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 § 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.
Claims 1-15 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 14, it is unclear what is being organized in the “hierarchical structure”, it can be grains, crystalline, pores/space between atoms/molecules etc. For purpose of examination, any three-dimensional structure reads on the claimed limitations. However, Applicant should clarify what is intended, without adding new matter.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun (Low-temperature growth of layered molybdenum disulphide with controlled clusters), as evidenced by Kang (KR20180011899A).
Regarding claim 1, Mun teaches a method of forming a layered molybdenum disulphide (MoS2) (transition metal dichalcogenide thin film) comprising both 2D and 3D structures on a substrate (page 2 results and discussion, page 3 figure 1), thus Mun teaches to deposite a two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenide planar layer and a three-dimensional hierarchical structure on the substrate). Mun teaches the MoS2 3D islands and 2D islands deposited on the substrate are formed by a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process by supplying H2S (chalcogen-containing precursor) and Mo(CO)6 (impurity-containing transition metal-containing precursor) to the substrate in a CVD chamber (page 2 results and discussion), wherein CO reads on the impurity of the claimed invention. Mun teaches the 2D structures has tunable band gap (page 1 and page 4, figure 3) and the 3D structural is formed by adjust the PSR (partial pressure of S reaction gas) to PMOP (partial pressure of Mo precursor) (page 2 results and discussion).
Therefore, it would have been within the skill of the ordinary artisan to adjust and optimize the ratio of PSR to PMOP along with the amount of 3D structure formation in the process to yield the desired amount of 2D structure with tunable band gap property. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding claim 2, Mun teaches to treat the surface with piranha solution (H2SO4:H2O2 solution) before the deposition (page 3), which reduces the surface energy of the surface as evidenced by Kang (paragraphs 0069-0075).
Regarding claim 3, Mun teaches the impurity includes carbon and oxygen (page 2).
Regarding clam 4, Mun the CVD process forming Mo based 3D structured using Mo(CO)6 comprises C and OC impurities (page 3), thus it is reasonably expected the Mo2S layer formed by CVD process with Mo(CO)6 precursor comprises C and OC type of impurities and at least a level of them becomes seed elements for build-up formatting of the 3D structure.
Regarding claim 5, Mun teaches the chalcogen containing precursor is H2S, which is S containing inorganic compound.
Regarding claim 6, Mun teaches the transition metal containing precursor from a transition metal selected from Mo (page 3).
Regarding claim 7, Mun teaches the substrate is SiO2 (page 3).
Regarding claim 8, Mun teaches the ratio between the transition metal containing precursor and the chalcogen containing precursor is inside the claimed range of forming the 3D and 2D structure (page 3).
Regarding claim 9, Mun teaches the growth time governs the thickness of the layers (page 4, see figure 3). Therefore, it would have been within the skill of the ordinary artisan to adjust and optimize the duration of deposition in the process to yield the desired thickness. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding claim 10, Mun teaches forming a two-dimensional planar transition metal dichalcogenide planer layer on the substrate and three dimensional structures (page 3). It is the position of the examiner that property of how the three-dimensional structure is growth on the two dimensional layer *growing in vertical direction at a faster decomposition rate of the transition metal containing precursor and the chalcogen-containing precursor, forming a three-dimensional hierarchical structure of a thin film by accelerating the decomposition speed of a transition metal containing precursor and a chalcogen-containing precursor by impurities contained in a thin film frown in the vertical direction), is inherent, given that the CVD process (process temperature, pressure in the chamber, deposition temperature, partial pressure ratio of the H2S and Mo(CO)6 as precursors in forming the 2D and 3D structures, see page 3 of Mun) and materials (H2S and Mo(CO)6 as precursors, forming MoS2 material with 2D and 3D structure with impurities, wherein the impurities intricially changes the decomposition rates of the precursors) disclosed by Mun and the present application are the same. A reference which is silent about a claimed invention's features is inherently anticipatory if the missing feature is necessarily present in than in that which is described in the reference. Inherency is not established by probabilities or possibilities. In re Robertson, 49 USPQ2d 1949(1999).
Regarding claim 11, Mun teaches to treat the surface with piranha solution (H2SO4:H2O2 solution) before the deposition (page 3).
Regarding claim 12, Mun teaches the temperature is 350ºC (page 3), which is inside of the claimed range.
Regarding claim 13, Mun teaches the deposition step is performed using CVD.
Regarding claim 14, Mun teaches a method of forming a layered molybdenum disulphide (MoS2) (transition metal dichalcogenide thin film) comprising both 2D and 3D structures on a substrate (page 2 results and discussion, page 3 figure 1), thus Mun teaches to deposite a two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenide planar layer and a three-dimensional hierarchical structure on the substrate). Mun teaches the MoS2 3D islands and 2D islands deposited on the substrate are formed by a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process by supplying H2S (chalcogen-containing precursor) and Mo(CO)6 (impurity-containing transition metal-containing precursor) to the substrate in a CVD chamber (page 2 results and discussion), wherein CO reads on the impurity of the claimed invention. Mun teaches the 2D structures has tunable band gap (page 1 and page 4, figure 3) and the 3D structural is formed by adjust the PSR (partial pressure of S reaction gas) to PMOP (partial pressure of Mo precursor) (page 2 results and discussion).
Therefore, it would have been within the skill of the ordinary artisan to adjust and optimize the ratio of PSR to PMOP along with the amount of 3D structure formation in the process to yield the desired amount of 2D structure with tunable band gap property. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ215. Mun teaches the temperature is 350ºC (page 3), which is inside of the claimed range. Mun teaches the pressure if 0.5 Torr (page 5, Method) which is inside the claimed range. Mun teaches the growth time governs the thickness of the layers (page 4, see figure 3). Therefore, it would have been within the skill of the ordinary artisan to adjust and optimize the duration of deposition in the process to yield the desired thickness. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding claim 15, Mun teaches the ratio between the transition metal containing precursor and the chalcogen containing precursor is inside the claimed range of forming the 3D and 2D structure (page 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGA LEUNG V LAW whose telephone number is (571)270-1115. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 5712721295. 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.
/NGA LEUNG V LAW/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights