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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: in Figures 2 and 3: 100, 101, 102, 103, and 104. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “gaps” recited in claims 2, 7, and 12 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ojima (US 2020/0081140 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Ojima discloses a scintillator (110) comprising: a plurality of columnar crystals (111) arranged on a substrate (112) and each configured to convert radiation into light; and protection films (113) configured to cover surfaces of the plurality of columnar crystals, wherein the plurality of columnar crystals contain an activator agent (paragraph 0023), the protection films contain silica (paragraph 0036).
Ojima does not specifically disclose and in a case that the scintillator is irradiated with radiation of 1,000 Gray (Gy), a quantity of light emission lowers by not more than 35%, as compared with a quantity of light emission before radiation irradiation.
It is noted that while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function alone. See MPEP 2114. In this case, it should be recognized that the wherein clause is functional in nature and does not distinguish structurally the instant claim over the prior art. See MPEP 2114 and 2111.04.
With respect to claim 6, Ojima discloses a scintillator (110) comprising: a plurality of columnar crystals (111) arranged on a substrate (112) and each configured to convert radiation into light; and protection films (113) configured to cover surfaces of the plurality of columnar crystals, wherein the plurality of columnar crystals contain an activator agent (paragraph 0023), the protection films contain silica (paragraph 0036), and the scintillator has been exposed to thermal treatment (paragraph 0038).
With respect to claims 2 and 7, Ojima discloses wherein there are gaps between the protection films (113) that cover the plurality of columnar crystals (111).
With respect to claims 3 and 8, Ojima discloses wherein the plurality of columnar crystals contain cesium iodide as a main component (paragraph 0023).
With respect to claim 4, Ojima does not specifically disclose wherein in the case that scintillator is irradiated with radiation of 1,000 Gy, the quantity of light emission lowers by not more than 30%, as compared with the quantity of light emission before radiation irradiation. It is noted that while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function alone. See MPEP 2114. In this case, it should be recognized that the wherein clause is functional in nature and does not distinguish structurally the instant claim over the prior art. See MPEP 2114 and 2111.04.
With respect to claim 9, Ojima discloses a radiation detector (300) comprising: the scintillator (110) according to claim 1; and a photoelectric conversion element (304) configured to convert light from the scintillator into an electric charge.
With respect to claim 10, Ojima discloses a radiation imaging system (Fig. 4) comprising: the radiation detector (300) according to claim 9; and a signal processing unit (6070) configured to process a signal from the radiation detector (paragraph 0056).
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.
Claims 5, 11-13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ojima (US 2020/0081140 A1) as applied to claim 1 above.
With respect to claim 5, Ojima discloses wherein the activator agent is thallium (paragraph 0023). Ojima does not specifically disclose and a concentration of the activator agent is not lower than 0.25 mol%. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ojima to have the concentration of the activator agent not lower than 0.25 mol%, 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.
With respect to claim 11, Ojima discloses a method of manufacturing a scintillator (110), comprising: forming a plurality of columnar crystals (111) containing an activator agent (paragraph 0023) on a substrate (112); forming protection films (113) containing silica (paragraph 0036) on surfaces of the plurality of columnar crystals; and performing thermal treatment (paragraph 0038). Ojima does not specifically disclose performing thermal treatment at not lower than 200°C after the formation of the protection films. Ojima is silent as to the temperature of the thermal treatment. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ojima to perform thermal treatment at not lower than 200°C after the formation of the protection films, 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.
With respect to claim 12, Ojima discloses wherein gaps are formed between the plurality of columnar crystals (111) in a state in which the protection films (113) are formed.
With respect to claim 13, Ojima discloses wherein the plurality of columnar crystals contain cesium iodide as a main component (paragraph 0023).
With respect to claim 15, Ojima does not specifically disclose wherein a concentration of a silica conversion material contained in a liquid material used to form the protection films is not less than 0.5 wt% and is not more than 2 wt%. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ojima to have a concentration of a silica conversion material contained in a liquid material used to form the protection films be not less than 0.5 wt% and is not more than 2 wt%, 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.
With respect to claim 17, Ojima does not specifically disclose wherein a temperature of the thermal treatment is not lower than 230°C and a time of the thermal treatment is not less than 1 hour. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ojima to have a temperature of the thermal treatment is not lower than 230°C and a time of the thermal treatment is not less than 1 hour, 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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ojima (US 2020/0081140 A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Ishida et al. (USPN 10,067,242 B2).
With respect to claim 14, Ojima does not specifically disclose forming a film that planarizes the surfaces of the plurality of columnar crystals, wherein the protection films are formed after the forming the film. Ishida et al. disclose forming a film that planarizes the surfaces of the plurality of columnar crystals, wherein the protection films are formed after the forming the film (column 3, lines 39+ & column 4, lines 19+). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ojima to form a film that planarizes the surfaces of the plurality of columnar crystals, wherein the protection films are formed after the forming the film, to remove any abnormally grown portions, to improve Detective Quantum Efficiency (DQE) and Modulation Transfer Function (MTF), as taught by Ishida et al.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ojima (US 2020/0081140 A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Keiko et al. (JP 2016095189 A) – machine English language translation provided.
With respect to claim 16, Ojima does not specifically disclose wherein a silica conversion material contained in a liquid material used to form the protection films contains a polysilazane-based inorganic polymer. Keiko et al. disclose a silica conversion material contained in a liquid material used to form the protection films contains a polysilazane-based inorganic polymer (Under “Barrier layer” - “For example, as an example of a method to modify a barrier thin film by injecting energy into a precursor film of a material having a barrier property, a coating film made of a silicon dioxide precursor such as alkoxysilane or perhydropolysilazane is formed. A method of converting such a coating film into a silicon dioxide film by injecting energy in the atmosphere or in an atmosphere containing water vapor is mentioned. In this method, the barrier layer 14 having an inorganic layer made of silicon dioxide is obtained.” See also “Example 9”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ojima to have a silica conversion material contained in a liquid material used to form the protection films contain a polysilazane-based inorganic polymer, to form an effective moisture-proof layer, as taught by Keiko et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JURIE YUN whose telephone number is (571)272-2497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 am - 7:30 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, David J Makiya can be reached at 571 272-2273. 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.
/JURIE YUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
July 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights