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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
(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, 4, 6-8, 11 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by HUGHS et al. (US 20230298880 A1).
Regarding claim 1, HUGHS discloses a quantum information processing (QIP) system [0002] comprising:
a vacuum housing (figs. 1a-1b, 100) defining a chamber (130);
an ion trap (140) positioned within the chamber; and
at least one optical viewport (160) coupled [0025-0027] to the vacuum housing and configured to provide optical access to the chamber, the at least one optical viewport including a glass portion [0026] including an aluminosilicate glass (ASG) material [0026] and a metal frame [0027]
(figs. 1a-1b; vacuum housing 100 with walls 110, 120; ion trap 140; optical viewport 160; metal frame of walls 110, 120)
[0014]
[0025-0027].
Regarding claim 8, HUGHS discloses an optical viewport (160) for use with a vacuum housing (figs. 1a-1b, 100), the optical viewport comprising:
a glass portion [0026] including an aluminosilicate glass (ASG) material [0026] bonded to a metal frame [0027]
(figs. 1a-1b; vacuum housing 100 with walls 110, 120; ion trap 140; optical viewport 160; metal frame of walls 110, 120)
[0014]
[0024-0027].
Regarding claims 4 and 11, HUGHS discloses that the ASG material [0026] is directly bonded to the metal frame [0027] in a hermetic seal [0024] (reference’s claim 7 and 13)
Regarding claims 6 and 13, HUGHS discloses that the QIP system is operable at room temperature [0026 Note operational temperature range(s) may include 0° C.-300° C].
Regarding claims 7 and 14, HUGHS discloses that the metal frame [0027] includes at least one of titanium [0027],
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.
2. Claim(s) 2-3 AND 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over HUGHS et al. (US 20230298880 A1) in view of HUGHS et al. (US 20120258022 A1); hereinafter HUGHS2.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, HUGHS discloses that the ASG material (160) [0026] includes
Regarding claims 3 and 10, HUGHS discloses that the ASG material (160) [0026] includes
But HUGHS fails to disclose that the ASG material includes approximately 15% alumina by weight; and
that the ASG material includes at least 15% alumina by weight.
HUGHS2, however, discloses a vacuum chamber with viewing window made from aluminosilicate material [0039] and that the
that the ASG material includes approximately 15% alumina by weight (reference’s claims 1 and 3); and
that the ASG material includes at least 15% alumina by weight (reference’s claims 1 and 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of HUGHS, with ASG material includes approximately 15% alumina o0r ASG material includes at least 15% alumina, as taught by HUGHS2, to use window material having low helium permeability (abstract) for improved vacuum conditions.
2. Claim(s) 5 AND 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over HUGHS et al. (US 20230298880 A1) in view of CANTY et al. (US 6359742 B1).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, HUGHS discloses that the metal frame [0027] is fixed to the vacuum housing (walls 110 or 120) [0027] in a hermetic seal [0024] (reference’s claim 7 and 13)
But HUGHS fails to disclose the metal frame is welded to the vacuum housing.
CANTY, however, discloses a window on a metal frame and that the metal frame is welded to a vacuum housing (abstract) (col. 2, lines 15-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of HUGHS, with a metal frame is welded to the vacuum housing, as taught by CANTY, to use as a substitution of one known fusing type (i.e. welded) for another to obtain predictable fusing results for window metal frame sealing to vacuum chamber .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew Smyth whose telephone number is 571-270-1746. The examiner can normally be reached between 9:00AM - 6:00PM; Monday thru Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Georgia Epps can be reached on (571) 272-2328. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW SMYTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights