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 Republic of Korea on October 6, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2023-0133512 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner acknowledges receipt of the KR10-2023-0137936 application filed in Republic of Korea on October 16, 2023.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2021/0389228 A1), hereinafter “Seo”, and further in view of Ryu et al. (KR 20180020614 A), references to English machine translation, hereinafter “Ryu”.
Regarding claim 1, Seo teaches a metamaterial sensing platform (abstract, Fig. 1, paragraph [0003]) comprising: a sensing portion (ref 100, paragraph [0022]) configured to capture a particle (ref P, paragraph [0023]); and a terahertz sensor portion configured to sense the particle (ref 110, paragraph [0022]) by allowing a terahertz electromagnetic wave to be incident on the sensing portion (paragraph [0026]); wherein the sensing portion includes a base substrate (ref 101, paragraph [0023]) and a particle capture portion (ref 102, paragraph [0023]) disposed on the base substrate (ref 101) and having a plurality of slits (ref S, paragraph [0033]) formed therein through which the particle is captured (as shown in Fig. 1, paragraph [0033]).
Seo is silent regarding wherein a nanodisk reactive with the particle is disposed in the plurality of slits.
However, Ryu teaches a terahertz frequency sensor (abstract, Fig. 2) including wherein a nanodisk reactive with the particle is disposed in the plurality of slits (as shown in Fig. 2, refs 130, 110, paragraphs [0026]-[0030]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Seo with the teaching of Ryu by including wherein a nanodisk reactive with the particle is disposed in the plurality of slits in order to collect a detection target by bonding and during permittivity changes when the detection target material is bonded.
Regarding claim 10, Seo teaches wherein the terahertz sensor portion senses the particle by allowing the terahertz electromagnetic wave to be incident on the sensing portion and detecting the terahertz electromagnetic wave reflected from the sensing portion (as shown in Fig. 1; paragraph [0023]).
Regarding claim 11, Seo teaches wherein the particle is sensed by measuring reflectivity (Figs. 10 and 11, paragraphs [0045]-[0049]) between the terahertz electromagnetic wave being incident on the sensing portion and the terahertz electromagnetic wave being reflected from the sensing portion (as shown in Fig. 1; paragraph [0023]), but is silent regarding measuring frequency shift.
However, Ryu teaches measuring frequency shift (paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Seo with the teaching of Ryu by including measuring frequency shift in order to have a more complete analysis of the particle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 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:
Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a metamaterial sensing platform, the device comprising, among other essential elements, wherein the base substrate is a Si layer, and a SiO2 layer that oxidizes the Si layer is further disposed between the Si layer and the particle capture portion, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1 and the above claim. Claims 3-9 are dependent from claim 2 and therefore are also included in the allowed subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cumming (US 2015/0276489) teaches a terahertz detector with a silicon nitride layer, but this is used as an insulator, and not as a base substrate as claimed.
Carr (US 2021/0381900) teaches a terahertz detector with a later of silicon SOI wafer and a silicon dioxide layer, but does not have a particle capture portion, as claimed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC J BOLOGNA whose telephone number is (571)272-9282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Kara E Geisel can be reached at (571) 272-2416. 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.
/DOMINIC J BOLOGNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights