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
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(s) 1-2, 7-8, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Tran et al, US Patent Publication 2020/0008299.
Regarding claim 1, Tran teaches a semiconductor material [0029], having fibers containing [0029], as a main component, a filament derived from at least any one of a wood material, a plant fiber (pulp), an animal, an alga, a microorganism and a product produced by a microorganism (CNF [0029]), and having N-type negative resistance [0064].
Regarding claim 2, Tran further teaches that the produce is a is an n-type semiconductor [0064].
Regarding claims 7 and 13, Tran further teaches that the fibers are amorphous [0027].
Regarding claims 8 and 14, Tran further teaches a multilayer semiconductor material, comprising a laminated body in which a plurality of the semiconductor materials according to claims 1 or 2 are laminated (see figures 5 for multiple circuits present within a multilayer product that is laminate [00345]).
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.
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) 3-4 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tran et al, US Patent Publication 2020/0008299 in view of Noritomi et al, US Patent publication 2016/0319232.
Regarding claims 3 and 9, Tran further teaches that the fibers comprise bundles of cellulose nanofibers (CNFs [0029]), but is silent to the width of the bundles is 30 to 50 nm.
In the same field of endeavor of utilizing cellulose nanofibers in a measuring unit [0149], Noritomi teaches that detectors that utilize CNFs will use the conventional sizing of cellulose nanotube of 4-100 nm with a length of 5 microns.
While the taught range is encompassing of the claimed range, it does teach the entirety of the claimed range and even gives examples of other nanotubes to utilize that fall within the even narrower range of around 50 nm [0149].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the conventional CNF as taught by Noritomi in the Tran method as Tran is simply silent as to what sizes the CNF materials should be, and a showing of conventional sizing would led the average artisan to utilize them with a high expectation of success.
Regarding claims 4 and 10, Noritomi remains as applied above and further teaches that the average length should be about 5 microns which would fall into the claimed aspect ratio when utilizing a width of 4-100 nm [0149].
Claim(s) 5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tran et al, US Patent Publication 2020/0008299 in view of Hartmann et al, US Patent Publication 2012/0225290.
Regarding claims 5 and 11, Tran teaches a laundry list of functional groups and components in the substrates, but is silent on the specific teaching of the fibers are fibers in which a plurality of hydroxy groups and a plurality of carbonyl groups are bound to cellulose.
In the same field of endeavor of making semiconductors with a cellulose substrate [0149-0160], Hartmann teaches that the hydroxy and carbonyl groups can be chemically bonded to the cellulose substrate [0160] fir the benefit of controlling the formation o the semiconductor with the desired functional groups present.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the act of controlling the functional groups of eh cellulose substrate int eh semiconductor as taught by Hartmann in the Tran semiconductors for the benefit of controlling the functionality and inclusion of the desired groups within the device in a known and conventional manner.
Claim(s) 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tran et al, US Patent Publication 2020/0008299 in view of Hentschel, USP 3,808,516.
Regarding claims 6 and 12 Tran further teaches a bulk semiconductor represented by an equivalent circuit in which a first RC parallel circuit and a second RC parallel circuit are connected in parallel [0287 and 0195].
Tran teaches that the readings of the circuit can be adjusted to calibrate for the desired output [0195]. The teachings of utilizing multiple circuits in parallel and calibrating them to provide the desired force graph or read out is directly taught even if it is silent as to the resistance values and capacity of the second circuit being greater.
To show that this is conventional in the field of endeavor, Hentschel teaches that RC elements held in a parallel can avoid electrical loss dependent on thermal attributes (see abstract and column 2) by setting the resistance and capacity to greater values after a switch (column 2 lines 21-65) to avoid time delays in the parallel components.
It would have been obvious to utilize the known structure of increasing the networked values of resistance and capacity in the parallel RC circuits as taught by Hentschel in the Tran method that teaches the act of calibrating the multiple components for the same avoidance of time delay but is silent on the differences of the settings.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB T MINSKEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7003. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6 PM.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 5712707475. 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.
JACOB T. MINSKEY
Examiner
Art Unit 1741
/JACOB T MINSKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights