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 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a as being anticipated by Fong et al. (US 2017/0092834).
With respect to claim 1, Fong teaches an infrared red (IR) detector (Abstract) comprising: a substrate (120) configured to absorb IR energy ([0046]); at least one pair of electrodes comprising a superconducting material, and at least one pair of electrodes arranged at an outer edge of the substrate, wherein IR energy absorbed by the substrate diffuses toward the outer edge while dissipating as heat from a surface of the substrate, and wherein the at least one electrode conducts the heat at the outer edge (130; [0049]; [0050]).
With respect to claim 2, Fong teaches the substrate comprises graphene ([0046]).
With respect to claim 3, Fong teaches the superconducting material comprises one, or a combination of, titanium (Ti), aluminum (Al), niobium nitride (NbN) ([0049]).
With respect to claim 4, Fong teaches the at least one electrode pair and the substrate are coupled together so as to establish a graphene Josephson junction (130).
With respect to claim 5, Fong teaches the at least one electrode pair includes a first leg coupled to a first surface of the substrate and a second leg connected to an opposing second surface of the substrate (Fig. 2A).
With respect to claim 6, Fong teaches the at least one electrode pair includes a plurality of electrodes disposed uniformly about the outer edge of the substrate (Fig. 2A).
With respect to claims 8 and 17, Fong teaches a detector comprising: at least one infrared (IR) detector configured to absorb IR energy and to conduct heat produced in response to absorbing the IR energy ([0046]); and a readout sensor circuit connected to the at least one IR detector, the readout sensor circuit configured to convert the heat into an electrical signal ([0050]).
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fong et al. (US 2017/0092834).
Regarding claim 7, Fong is silent regarding the wavelengths absorbed by the substrate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to have the IR energy absorbed by the substrate has a wavelength ranging from at least about 750 nanometers (nm) to at least 300,000 nm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-16 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.
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Kamineni et al. (US 2023/0366913) teaches method and structure incorporating photonic circuit that determines spatial mode of a photon according to the waveguide that the photon propagated through ([0031]).
Regarding claims 9-16, the prior art of record does not disclose or reasonably suggest, along with the other claimed limitations, a spatial-mode-resolving bolometer comprising: namely, the controller configured to determine a spatial mode of the IR energy based on the electrical signal.
Regarding claims 18-20, the prior art of record does not disclose or reasonably suggest, along with the other claimed limitations, a method of resolving a spatial-mode of a photon comprising: namely, resolving, via a controller in signal communication with the readout sensor circuit, the spatial mode of the IR energy based on the electrical signal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Carolyn Fin whose telephone number is (571)270-1286. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday.
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.
/CAROLYN FIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights