DETAILED ACTION
This action is made FINAL in response to the amendments filed on 1/07/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 8 – 11, 13, 17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ibrahim (US 2024/0014024).
As to claim 1, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B a system for non-classical computing (paragraph [0004]…a representative example of the disclosed technology, an ion manipulation device can include an ion manipulation structure having one or more pairs of opposing curved surfaces sharing a common longitudinal axis and radially spaced from one another by a radial gap along a radius of the ion manipulation structure, each pair of opposing curved surfaces having a first electrode arrangement and a second electrode arrangement opposed to the first electrode arrangement. The first and second electrode arrangements define an ion pathway through the radial gap and are configured to direct ions along the ion pathway and circumferentially through the radial gap), comprising:
a first module (first 702) adjacent to a second module (second 702) and an inter-module gap therebetween (paragraph [0081]…extending between each pair of opposed curved surfaces 616, 618 and curved surfaces 716, 718 is defined a respective radial gap 622, 722), the first or the second module (paragraph [0079]… each electrode arrangement 602, 702 can be patterned, printed, and/or embedded along a surface 608, 708 of a respective substrate 600, 700) comprising:
a substrate (paragraph [0081]…the substrate 600, 700 are fashioned into outer structures 612, 712 of respective ion manipulation devices 610, 710); and
a plurality of electrodes (paragraph [0080]…electrode arrangements 602, 702) disposed above the substrate and configured to trap an ion above a surface of the substrate (paragraph [0080]…the switches 632, 732 can be used for ion trapping),
a common package material (paragraph [0033]… [0033] The curved ion manipulation architectures described herein can be devices constructed of non-conductive or low conductivity material s capable of being fashioned into a variety of longitudinally extending curved configurations), wherein the first module is connected to the common packaging material by a first interconnect (when first 702 connects with curved surface curved surfaces 716, 718) with , and wherein the second module is connected to the common package material by a second interconnect (when second 702 with connects with curved surface curved surfaces 716, 718). (paragraph [0081]… he inner structures 614, 714 define first curved surfaces 616, 716 facing radially outwardly from respective common axes A6, A7, while the surfaces 608, 708 of the substrates 600, 700 define second curved surfaces 618, 718 opposed to the first curved surfaces 616, 716 and facing radially inwardly toward the common axes A6, A7) (Examiner’s Note: The applicant doesn’t further limit the claims with their newly added amendments. Ibrahim clearly shows a first and second module and both the first and second module each are connected to the curved surface. The first module connection is a first interconnect and the second module connection is the second interconnect)
As to claim 8, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein the plurality of electrodes (paragraph [0080]…electrode arrangements 602, 702) comprises:
at least two RF electrodes disposed in an axis parallel to the direction of transport of the one or more ions; and at least three RF ground electrodes disposed in one or more axes parallel to the direction of transport of the one or more ions, wherein a first RF ground electrode of the at least three RF ground electrodes is between the at least two RF electrodes, and wherein a second RF ground electrode and a third RF ground electrode are outside of the at least two RF electrodes (paragraph [0075]… [0075] The electrode arrangement 500C of FIG. 5C can include a plurality of RF electrode columns 516-516c. Each RF electrode column 516-516c can include a plurality of respective RF electrodes 518a-518c and interposed traveling electrode sets 520a-520c. The RF electrode columns 516-516c and traveling wave electrode sets 520a-520c can extend parallel to the ion propagation axis 506E (e.g., while RF electrodes 518a-518c are perpendicular). In some configurations, adjacent electrodes 518a-518c of the RF electrode columns 516-516c can be in opposite phase with one another. In other configurations, the laterally adjacent electrodes 518a-518c in one or more selected rows can have an opposite phase).
As to claim 9, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein an RF ground electrode of the at least three RF ground electrodes comprises a plurality of sub-electrodes configured to provide one or both of confinement of an ion of the one or more ions along the direction of transport of the one or more ions or transport the ion of the one or more ions along the direction of transport of the one or more ions (paragraph [0074]… Turning now to FIG. 5B, the electrode arrangement 500B can include a plurality of laterally extending RF electrodes 514a-514o arranged in a column-like configuration which tracks the ion propagation axis 504B. Adjacent RF electrodes 514a-514o can be in opposite phase of one another such that the RF electrodes 514a-514o can direct ions away from the substrate 502B for ion confinement. In some implementations, selected ones of the RF electrodes can be configured as a traveling wave electrode set to receive a time-varying DC voltage that directs ions along the ion propagation axis 504B. For instance, the electrodes 514c, 514f, 514i, 514l, 514o can constitute the traveling wave electrode set. In such implementations, traveling waves produced by the traveling wave electrode set are superimposed over the RF potentials to effectuate ion manipulation and ion confinement).
As to claim 10, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein the first RF ground electrode comprises a plurality of sub- electrodes along the direction of transport of the one or more ions (paragraph [0079]… Each substrate 600, 700 can include a respective electrode arrangement that when paired with an opposing electrode arrangement can define an ion pathway. As shown in both FIGS. 6A and 7A, each electrode arrangement 602, 702 can be patterned, printed, and/or embedded along a surface 608, 708 of a respective substrate 600, 700. The electrode arrangements 602, 702 can extend along at least a portion of the substrate surfaces 608, 708 between respective first ends 604, 704 and second ends 606, 706 and have a similar serpentine arrangement. Each electrode arrangement 602, 702, for example, can include a plurality of extended segments 626, 726 and. bended segments 628, 728 within the serpentine arrangements).
As to claim 11, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein an oscillating voltage is applied to the at least two RF electrodes (paragraph [0038]… traveling waves include at least one trough and at least one crest that propagates along a channel, formed by an electric potential waveform. When used for ion mobility separation, a TW can be continuous or can extend over multiple periods, however this is not a requirement. In other examples, a TW can be a single period (or even as little as half a period) of an oscillatory waveform).
As to claim 13, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein the at least two RF electrodes are configured to confine an ion of the one or more ions in a direction perpendicular to the direction of transport of the one or more ions (paragraph [0075]… the electrode arrangement 500C of FIG. 5C can include a plurality of RF electrode columns 516-516c. Each RF electrode column 516-516c can include a plurality of respective RF electrodes 518a-518c and interposed traveling electrode sets 520a-520c. The RF electrode columns 516-516c and traveling wave electrode sets 520a-520c can extend parallel to the ion propagation axis 506E (e.g., while RF electrodes 518a-518c are perpendicular). In some configurations, adjacent electrodes 518a-518c of the RF electrode columns 516-516c can be in opposite phase with one another. In other configurations, the laterally adjacent electrodes 518a-518c in one or more selected rows can have an opposite phase).
As to claim 17, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, further comprising a third module (third t 702) adjacent to the first module (first 702) and forming a second inter-module gap therebetween (paragraph [0081]…extending between each pair of opposed curved surfaces 616, 618 and curved surfaces 716, 718 is defined a respective radial gap 622, 722).
As to claim 19, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein the plurality of electrodes (paragraph [0080]…electrode arrangements 602, 702) extends (paragraph [0079]… Each electrode arrangement 602, 702, for example, can include a plurality of extended segments 626, 726) beyond substrate towards the inter-module gap (paragraph [0081]…extending between each pair of opposed curved surfaces 616, 618 and curved surfaces 716, 718 is defined a respective radial gap 622, 722).
As to claim 20, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein the plurality of electrodes extends beyond the substrate along an axis parallel to a direction of ion transport (paragraph [0075]… [0075] The electrode arrangement 500C of FIG. 5C can include a plurality of RF electrode columns 516-516c. Each RF electrode column 516-516c can include a plurality of respective RF electrodes 518a-518c and interposed traveling electrode sets 520a-520c. The RF electrode columns 516-516c and traveling wave electrode sets 520a-520c can extend parallel to the ion propagation axis 506E (e.g., while RF electrodes 518a-518c are perpendicular). In some configurations, adjacent electrodes 518a-518c of the RF electrode columns 516-516c can be in opposite phase with one another. In other configurations, the laterally adjacent electrodes 518a-518c in one or more selected rows can have an opposite phase).
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.
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) 2, 3, 6, 7, 12, 14 – 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim (US 2024/0014024) in view of Jachowski et al (US 2006/0219888).
As to claim 2, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, comprising the first (first 702) or the second (second 702) module.
Ibrahim fails toe explilxty show/teach a module further comprises a ground plane layer disposed between the substrate and the plurality of electrodes, and wherein the ground plane layer is substantially at a voltage ground
However, Jachowski et al shows/teaches in figures 3 - 4 a module (ion trap device 30) further comprises a ground plane layer disposed between the substrate and the plurality of electrodes, and wherein the ground plane layer is substantially at a voltage ground (paragraph [0035]… a DC voltage (or ground) is applied to the first electrode 30.1, a suitable AC voltage, well known in the art, is applied to the second electrode 30.2, and a DC voltage (or ground) is applied to second electrode 30.3)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, for Ibrahim’s first or the second module further to comprises a ground plane layer disposed between the substrate and the plurality of electrodes, and wherein the ground plane layer is substantially at a voltage ground, as in Jachowski et al, for the purpose of the ion trap that has a micro-cavity that can be readily and inexpensively fabricated without the need for complex, multi-layered structures.
As to claim 3, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, wherein the plurality of electrodes (paragraph [0080]…electrode arrangements 602, 702) extends (paragraph [0079]… Each electrode arrangement 602, 702, for example, can include a plurality of extended segments 626, 726) beyond the ground plane layer towards the inter-module gap (paragraph [0081]…extending between each pair of opposed curved surfaces 616, 618 and curved surfaces 716, 718 is defined a respective radial gap 622, 722).
As to claims 6 and 7, Jachowski et al shows/teaches the substrate comprises one or more through-chip vias in electrical communication with the plurality of electrodes and configured to receive an electrical signal from a power source (paragraph [0024]… [0024] FIG. 6 is schematic, side view of a portion of a micro-miniature ion trap device showing how vias are used to gain electrical access to the completely annular electrodes of the type shown in FIG. 3, for example, in accordance with yet another embodiment of our invention).
It would have been obvious for “the substrate comprises one or more through-chip vias in electrical communication with the plurality of electrodes and configured to receive an electrical signal from a power source” for the same reasons as above.
As to claim 12, Jachowski et al shows/teaches wherein a substantially constant voltage is applied to one or more of the at least three RF ground electrodes (paragraph [0024]… [0024] FIG. 6 is schematic, side view of a portion of a micro-miniature ion trap device showing how vias are used to gain electrical access to the completely annular electrodes of the type shown in FIG. 3, for example, in accordance with yet another embodiment of our invention).
It would have been obvious for “a substantially constant voltage is applied to one or more of the at least three RF ground electrodes” for the same reasons as above.
As to claim 14, Jachowski et al shows/teaches in figures 3 - 4 the second and third RF ground electrodes are ground (paragraph [0035]… a DC voltage (or ground) is applied to the first electrode 30.1, a suitable AC voltage, well known in the art, is applied to the second electrode 30.2, and a DC voltage (or ground) is applied to second electrode 30.3)
It would have been obvious for “a substantially constant voltage is applied to one or more of the at least three RF ground electrodes” for the same reasons as above.
As to claim 15, Jachowski et al shows/teaches in figures 3 - 4 wherein the plurality of electrodes lies in a plurality of planes above a surface of the substrate and wherein the plurality of planes is non-coplanar (paragraph [0035]… Notwithstanding that all of the first and second electrodes are coplanar (rather than stacked, as in the prior art), we were surprised to find that our model was still able to simulate an ion trapping region 50. More specifically, the applied voltage generates an essentially quadrupole potential in the region 50, which lies just above the top surface of the first electrode 30.1. Region 50 effectively traps ions injected into the device 30)
It would have been obvious for “wherein the plurality of electrodes lies in a plurality of planes above a surface of the substrate and wherein the plurality of planes is non-coplanar” for the same reasons as above.
As to claim 16, Ibrahim discloses the claimed invention except for “wherein a first plane and a second plane of the plurality of planes is separated by at least about 1 um”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a first plane and a second plane of the plurality of planes is separated by at least about 1 um, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
As to claim 18, Ibrahim discloses the claimed invention except for “wherein the first and second module comprise an alignment offset of less than about 10 um in a direction perpendicular to a direction of ion transport.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the first and second module comprise an alignment offset of less than about 10 um in a direction perpendicular to a direction of ion transport, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim (US 2024/0014024) in view of Donofrio et al (US 9,673,363).
As to claim 1, Ibrahim shows/teaches figures 7A - 7B the system, comprising the first (first 702) or the second (second 702) module are attached to a common package material by an interconnect (paragraph [0081]… he inner structures 614, 714 define first curved surfaces 616, 716 facing radially outwardly from respective common axes A6, A7, while the surfaces 608, 708 of the substrates 600, 700 define second curved surfaces 618, 718 opposed to the first curved surfaces 616, 716 and facing radially inwardly toward the common axes A6, A7. ; paragraph [0033]… [0033] The curved ion manipulation architectures described herein can be devices constructed of non-conductive or low conductivity material s capable of being fashioned into a variety of longitudinally extending curved configurations).
Ibrahim fails to explicitly show/teach wherein the first module and the second module are die-bonded to the common package material
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for the the first module and the second module are die-bonded to the common package material since it was known in the art that die bonding areas are more efficiently utilized to balance desired operating voltage and chip area and balanced with practical aspects of maintaining a chip spacing that provides increased efficiency (Taught in Donofrio et al (US 9,673,363) column 14, lines 55 – 65). (Examiner’s note:
As to claim 5, Donofrio et al teaches the first interconnect, the second interconnect (when second 702 with connects with curved surface curved surfaces 716, 718), or both comprises a ball grid array, a pin grid array, a land grid array, a ceramic column grid array, a bumps array, a spring pin, or a direct bond interface (Column 14, lines 50 – 60…direct LED die attach as discussed above, arrays of LED die may be provided with spacings between LED die of less than about 250 micrometers, less than about 100 micrometers, or even less than about 50 micrometers)
It would have been obvious for “the first interconnect, the second interconnect, or both to comprises a ball grid array, a pin grid array, a land grid array, a ceramic column grid array, a bumps array, a spring pin, or a direct bond interface” for the same reasons as above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The applicant argues:
Ibrahim does not meet "a common package material." For example, Ibrahim does not meet at least "a common package material," as recited in claim 1
The examiner disagrees. Under broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) the examiner interprets the “common package material” as second curved surfaces 716, 718, (or surface 708) (taught in Ibrahim paragraph [0083]). Further, Ibrahim paragraph [0033] teaches the curved ion manipulation architectures described herein can be devices constructed of non-conductive or low conductivity material capable of being fashioned into a variety of longitudinally extending curved configurations. Therefore, the curved surfaces are made of non-conductive or low conductivity material which under BRI clearly reads on the limitation “common package material.”
It is well known in the art that Ion pathways, are frequently engineered with curved or tortuous architectures, often surrounded or constrained by non-conductive, inert, or rigid materials to control ion transport, improve safety, or facilitate selective migration.
Therefore, Ibrahim clearly teaches the “common package material.” The applicant needs to go into a lot more detail explaining their common packaging material.
The applicant argues:
Ibrahim does not meet "the first module is connected to the common package material by a first interconnect" or "the second module is connected to the common package material by a second interconnect."
The examiner disagrees. As stated above, the applicant doesn’t further limit the claims with their newly added amendments. Ibrahim clearly shows a first and second module and both the first and second module each are connected to the curved surface. The first module connection is a first interconnect and the second module connection is the second interconnect Ibrahim paragraph [0100] teaches the term “coupled” or “connected” does not exclude the presence of intermediate elements between the coupled items. The examiner needs to go into a lot more detail of the first and second interconnections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The applicant argues:
Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 12, 14 - 16, 18 depend from and include all of the elements of claim 1 and recite additional elements. Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 12, 14 - 16, 18 are not obvious over Ibrahim in view of Jachowski, at least because Ibrahim does not disclose or suggest each and every element of claim 1, as described above, much less the combination of elements of claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 12, 14- 16, 18; further, Jachowski does not remedy the deficiencies of Ibrahim with respect to claim 1. For example, Jachowski does not disclose or suggest at least "a module," let alone a "first module" and "a second module" connected to "a common package material," as recited in claim
The examiner disagrees. As described above, Ibrahim teaches a "first module" and "a second module" connected to "a common package material.” Therefore, Ibrahim in view of Jachowski shows all the limitations as claimed.
The applicant argues:
Claims 4 and 5 are not obvious over Ibrahim in view of Donofrio. Claims 4 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ibrahim in view of U.S. Patent
No. 9,673,363 to Donofrio et al ("Donofrio"). Applicant respectfully submits that claims 4 and 5 are not obvious over Ibrahim in view of Donofrio, at least because neither Ibrahim nor Donofrio, alone or in combination, discloses or suggests each and every element of claims 4 and 5. Claims 4 and 5 depend from and include all of the elements of claim 1 and recite additional elements. Claims 4 and 5 are not obvious over Ibrahim in view of Donofrio, at least because Ibrahim does not disclose or suggest each and every element of claim 1, as described above, much less the combination of elements of claims 4 and 5; further, Donofrio does not remedy the deficiencies of Ibrahim with respect to claim 1. For example, Donofrio does not disclose or suggest at least "a module," let alone a "first module" and "a second module" connected to "a common package material," as recited in claim
The examiner disagrees. As described above, Ibrahim teaches a "first module" and "a second module" connected to "a common package material.” Therefore, Ibrahim in view of Donofrio et al shows all the limitations as claimed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON S COLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5075. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30pm - 5pm EST (Alternate Friday's Off).
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, Omar Fernandez can be reached at 571-272-2589. 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.
/BRANDON S COLE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2128