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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 28 August 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2023-138339 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 14 July 2024 does not fully comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.98 because: each publication listed in an information disclosure statement must be identified by publisher, author (if any), title, relevant pages of the publication, date, and place of publication. The date of publication supplied must include at least the month and year of publication, except that the year of publication (without the month) will be accepted if the applicant points out in the information disclosure statement that the year of publication is sufficiently earlier than the effective U.S. filing date and any foreign priority date so that the particular month of publication is not in issue. Since the submission appears to be bona fide, applicant is given ONE (1) MONTH from the date of this notice to supply the above mentioned omissions or corrections in the information disclosure statement. NO EXTENSION OF THIS TIME LIMIT MAY BE GRANTED UNDER EITHER 37 CFR 1.136(a) OR (b). Failure to timely comply with this notice will result in the above mentioned information disclosure statement being placed in the application file with the noncomplying information not being considered. See 37 CFR 1.97(i).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 11Z and 13Z. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
MPEP § 2111.01 states that “… Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms …”. Thus under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification (e.g., see “… temperature coefficient of resistance (TCR) … In the disclosure, Itotal indicates a drain current Id, Vg indicates a gate voltage, and a median to be calculated indicates a gate voltage value at which the absolute value of the TCR is at a maximum …” on pg. 1, line 15 and pg. 11, lines 11+) serves as a glossary for the claim terms “Itotal” and “median”.
The specification (e.g., see “… second film 17 gives the CNTs 161 contained in the first film 16 an action of donating electrons (carriers induced by a gate voltage become electrons: N-type doping) or extracting electrons (carriers induced by a gate voltage become holes: P-type doping) by a doping action …” on pg. 8, line 21+) serves as a glossary for the claim term “doping action”.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 4, 11, and 12, the phrase "when" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “median” in claim(s) 1, 4, and 9-12 is used by the claim(s) to mean “a gate voltage value at which the absolute value of the TCR is at a maximum”, while the accepted meaning1 is “1. In a sequence of numbers arranged from smallest to largest: a. The middle number, when such a sequence has an odd number of values. For example, in the sequence 3, 4, 14, 35, 280, the median is 14. b. The average of the two middle numbers, when such a sequence has an even number of values. For example, in the sequence 4, 8, 10, 56, the median is 9 (the average of 8 and 10). Compare arithmetic mean, average, mode”. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claim(s) dependent on the claim(s) discussed above is/are also indefinite for the same reasons.
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)(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 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 of this title, 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) 1, 4, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Gokturk (US 2005/0036905).
In regard to claim 1 (in so far as understood) and claim 4 (which is dependent on claim 1 in so far as understood), Gokturk discloses a bolometer comprising:
(a) a gate electrode to which a gate voltage is configured to be applied (e.g., see “… gate electrode (G) can be positioned on a side of the insulating film 29 opposite the side on which the nanotube is located … Conductivity of the nanotube (channel) is modulated by a voltage applied to the gate (G) electrode. Such an arrangement provides the opportunity to control sensor characteristics by means of the gate voltage. Moreover, resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage. For example, resistivity of the nanotube can change as a function of the quantity being detected, such as but not limited to … temperature …” in
PNG
media_image1.png
365
1713
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and paragraph 135);
(b) a drain electrode to which a drain voltage is configured to be applied (e.g., see “… drain electrode (D) and source electrode (S) are located at opposite ends of the nanotube … drain (D) and source (S) electrodes contact the channel to allow current flow …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraphs 135-136 or alternatively it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a drain voltage in order to measure “resistivity of the nanotube” “as a function of” “temperature”);
(c) a source electrode (e.g., see “… drain electrode (D) and source electrode (S) are located at opposite ends of the nanotube …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraph 135); and
(d) a first film that connects the drain electrode and the source electrode and includes a carbon nanotube (e.g., see “… preferred nanotube will be formed of carbon atoms … As discussed above, nanotubes can have semiconducting properties depending on the structure. Originally metallic tubes with nearly zero bandgap can be converted to semiconductive tubes with larger bandgap by introducing defects. A semiconductive nanotube can be used as the channel of a MOSFET transistor as illustrated in FIGS. 16(a)-(d) …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraphs 78 and 135).
In regard to claim 7 which is dependent on claim 1, Gokturk also discloses that the carbon nanotube is a semiconductor type carbon nanotube (e.g., “… preferred nanotube will be formed of carbon atoms … semiconductive nanotube can be used as the channel of a MOSFET transistor as illustrated in FIGS. 16(a)-(d) …” in paragraphs 78 and 135).
Claim(s) 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gokturk (US 2005/0036905) in view of Xu et al. (Selective conversion from p‑type to n‑type of printed bottom-gate carbon nanotube thin-film transistors and application in complementary metal−oxide−semiconductor inverters, ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces Vol. 9, no. 14 (March 2017), pp.12750−12758).
In regard to claim 2 which is dependent on claim 1, while Gokturk also discloses a second film that is provided on a surface of the first film (e.g., “… sensor comprising a transistor comprising the defect controlled nanotube can detect temperature … density of defects adjusted to broaden the bandgap to several times, for example, 5 times, that of thermal energy corresponding to the temperature of interest; a protection layer with high thermal conductivity to prevent exposure to ambient gases … defect controlled nanotube fabricated as an n-channel MOSFETs, it is understood that they may also be fabricated as p-channel MOSFETs without departing from the scope and/or spirit of the invention … At least the nanotube can include a protection layer, such as, composed of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) polymer, to prevent exposure to ambient gases …” in paragraphs 55 , 150, and 165), the bolometer of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… fabricated as an n-channel MOSFETs, it is understood that they may also be fabricated as fabricated as p-channel …” such as the second film performs a doping action on the first film. However, “… fabricated as an n-channel … fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes (sc-SWCNTs). (5, 14, 36-39) … most printed sc-SWCNT TFT circuits are based on unipolar (p-type only) technologies, which are burdened with high power dissipation and limited noise margins compared to CMOS circuitry consisting of both p-type and n-type TFTs. (43) … a new polarity conversion method is presented which is based on printing ethanolamine (EA) as an electron doping agent on the transistor active region …” in the Introduction section paragraphs of Xu et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “printing ethanolamine (EA) as an electron doping agent on the transistor active region”, in order to achieve “CMOS circuitry consisting of both p-type and n-type TFTs”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as the second film performs a doping action on the first film) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
In regard to claim 5 which is dependent on claim 2, Gokturk also discloses that the second film includes a polymeric material (e.g., “… sensor comprising a transistor comprising the defect controlled nanotube can detect temperature … protection layer with high thermal conductivity to prevent exposure to ambient gases … At least the nanotube can include a protection layer, such as, composed of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) polymer, to prevent exposure to ambient gases …” in paragraphs 55 and 165).
In regard to claim 6 which is dependent on claim 2, Gokturk also discloses that the second film includes PMMA, P4VP, or P4VBM (e.g., “… sensor comprising a transistor comprising the defect controlled nanotube can detect temperature … protection layer with high thermal conductivity to prevent exposure to ambient gases … At least the nanotube can include a protection layer, such as, composed of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) polymer, to prevent exposure to ambient gases …” in paragraphs 55 and 165).
In regard to claim 8 which is dependent on claim 1, the bolometer of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… fabricated as an n-channel MOSFETs, it is understood that they may also be fabricated as fabricated as p-channel …” such as the first film covers the drain electrode and the source electrode. However, “… fabricated as an n-channel … fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… source and drain gold electrode arrays were fabricated by photolithography and e-beam metal deposition. Polymer-sorted sc-SWCNT inks were selectively deposited on device channels by drop casting or inkjet printing … polarity conversion inks were deposited on the transistor active regions by drop coating, dip-coating, spin-coating, or printing …” in the “Fabrication and Electrical Properties of Printed p-Type and n-Type SWCNT TFTs and Printed CMOS Inverters” section paragraphs of Xu et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “source and drain gold electrode arrays were fabricated by photolithography and e-beam metal deposition. Polymer-sorted sc-SWCNT inks were selectively deposited on device channels by drop casting or inkjet printing”, in order to achieve “CMOS circuitry consisting of both p-type and n-type TFTs”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as the first film covers the drain electrode and the source electrode) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
In regard to claim 11 in so far as understood, Gokturk discloses a bolometer manufacturing method comprising:
(a) laminating a first film that connects a drain electrode and a source electrode and includes a carbon nanotube (e.g., see “… preferred nanotube will be formed of carbon atoms … As discussed above, nanotubes can have semiconducting properties depending on the structure. Originally metallic tubes with nearly zero bandgap can be converted to semiconductive tubes with larger bandgap by introducing defects. A semiconductive nanotube can be used as the channel of a MOSFET transistor as illustrated in FIGS. 16(a)-(d). For example, as illustrated in FIG. 16(a), the nanotube can be positioned on an insulating film 29, of, for example, silicon dioxide, gate electrode (G) can be positioned on a side of the insulating film 29 opposite the side on which the nanotube is located, and the drain electrode (D) and source electrode (S) are located at opposite ends of the nanotube. The gate electrode can be insulated from the nanotubes in other manners then being positioned on the opposite side of the insulating film. Conductivity of the nanotube (channel) is modulated by a voltage applied to the gate (G) electrode. Such an arrangement provides the opportunity to control sensor characteristics by means of the gate voltage. Moreover, resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage. For example, resistivity of the nanotube can change as a function of the quantity being detected, such as but not limited to … temperature …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraphs 78 and 135); and
(b) providing a second film on a surface of the first film (e.g., “… sensor comprising a transistor comprising the defect controlled nanotube can detect temperature … density of defects adjusted to broaden the bandgap to several times, for example, 5 times, that of thermal energy corresponding to the temperature of interest; a protection layer with high thermal conductivity to prevent exposure to ambient gases … At least the nanotube can include a protection layer, such as, composed of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) polymer, to prevent exposure to ambient gases …” in paragraphs 55 and 165).
The method of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… fabricated as an n-channel MOSFETs, it is understood that they may also be fabricated as fabricated as p-channel …” such as the second film performing a doping action on the first film. However, “… fabricated as an n-channel … fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes (sc-SWCNTs). (5, 14, 36-39) … most printed sc-SWCNT TFT circuits are based on unipolar (p-type only) technologies, which are burdened with high power dissipation and limited noise margins compared to CMOS circuitry consisting of both p-type and n-type TFTs. (43) … a new polarity conversion method is presented which is based on printing ethanolamine (EA) as an electron doping agent on the transistor active region …” in the Introduction section paragraphs of Xu et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “printing ethanolamine (EA) as an electron doping agent on the transistor active region”, in order to achieve “CMOS circuitry consisting of both p-type and n-type TFTs”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as the second film performing a doping action on the first film) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
In regard to claim 13 which is dependent on claim 11, Gokturk also discloses that, in the providing of the second film, the second film includes a polymeric material (e.g., “… sensor comprising a transistor comprising the defect controlled nanotube can detect temperature … protection layer with high thermal conductivity to prevent exposure to ambient gases … At least the nanotube can include a protection layer, such as, composed of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) polymer, to prevent exposure to ambient gases …” in paragraphs 55 and 165).
In regard to claim 14 which is dependent on claim 11, Gokturk also discloses that, in the providing of the second film, the second film includes PMMA, P4VP, or P4VBM (e.g., “… sensor comprising a transistor comprising the defect controlled nanotube can detect temperature … protection layer with high thermal conductivity to prevent exposure to ambient gases … At least the nanotube can include a protection layer, such as, composed of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) polymer, to prevent exposure to ambient gases …” in paragraphs 55 and 165).
In regard to claim 15 which is dependent on claim 11, Gokturk also discloses that, in the laminating of the first film, the carbon nanotube is a semiconductor type carbon nanotube (e.g., “… preferred nanotube will be formed of carbon atoms … semiconductive nanotube can be used as the channel of a MOSFET transistor as illustrated in FIGS. 16(a)-(d) …” in paragraphs 78 and 135).
In regard to claim 16 which is dependent on claim 11, the method of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… fabricated as an n-channel MOSFETs, it is understood that they may also be fabricated as fabricated as p-channel …” such as the first film covers the drain electrode and the source electrode in the laminating of the first film. However, “… fabricated as an n-channel … fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… source and drain gold electrode arrays were fabricated by photolithography and e-beam metal deposition. Polymer-sorted sc-SWCNT inks were selectively deposited on device channels by drop casting or inkjet printing … polarity conversion inks were deposited on the transistor active regions by drop coating, dip-coating, spin-coating, or printing …” in the “Fabrication and Electrical Properties of Printed p-Type and n-Type SWCNT TFTs and Printed CMOS Inverters” section paragraphs of Xu et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “source and drain gold electrode arrays were fabricated by photolithography and e-beam metal deposition. Polymer-sorted sc-SWCNT inks were selectively deposited on device channels by drop casting or inkjet printing”, in order to achieve “CMOS circuitry consisting of both p-type and n-type TFTs”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as in the laminating of the first film, the first film covers the drain electrode and the source electrode) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gokturk in view of Xu et al. as applied to claim(s) 2 above, and further in view of Aota (US 2005/0248397).
In regard to claim 3 which is dependent on claim 2, the bolometer of Gokturk lacks that the gate electrode and the source electrode are short-circuited. However, Aota teaches (paragraph 61) that “… FET 112 functions as a constant current source since its source and gate are connected together …”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to short-circuit the gate and source electrodes of Gokturk, in order to achieve constant current to measure voltage instead of a current measurement.
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gokturk (US 2005/0036905) in view of Saxena et al. (Gate voltage tunable temperature coefficient of resistance of WSe2 for thermal sensing applications, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Vol. 70, no. 5 (May 2023), pp. 2600-2605).
In regard to claim 9, Gokturk discloses a detection method for a bolometer including a gate electrode, a drain electrode, a source electrode, and a first film that connects the drain electrode and the source electrode and includes a carbon nanotube (e.g., see “… preferred nanotube will be formed of carbon atoms … As discussed above, nanotubes can have semiconducting properties depending on the structure. Originally metallic tubes with nearly zero bandgap can be converted to semiconductive tubes with larger bandgap by introducing defects. A semiconductive nanotube can be used as the channel of a MOSFET transistor as illustrated in FIGS. 16(a)-(d). For example, as illustrated in FIG. 16(a), the nanotube can be positioned on an insulating film 29, of, for example, silicon dioxide, gate electrode (G) can be positioned on a side of the insulating film 29 opposite the side on which the nanotube is located, and the drain electrode (D) and source electrode (S) are located at opposite ends of the nanotube. The gate electrode can be insulated from the nanotubes in other manners then being positioned on the opposite side of the insulating film. Conductivity of the nanotube (channel) is modulated by a voltage applied to the gate (G) electrode. Such an arrangement provides the opportunity to control sensor characteristics by means of the gate voltage. Moreover, resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage. For example, resistivity of the nanotube can change as a function of the quantity being detected, such as but not limited to … temperature …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraphs 78 and 135), the detection method comprising:
(a) applying a gate voltage between a first upper limit value and a first lower limit value to the gate electrode (e.g., see “… gate electrode (G) can be positioned on a side of the insulating film 29 opposite the side on which the nanotube is located … Conductivity of the nanotube (channel) is modulated by a voltage applied to the gate (G) electrode. Such an arrangement provides the opportunity to control sensor characteristics by means of the gate voltage. Moreover, resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage. For example, resistivity of the nanotube can change as a function of the quantity being detected, such as but not limited to … temperature …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraph 135); and
(b) detecting infrared rays (e.g., see “… resistivity of the nanotube can change as a function of the quantity being detected, such as but not limited to … temperature …” in Figs. 16a-b and paragraphs 78 and 135).
The method of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… MOSFETs, it is understood that they may also be fabricated as fabricated as p-channel …” such as applying a negative drain voltage to the drain electrode and details of the “… resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage …” such as the first upper limit value is the gate voltage when a drain current of the drain electrode is at a minimum, and the first lower limit value is the gate voltage that satisfies relationships shown in the following equation: first lower limit value = first upper limit value - (first upper limit value - median)×2 where
m
e
d
i
a
n
=
a
r
g
m
a
x
d
l
o
g
I
t
o
t
a
l
V
g
d
V
g
. However, “… fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… temperature coefficient of resistance (TCR) … Gate voltage tunable TCR … lead to the design of maximal TCR-based thermal sensors …” in the section I paragraphs, “… where Cox is the oxide capacitance … Vg is the gate voltage, and Vt is the threshold voltage … for n-channel metal oxide semiconductor FET (MOS-FET), the current in the saturation region is given by [20]
I
D
=
μ
w
c
O
X
2
L
V
g
-
V
t
2
(5) where W is the channel width, µ is the mobility, and L is the channel length … For the temperature ranges …” in the section III paragraphs, and “… back-gated FET devices were fabricated … p-WSe2 device turns to ON state for the negative gate voltage, and the n-MoS2 device turns to ON state for the positive gate voltage. The voltage polarity reversal between p-WSe2 and n-MoS2 is an expected response from an FET device [20]. The applied drain voltage is −1 V for p-WSe2 and 1 V for n-MoS2. Also, Vt is estimated experimentally from the peak position in the graph of the double derivative of drain current versus the applied gate voltage …” in the section IV paragraphs of Saxena et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “applied drain voltage is −1 V” and “Gate voltage tunable TCR”, in order to achieve “maximal TCR-based thermal sensors” for desired “temperature ranges”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as applying a negative drain voltage to the drain electrode, wherein the first upper limit value is the gate voltage when a drain current of the drain electrode is at a minimum, and the first lower limit value is the gate voltage that satisfies relationships shown in the following equation: first lower limit value = first upper limit value - (first upper limit value - median)×2 where
m
e
d
i
a
n
=
a
r
g
m
a
x
d
l
o
g
I
t
o
t
a
l
V
g
d
V
g
) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
In regard to claim 10 which is dependent on claim 9, the method of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage …” such as in the applying of the gate voltage, when the drain voltage is negative, the gate voltage is set between a second upper limit value and a second lower limit value, the second upper limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second upper limit value=median+(first upper limit value−median)/2, and the second lower limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second lower limit value=second upper limit value−(second upper limit value−median)×2. However, “… fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… temperature coefficient of resistance (TCR) … Gate voltage tunable TCR … lead to the design of maximal TCR-based thermal sensors …” in the section I paragraphs, “… where Cox is the oxide capacitance … Vg is the gate voltage, and Vt is the threshold voltage … for n-channel metal oxide semiconductor FET (MOS-FET), the current in the saturation region is given by [20]
I
D
=
μ
w
c
O
X
2
L
V
g
-
V
t
2
(5) where W is the channel width, µ is the mobility, and L is the channel length … For the temperature ranges …” in the section III paragraphs, and “… back-gated FET devices were fabricated … p-WSe2 device turns to ON state for the negative gate voltage, and the n-MoS2 device turns to ON state for the positive gate voltage. The voltage polarity reversal between p-WSe2 and n-MoS2 is an expected response from an FET device [20]. The applied drain voltage is −1 V for p-WSe2 and 1 V for n-MoS2. Also, Vt is estimated experimentally from the peak position in the graph of the double derivative of drain current versus the applied gate voltage …” in the section IV paragraphs of Saxena et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “applied drain voltage is −1 V” and “Gate voltage tunable TCR”, in order to achieve “maximal TCR-based thermal sensors” for desired “temperature ranges”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as in the applying of the gate voltage, when the drain voltage is negative, the gate voltage is set between a second upper limit value and a second lower limit value, the second upper limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second upper limit value=median+(first upper limit value−median)/2, and the second lower limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second lower limit value=second upper limit value−(second upper limit value−median)×2) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gokturk in view of Xu et al. as applied to claim(s) 11 above, and further in view of Saxena et al. (Gate voltage tunable temperature coefficient of resistance of WSe2 for thermal sensing applications, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Vol. 70, no. 5 (May 2023), pp. 2600-2605).
In regard to claim 12 which is dependent on claim 11, the method of Gokturk lacks an explicit description of details of the “… resistivity of the nanotube can also be controlled by the gate voltage …” such as in the applying of the gate voltage, when the drain voltage is negative, the gate voltage is set between a second upper limit value and a second lower limit value, the second upper limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second upper limit value=median+(upper limit value−median)/2, and the second lower limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second lower limit value=second upper limit value−(second upper limit value−median)×2. However, “… fabricated as p-channel …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… temperature coefficient of resistance (TCR) … Gate voltage tunable TCR … lead to the design of maximal TCR-based thermal sensors …” in the section I paragraphs, “… where Cox is the oxide capacitance … Vg is the gate voltage, and Vt is the threshold voltage … for n-channel metal oxide semiconductor FET (MOS-FET), the current in the saturation region is given by [20]
I
D
=
μ
w
c
O
X
2
L
V
g
-
V
t
2
(5) where W is the channel width, µ is the mobility, and L is the channel length … For the temperature ranges …” in the section III paragraphs, and “… back-gated FET devices were fabricated … p-WSe2 device turns to ON state for the negative gate voltage, and the n-MoS2 device turns to ON state for the positive gate voltage. The voltage polarity reversal between p-WSe2 and n-MoS2 is an expected response from an FET device [20]. The applied drain voltage is −1 V for p-WSe2 and 1 V for n-MoS2. Also, Vt is estimated experimentally from the peak position in the graph of the double derivative of drain current versus the applied gate voltage …” in the section IV paragraphs of Saxena et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as “applied drain voltage is −1 V” and “Gate voltage tunable TCR”, in order to achieve “maximal TCR-based thermal sensors” for desired “temperature ranges”) for the unspecified transistor of Gokturk and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional transistor (e.g., comprising details such as in the applying of the gate voltage, when the drain voltage is negative, the gate voltage is set between a second upper limit value and a second lower limit value, the second upper limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second upper limit value=median+(upper limit value−median)/2, and the second lower limit value satisfies a relationship shown in the following equation: second lower limit value=second upper limit value−(second upper limit value−median)×2) as the unspecified transistor of Gokturk.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 2015-49207 teaches a carbon nanotube FET.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shun Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at (571)272-3995. 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.
/SL/
Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
1 The American Heritage® Student Science Dictionary, Second Edition. Copyright © 2014 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.