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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the element numerals should be deleted. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 9 is 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.
It is not clear what applicant is claiming:
What exactly does applicant mean by “all-solid-state” …”formed as a solid” ? does it mean integrated circuit or just “solid” or no cell involved in making the atomic oscillator? The claim is awkwardly written.
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)(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 and 9(as best understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Englund et al US 2014/0247094.
Re claims 1 and 2:
The reference to Englund et al, see figure below, shows an oscillation module with substrate
defect in a diamond crystal, formed by a nitrogen atom substituting a carbon atom next to a
vacant lattice site, as is inherent, representing the impurity and vacancy concept. The substrate
as shown is a diamond substrate having a nitrogen- vacancy center as the defect.
PNG
media_image1.png
880
1538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A laser/light source(120) is shown and allows for the exciting the defect and a detector (140) detecting the fluorescence emitted from the diamond substrate. The magnetic field B will cause an electric field via the stripline/electrodes(131) region on the substrate around the NVC(see figure 4) that affect the spins states and thus local electric field.
Re claim 3: A microwave generator (130 and 131)configured to generate a microwave (B)based on an input signal received from outside via the frequency controller(160)
Re claim 4:
A microwave generator is provided on the substrate via the stripline(on substrate) and microwave signals.
Re claim 6: The microwave generator is a coil or linear electric wire(part of stripline is linear).
Re claim 8: a mixer is part of the microwave source(frequency controller/inherent) that allows for the adjustment of the frequencies (re fig 7 and 2 NVC’s)inputted via feedback and thus adjust the frequency in the feedback path to the output.
Re claim 9: all the elements are made of atoms and all are “solid” as no other state exists as
best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 6, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al NPL MICROMACHINES, (Multipoint Lock-in Detection for Diamond Nitrogen-Vacancy Magnetometry Using DDS-Based Frequency-Shift Keying .)
Re claims 1 and 2
The reference to HU et al, see figure below, shows an oscillation module with substrate (green
square) with the diamond crystal(NV center) that is, an NV (Nitrogen-Vacancy) center is a
defect in a diamond crystal, formed by a nitrogen atom substituting a carbon atom next to a
vacant lattice site, as is inherent, representing the impurity and vacancy concept. The substrate
as shown is a diamond substrate having a nitrogen- vacancy center as the defect.
A laser(532nm) is shown as the light source and allows for the exciting the defect and a detector (PD) detecting the fluorescence emitted from the substrate. The magnetic field B will cause an circulating electric field in the coil ( a function of induced voltage)on the substrate.
PNG
media_image2.png
714
1004
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The reference does not explicitly describe “electrodes” on the substrate, however, the coils shown on the substrate are considered electrodes as they do in fact allow for signals to be coupled to the substrate from various sources shown. A simple matter of design consideration.
In light of the above it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have recognized that the coils on the substrate, in the Hu et al reference, are in fact electrodes that allow for the coupling of signals on the diamond crystal, as noted above in Hu et al. This allows, for example the feedback microwave control and measurement.
Re claim 3: A microwave generator configured to generate a microwave (B)based on an input
signal received from an outside.
Re claim 4:
A microwave generator is provided on the substrate via the split coil (on substrate) and microwave signals.
Re claim 5: the electrode ends (that couple the feedback signal)to the split coil generator are shown.
Re claim 6: The microwave generator is a coil or linear electric wire.
Re claim 8: a mixer is part of the microwave source(see figures 2 and 6) that allows for the multiplication of the frequencies inputted and thus adjust the frequency in the feedback path.
Re claim 9: all the elements are made of atoms and all are “solid” as no other state exists as
best understood.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARNOLD M KINKEAD whose telephone number is (571)272-1763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-5:30pm(Fri-Flex).
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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
ARNOLD M. KINKEAD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2849
/ARNOLD M KINKEAD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849