CTNF 19/007,287 CTNF 82266 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-30 AIA A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co. , 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert , 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. 08-32 Claim s 1-20 provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim s 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/524,470 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 20, line 2, “a FET” should read --an FET --. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 8, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 8 recites the limitation " the isolation layer of the first FET " in lines 2-3 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 8 recites the limitation " the isolation layer of the second FET " in line 4 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 15 recites the limitation " the first-type FET " in line 4 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 16 recites the limitation " the substrate layer and the isolation layer of the third FET " in lines 2-3 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 16 recites the limitation " the substrate layer and the isolation layer of the fourth FET " in lines 4-5 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Allowable Subject Matter The double patenting rejection notwithstanding, claims 1-20 are otherwise allowable. The double patenting rejection notwithstanding, claims 8, 15, and 16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oelmann’s (USP 12,316,097) Fig. 3 shows a solid-state switch (22) comprising two transistors in series and a buffer (24) coupled between the drain and source of one of the two transistors . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM HERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8979. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri; 10am to 6pm. 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, Taelor Kim can be reached at (571) 270-7166. 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. /WILLIAM HERNANDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836 Application/Control Number: 19/007,287 Page 2 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 19/007,287 Page 3 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 19/007,287 Page 4 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 19/007,287 Page 5 Art Unit: 2836
Prosecution Insights