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) 1-8, 11, 12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays”. Kimber et al teach An electrospray thruster comprising: an emitter comprising an array of tips [see title, introduction], each tip of the array of tips being configured to emit ionic liquid [Fig. 1, droplets]; and an extractor electrode [Fig. 1] spaced from the emitter and comprising a conductive film [flat extracting electrode, bottom of page 5], the conductive film having a plurality of apertures [Fig. 1 emitter / extractor electrode of the array], the plurality of apertures being aligned with the array of tips of the emitter; wherein the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [bottom of page 5, note that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting]. (2) a dielectric substance [bottom of page 5] disposed between the emitter and the extractor electrode. (3) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a gas [operable under atmospheric conditions or top of page 6]. (4) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a dielectric substrate that supports the conductive film, the dielectric substrate having a plurality of holes aligned with the plurality of apertures in the conductive film [Figs. 2, 3]. (5) wherein the dielectric substrate is mounted on the emitter [Figs. 2, 3]. (6) wherein each hole of the plurality of holes in the dielectric substrate defines a respective sidewall disposed at a respective base of each tip of the array of tips [Fig. 3]. (7) wherein the dielectric substrate has a uniform thickness. (8) wherein the dielectric substrate has a thickness that matches a height of each tip of the array of tips [Figs. 2, 3]. (9) wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic material [silicon capillary]. (11) a power source [high voltage, Fig. 1] coupled to the emitter and the extractor electrode, the power source being configured to apply a voltage to generate an electric field between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from each tip of the array of tips, wherein: the conductive film has a resistivity [inherent]; and the voltage is sufficient for ablation of the conductive film given the resistivity. (12) wherein the conductive film comprises a metallic material. (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold [abstract].
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Singh et al “Operation of a Carbon Nanotube Field Emitter Array in a Hall Effect Thruster Plume Environment” in view of Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays”. See the section below for details, especially Fig. 12b, see missing part of gate with ablated conductive film and page 100, right col.].
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(s) 1-9, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marrese-Reading et al (2012/0144796) in view of Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays”. Marrese-Reading et al teach An electrospray thruster comprising: an emitter 24 comprising an array of tips 24 [Figs. 3A, 3B], each tip of the array of tips being configured to emit ionic liquid; and an extractor electrode 32 spaced from the emitter and comprising a conductive film, the conductive film having a plurality of apertures, the plurality of apertures being aligned with the array of tips of the emitter. (2) a dielectric substance disposed between the emitter and the extractor electrode [evaporated particles ¶ 0007-0008 or silicon]. (3) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a gas [evaporated particles ¶ 0007-0008]. (4) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a dielectric substrate [silicon, e.g. para 0029] that supports the conductive film, the dielectric substrate having a plurality of holes aligned with the plurality of apertures in the conductive film. (5) wherein the dielectric substrate is mounted on the emitter. (6) wherein each hole of the plurality of holes in the dielectric substrate defines a respective sidewall disposed at a respective base of each tip of the array of tips. (7) wherein the dielectric substrate has a uniform thickness. (8) wherein the dielectric substrate has a thickness that matches a height of each tip of the array of tips [tips may be made of silicon]. (9) wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic material [silicon]. (11) a power source [Fig. 3B] coupled to the emitter and the extractor electrode, the power source being configured to apply a voltage to generate an electric field between the extractor electrode 32 and the ionic fluid emitted from each tip of the array of tips 24, wherein: the conductive film has a resistivity; and the voltage is sufficient for ablation of the conductive film given the resistivity. (12) wherein the conductive film comprises a metallic material [metalized, e.g. titanium, ¶ 0077-0078]. Marrese-Reading et al do not teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip; (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold. Nor (10) wherein the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm. Kimber et al teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [bottom of page 5, note that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting], (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold; (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm [about 20 nm with the thickness controlled by the length of time gold was sputtered as a film, see bottom of page 8 and using a thinner thickness is done by using shorter lengths of time]. Kimber et al teach the conductive film facilitates protecting against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip, wherein the conductive film comprises gold, as taught by Kimber et al, in order to protect against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges around 20 nm, noting that the time of deposition governs the thickness of the film and using a shorter time to create a thinner layer allows for using less material and/or expenses associated therewith.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones et al “Numerical investigation of the effects of geometry and materials on the onset voltage of electrospray emitters” in view of Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays”. Jones et al teach An electrospray thruster comprising: an emitter comprising an array of tips [Fig. 1], each tip of the array of tips being configured to emit ionic liquid; and an extractor electrode [extractor grid] spaced from the emitter and comprising a conductive film, the conductive film having a plurality of apertures, the plurality of apertures being aligned with the array of tips of the emitter. (2) a dielectric substance [Fig. 2] disposed between the [e.g. bottom of] emitter and the extractor electrode [grid]. (3) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a gas [ionized liquid]. (4) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a dielectric substrate that supports the conductive film, the dielectric substrate having a plurality of holes aligned with the plurality of apertures in the conductive film. (5) wherein the dielectric substrate is mounted on the emitter. (6) wherein each hole of the plurality of holes in the dielectric substrate defines a respective sidewall disposed at a respective base of each tip of the array of tips. (7) wherein the dielectric substrate has a uniform thickness [Fig. 2]. (8) wherein the dielectric substrate has a thickness that matches a height of each tip of the array of tips. (9) wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic material [Table 1, includes silicon dioxide and sapphire (aluminum oxide). (11) a power source [voltage applied] coupled to the emitter and the extractor electrode, the power source being configured to apply a voltage to generate an electric field between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from each tip of the array of tips, wherein: the conductive film has a resistivity; and the voltage is sufficient for ablation of the conductive film given the resistivity. (12) wherein the conductive film comprises a metallic material [inherent/obvious. Marrese-Reading et al do not teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip; (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold. Nor (10) wherein the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm. Kimber et al teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [bottom of page 5, note that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting], (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold; (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm [about 20 nm with the thickness controlled by the length of time gold was sputtered as a film, see bottom of page 8 and using a thinner thickness is done by using shorter lengths of time]. Kimber et al teach the conductive film facilitates protecting against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip, wherein the conductive film comprises gold, as taught by Kimber et al, in order to protect against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges around 20 nm, noting that the time of deposition governs the thickness of the film and using a shorter time to create a thinner layer allows for using less material and/or expenses associated therewith.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al “Operation of a Carbon Nanotube Field Emitter Array in a Hall Effect Thruster Plume Environment” in view of Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays”. Singh et al teach [Fig. 1] An electrospray thruster comprising: an emitter comprising an array of tips, each tip of the array of tips being configured to emit ionic liquid; and an extractor electrode [top black layer / gate in Fig. 1] spaced from the emitter and comprising a conductive film, the conductive film having a plurality of apertures, the plurality of apertures being aligned with the array of tips of the emitter; wherein the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short [arcing] between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [Fig. 12b, see missing part of gate with ablated conductive film and page 100, right col.]. (2) a dielectric substance [SiO2] disposed between the emitter and the extractor electrode. (3) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a gas [vaporized propellant]. (4) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a dielectric substrate [SiO2] that supports the conductive film [Fig. 1], the dielectric substrate having a plurality of holes aligned with the plurality of apertures in the conductive film. (5) wherein the dielectric substrate [SiO2] is mounted on the emitter [SiO2]. (6) wherein each hole of the plurality of holes in the dielectric substrate defines a respective sidewall disposed at a respective base of each tip of the array of tips. (7) wherein the dielectric substrate has a uniform thickness [Fig. 1]. (9) wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic material [SiO2]. (11) a power source [Fig. 5] coupled to the emitter and the extractor electrode, the power source being configured to apply a voltage to generate an electric field between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from each tip of the array of tips, wherein: the conductive film has a resistivity; and the voltage is sufficient for ablation of the conductive film given the resistivity. (12) wherein the conductive film comprises a metallic material [after sputtering gold deposits on the gate, page 100, right col.] (13) wherein the conductive film comprises silver. (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold [after sputtering gold deposits on the gate, page 100, right col.]. For an alternate treatment of the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip; as well as treating (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold; and (10) wherein the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm, Kimber et al is applied. Kimber et al teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [bottom of page 5, note that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting], (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold; (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm [about 20 nm with the thickness controlled by the length of time gold was sputtered as a film, see bottom of page 8 and using a thinner thickness is done by using shorter lengths of time]. Kimber et al teach the conductive film facilitates protecting against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip, wherein the conductive film comprises gold, as taught by Kimber et al, in order to protect against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges around 20 nm, noting that the time of deposition governs the thickness of the film and using a shorter time to create a thinner layer allows for using less material and/or expenses associated therewith.
Claim(s) 1-12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King et al (8080930) in view of Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays” and optionally Singh et al. King et al teach An electrospray thruster comprising: an emitter comprising an array of tips, each tip of the array of tips 40 being configured to emit ionic liquid; and an extractor electrode 42, 52 spaced from the emitter and comprising a conductive film, the conductive film having a plurality of apertures, the plurality of apertures being aligned with the array of tips of the emitter; (2) a dielectric substance 50 [Fig. 5] disposed between the emitter and the extractor electrode. (3) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a gas [residual gas, col. 2, lines 30+]. (4) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a dielectric substrate 50 that supports the conductive film 52, the dielectric substrate having a plurality of holes aligned with the plurality of apertures in the conductive film. (5) wherein the dielectric substrate 50 is mounted on the emitter 54. (6) wherein each hole of the plurality of holes in the dielectric substrate defines a respective sidewall disposed at a respective base of each tip of the array of tips. (7) wherein the dielectric substrate 50 has a uniform thickness. (8) wherein the dielectric substrate has a thickness that matches a height of each tip of the array of tips [Fig. 5]. (9) wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic material [e.g. silicon]. (11) a power source coupled to the emitter and the extractor electrode, the power source being configured to apply a voltage to generate an electric field between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from each tip of the array of tips, wherein: the conductive film has a resistivity; and the voltage is sufficient for ablation of the conductive film given the resistivity. (12) wherein the conductive film comprises a metallic material. King et al do not teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip; (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold. Nor (10) wherein the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm. Kimber et al teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [bottom of page 5, note that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting], (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold; (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm [about 20 nm with the thickness controlled by the length of time gold was sputtered as a film, see bottom of page 8 and using a thinner thickness is done by using shorter lengths of time]. Kimber et al teach the conductive film facilitates protecting against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip, wherein the conductive film comprises gold, as taught by Kimber et al, in order to protect against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges around 20 nm, noting that the time of deposition governs the thickness of the film and using a shorter time to create a thinner layer allows for using less material and/or expenses associated therewith. King et al teach the array with apertures and holes but do not necessarily show the entire array. Singh et al show the array with apertures and holes and alignment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the array with apertures and holes and alignment, as taught by Singh et al, as the typical way to manufacture the thrust array utilized in the art.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fomani et al (2014/0285084) in view of Kimber et al “Dielectric Materials with Deposited Electrode Layers for Electrospray Arrays.” Fomani et al teach An electrospray thruster comprising: an emitter comprising an array of tips 310 [Fig. 10], each tip of the array of tips being configured to emit ionic liquid; and an extractor electrode 390 spaced from the emitter and comprising a conductive film 390, the conductive film having a plurality of apertures, the plurality of apertures being aligned with the array of tips of the emitter; wherein the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips [¶ 0144] along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips [note the conductive layer is applied to both the gate 390 – see e.g. Figs. 3, 18]. (2) a dielectric substance 345 disposed between the emitter and the extractor electrode. (3) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a gas [¶ 0073]. (4) wherein the dielectric substance comprises a dielectric substrate 345 that supports the conductive film, the dielectric substrate having a plurality of holes aligned with the plurality of apertures in the conductive film [Fig. 10]. (5) wherein the dielectric substrate 345 is mounted on the emitter 350. (6) wherein each hole of the plurality of holes in the dielectric substrate defines a respective sidewall disposed at a respective base of each tip of the array of tips. (7) wherein the dielectric substrate 345 has a uniform thickness. (8) wherein the dielectric substrate has a thickness that matches a height of each tip of the array of tips. (9) wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic material [¶ 0007]. (10) wherein the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm [e.g. 10 nm, ¶ 0153 compare with ¶ 0141 and Fig. 22]. (11) a power source coupled to the emitter and the extractor electrode, the power source being configured to apply a voltage to generate an electric field between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from each tip of the array of tips, wherein: the conductive film has a resistivity; and the voltage is sufficient for ablation of the conductive film given the resistivity. (12) wherein the conductive film comprises a metallic material [¶ 0086]. (13) wherein the conductive film comprises silver [¶ 0086]. (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold [¶ 0086].
Fomani already teach wherein the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips and also teach the claimed thickness and materials for the conductive film but does not teach the electrical short ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip. Kimber et al teach the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip [bottom of page 5, note that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting], (14) wherein the conductive film comprises gold; (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm [about 20 nm with the thickness controlled by the length of time gold was sputtered as a film, see bottom of page 8 and using a thinner thickness is done by using shorter lengths of time]. Kimber et al teach the conductive film facilitates protecting against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the conductive film has a thickness such that an electrical short between the extractor electrode and the ionic fluid emitted from a respective tip of the array of tips ablates a portion of the conductive film along the aperture of the plurality of apertures aligned with the respective tip of the array of tips to an extent sufficient to deactivate the respective tip, wherein the conductive film comprises gold, as taught by Kimber et al, in order to protect against electrical shorts and prolonging the life of the thruster. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize (10) the thickness of the conductive film falls in a range from about 8 nanometers (nm) to about 15 nm, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges around 20 nm, noting that the time of deposition governs the thickness of the film and using a shorter time to create a thinner layer allows for using less material and/or expenses associated therewith and is already consistent with the range of thickness used by Fomani et al.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of the prior art, as applied above, and further in view of Fomani et al (2014/0285084). The prior art do not teach (13) wherein the conductive film comprises silver. Fomani et al teach (13) wherein the conductive film comprises silver [¶ 0086] as an equivalent to gold, platinum and other highly conductive metals. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make conductive film silver, as taught by Fomani et al, as an equivalent to gold, platinum and other highly conductive metals [¶ 0086].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments concerning Kimber are not persuasive.
Applicant argues for Kimber:
“It is respectfully submitted that the cited art fails to disclose or suggest ablation to an extent sufficient to deactivate a respective tip as claimed.
Kimber instead describes an electrode film that self-heals after an arc event. "If an arc occurs between a Taylor cone and electrode, the current conducted through the electrode ablates the material and the failure occurs only locally, so the other emitters in the array are not impacted" (Kimber, p. 5). But Kimber describes the use of "self-healing ablative conductive materials" that allow the electrode film to renew or recover. Please see, e.g., Kimber, p. 4 ("These materials allow conductive surfaces to 'renew' in an arcing event by ablating or shedding singular layers of material ..."). Thus, recovery was the goal in Kimber, rather than deactivation. It follows that Kimber fails to disclose or suggest ablation to an extent sufficient to deactivate a respective tip as claimed.”
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because the bottom of page 5 teaches that failure occurs locally, i.e. at the site of arcing / shorting such that the tip / emitter fails / deactivates [bottom of page 5, excerpted below] and does not prevent the emitter from failing during ablation.
“The first objective in our design architecture is to eliminate alignment issues by removing the traditionally separate electrode grid altogether, and instead deposit a thin-film conductor directly on the emitter substrate, as modeled in Figure 2. The emitter will be constructed from a dielectric substrate, with a low relative permittivity of 2 - 10 F/m. The second objective aims to reduce the occurrence of material degradation and destructive arcing incidents across an array of emitters by employing a ‘self-healing’ electrode film. These films can support 600 – 800 V/µm 25−27 and can be fabricated through vacuum evaporation directly onto the substrate array. If an arc occurs between a Taylor cone and electrode, the current conducted through the electrode ablates the material and the failure occurs only locally, so the other emitters in the array are not impacted. [Kimber, bottom of page 5].”
Applicant argues that the self-healing of the electrode film is the goal in Kimber not deactivation. In rebuttal, it is noted that the failure / deactivation is at the local emitter of the electrical short. In arguendo, even if “self-healing” of the film were to mean that the emitter were not to cease operation; eventually, sufficient ablation would eventually occur that the shorted emitter would no longer be functional / fail locally as the ablation / self-healing only extends the lifetime performance of the emitter arrays [top of page 2] but does not prevent the ablative emitter from failing.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to TED KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-4829. The Examiner can be reached on regular business hours before 5:00 pm, Monday to Thursday and every other Friday.
The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Devon Kramer, can be reached at 571-272-7118 Alternate inquiries to Technology Center 3700 can be made via 571-272-3700.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions on Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). General inquiries can also be directed to the Inventors Assistance Center whose telephone number is 800-786-9199. Furthermore, a variety of online resources are available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent
/Ted Kim/
Telephone
571-272-4829
Primary Examiner
Fax
571-273-8300
March 3, 2026