the at least one inert conducting element (because it is gold; i.e. the same material disclosed in the instant specification; see paragraph [0051]).
As for claim 6, Sankarraj discloses that the at least one inert conducting element is embodied as a non-continuous film having an average thickness in a range of 0.1 nm to 9 nm (paragraph [0034]).
As for claim 10, Sankarraj discloses that the at least one inert conducting element has an island pattern (paragraph [0034]).
As for claim 13, Sankarraj discloses that the at least one inert conducting element (16) is formed of a nonreactive conductive material (i.e. gold; Abstract).
As for claim 14, Sankarraj discloses that the first metal comprises aluminum, bismuth, cadmium, cerium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, gallium, indium, molybdenum, niobium, tantalum, tin, titanium, tungsten, vanadium, or zinc (paragraph [0032]).
As for claim 15, Sankarraj discloses that:
the first metal comprises aluminum, bismuth, cadmium, cerium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, gallium, indium, molybdenum, niobium, tantalum, tin, titanium, tungsten, vanadium, or zinc (paragraph [0032]), and
the second metal comprises one or more group 5 to group 11 transition metals (platinum; paragraph [0032]).
As for claim 16, Sankarraj discloses that the at least one inert conducting element (16) is adapted to maintain the predefined minimum conductivity of the gas-sensing element to evaluate an operational integrity of the gas- sensing surface in at least one of absence and presence of a gas to be tested (the examiner notes that this limitation describes the intended use of the conducting element and does not structurally distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art).
As for claim 17, Sankarraj discloses that the gas is embodied as one of hydrogen and hydrogen sulfide (paragraph [0032]).
As for claim 18, Sankarraj discloses a gas sensor (Figs. 1 and 3) comprising:
a substrate (11);
a gas-sensing element disposed on the substrate and comprising:
a base (12) comprising a metal oxide semiconductor formed of a first metal (paragraph [0032]);
a gas-sensing surface disposed on the base (see Fig. 1) and, comprising:
a metal oxide semiconductor (14) formed of the first metal (paragraph [0032]) and at least one dopant having at least one of a second metal (e.g. platinum; paragraph [0032]) and at least one compound (a mixed metal oxide; paragraph [0032]), and
at least one inert conducting element (16, e.g. gold; Abstract) disposed between the base and the gas-sensing surface (see Fig. 1),
wherein the at least one inert conducting element is adapted to maintain a predefined minimum conductivity of the gas-sensing element (i.e. the gas sensing element will have a conductivity that is defined, at least in part, by the at least one inert conducting element), and
a plurality of electrodes (32, 34) connected to the gas-sensing element and an electrical circuit (38), wherein the electrical circuit is adapted to measure at least one of a voltage across the gas-sensing element (paragraph [0037]), resistance, impedance, current, and conductance associated with the gas-sensing element and the at least one conducting element.
As for claim 19, Sankarraj discloses a method of manufacturing the gas-sensing element according to claim 1, the method comprising:
disposing (see Fig. 1) a base (12) comprising a metal oxide semiconductor formed of a first metal (paragraph [0032]);
disposing (see Fig. 1) a gas-sensing surface having a metal oxide semiconductor (14) on the base,
wherein the metal oxide semiconductor (14) is formed of the first metal (paragraph [0032]) and at least one dopant having at least one of a second metal (e.g. platinum; paragraph [0032]) and at least one compound (a mixed metal oxide, paragraph [0032]); and
disposing (see Fig. 1) at least one inert conducting element (16) between the base and the gas-sensing surface,
wherein the at least one inert conducting element is adapted to maintain a predefined minimum conductivity of the gas-sensing element (i.e. the gas sensing element will have a conductivity that is defined, at least in part, by the at least one inert conducting element).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0317036 by Sankarraj et al. (“Sankarraj”) in view of U.S. Patent 4,358,951 issued to Chang (“Chang”), U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0163473 by Bartsch et al. (“Bartsch”), JP 3929164 (“JP 3929164”) and EP 0141089 by Forster (“Forster”).
As for claim 2, Sankarraj discloses the gas-sensing element according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim above).
Sankarraj does not disclose that the predefined minimum conductivity is tunable corresponding to a series resistance of the gas sensor and tunable in at least one of 1E-5 mS to 1E-3 mS, 1E-4 mS to 1E-2 mS, 1E-3 mS to 1E-1 mS and 1E-2 to 1mS ranges.
However, Chang discloses a gas sensing element in which a predefined minimum conductivity is tunable corresponding to a series resistance of the gas sensor and tunable in at least one of 1E-5 mS to 1E-3 mS, 1E-4 mS to 1E-2 mS (see Fig. 3), 1E-3 mS to 1E-1 mS and 1E-2 to 1mS ranges. Bartsch also discloses a gas sensing element in which a predefined minimum conductivity is tunable corresponding to a series resistance of the gas sensor and tunable in at least one of 1E-5 mS to 1E-3 mS, 1E-4 mS to 1E-2 mS (see Fig. 7), 1E-3 mS to 1E-1 mS and 1E-2 to 1mS ranges. JP 3929164 discloses that the conductivity of a metal oxide semiconductor gas sensor can be optimized (paragraph [0016]). Forster also discloses that the conductivity of a metal oxide semiconductor gas sensor can be optimized (see the paragraph beginning “Fig. 4 shows another gas sensor 6.”). It has been held that "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A) and In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to optimize the conductivity of the gas sensor of Sankarraj to be in the claimed range as disclosed by Chang and Barsch in order to optimize the performance of the gas sensor as suggested by JP 3929164 and Forster.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 9,910,023 issued to Ui et al. (“Ui”) is cited for all that it discloses including a gas sensing element with metal oxide layers and an inert layer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN N OLAMIT whose telephone number is (571)270-1969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (Pacific).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JUSTIN N OLAMIT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights