DETAILED ACTION
1. This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s communication received on 07/02/2025 for application number 19/257/853. The Office herby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, and claims.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/19/2026 is in accordance with provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
5. A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
6. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent App. 17/585,222. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other: Table 1 shows comparison between the instant claims and the U.S. Patent App. 17/585,222 B1 claims.
Application: 19257853
1. A control system configured for sample tracking in an electron microscope environment, the control system comprising: a memory; and a processor; wherein the control system is configured to: register a movement associated with a region of interest located within an active area of a sample under observation with an electron microscope, wherein the registered movement includes at least one directional constituent, and wherein the region of interest is positioned within a field of view of the electron microscope; and calculate an electron dose for the region of interest as a function of a position of the sample under observation, a beam configuration of the electron microscope, and time.
Application: 17,585,222
1. A method for measuring electron dose in a sample with a transmission electron microscope (TEM), the method comprising: locating a fiducial mark on a TEM holder tip, wherein the TEM holder tip includes a through-hole located at a predetermined distance from the fiducial mark and a current collection area located at a predetermined distance from the fiducial mark; calibrating the TEM for measuring beam area across a range of possible beam areas to generate a calibration table for beam area for the TEM; calibrating the TEM for measuring beam current across a range of possible beam currents to generate a calibration table for beam current for the TEM; and measuring electron dose on the sample during an experiment using the calibrated TEM having a defined configuration, wherein the measured electron dose is determined using the calibration table for beam area and the calibration table for beam current.
Remaining claims are analyzed similarly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Walden et al., [US Pub. No.: 2022/0247934].
Re. Claim 1, Walden et al., [US Pub. No.: 2022/0247934] discloses:
A control system configured for sample tracking in an electron microscope environment [a control system configured for sample tracking for sample tracking in an electron microscope environment |0007], the control system comprising: a memory [The control system comprises a memory, a processor, and a microscope control component |0007];
and a processor [Processor |0007];
wherein the control system is configured to: register a movement associated with a region of interest located within an active area of a sample under observation with an electron microscope [The control system is configured to register a movement associated with a region of interest located within an active area of a sample under observation with an electron microscope |0007], wherein the registered movement includes at least one directional constituent [The registered movement includes at least one directional constituent. |0007], and wherein the region of interest is positioned within a field of view of the electron microscope [The region of interest is positioned within a field of view of the electron microscope |0007];
and calculate an electron dose for the region of interest as a function of a position of the sample under observation [The calibration tables are then used to determine electron dose of a sample during an experiment at a given configuration. |Abstract], a beam configuration of the electron microscope, and time [the control system is also configured to calculate an electron dose rate for the electron microscope as a function of a position of an electron microscope lens and time |0173].
Re. Claim 2, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to allow a user to set an electron dose limit for the sample under observation [the control system is further configured to allow a user to set an electron dose rate limit for the sample under observation |0173].
Re. Claim 3, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 2, wherein the control system is further configured to monitor that the electron dose does not exceed the electron dose limit [the control system also monitors to ensure that the electron dose rate does not exceed a predetermined electron dose rate limit. |0173].
Re. Claim 4, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to: display, on a graphical user interface, an image of the electron dose in a heatmap form [the control system is configured to display, on a graphical user display device, an image of an electron dose rate in a heatmap form |0174];
and, automatically adjust the displayed image to in response to a change in one or more of a sample position and a magnification level, wherein the adjustment is based on the change [the control system is configured to automatically adjust the displayed image to counteract a change in one or more of a sample position and a magnification level |0174].
Re. Claim 5, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 4, wherein a pre-determined electron dose limit is used as a metric in the heatmap form [FIG. 128B shows a heat map representation of the end results of the calibration |0423].
Re. Claim 6, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to perform a calibration process to improve an effectiveness of the determination of the electron dose [calibration process 116 to determine effectiveness of the electron dose |0114], wherein the calibration process determines one or more calibration values associated with the calibration [ the calibration value is associated with an expected movement model corresponding to one or more of: a drift velocity relating to a change in unit temperature, a cooling ramp-rate, and a heating ramp-rate |0168].
Re. Claim 7, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 6, wherein the control system is further configured to perform at least one of the following: store the one or more calibration values associated with the calibration in a calibration database [The control system can provide for these calibrations to be run each session; alternately, the control system can allow for the calibration values to be stored in a calibration database and checked against periodically |0265];
compare a measured value from the electron microscope against the one or more calibrated values on a periodic basis [compare a measured value against the calibrated value on a periodic basis; the control system can also monitor performance of the control system against one or more calibration values |0167];
and monitor performance of the control system against the one or more calibration values [The control system can also constantly monitor performance against these calibrations and could improve on the calibrations themselves |0264].
Re. Claim 8, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 6, wherein the control system is further configured to store data representing beam current per microscope configuration of the electron microscope as a profile [control system may read the current microscope parameters is use for the experiment and use the stored measurements to calculate the electron dose rate and track the cumulative electron dose against the sample position and beam area |0288] and retrieve measured values from the stored data or determine interpolated values from the stored data as a user changes beam conditions on the microscope during use [The control system may interpolate data between measured points to reflect the beam area and beam current as the microscope user changes parameters on the microscope mid-experiment. |0288].
Re. Claim 9, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 6, wherein the control system is further configured to store data representing beam area per microscope configuration as a profile [The control system may interpolate data between measured points to reflect the beam area and beam current as the microscope user changes parameters on the microscope mid-experiment. |0288] and retrieve measured values from the stored data or determine interpolated values from the stored data as a user changes beam conditions on the microscope during use [The control system may interpolate data between measured points to reflect the beam area and beam current as the microscope user changes parameters on the microscope mid-experiment.|0288].
Re. Claim 10. Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the electron dose is represented as an electron dose rate [electron dose is represented as electron dose rate |0173].
Re. Claim 11, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 10, wherein the control system is further configured to allow a user to set an electron dose rate limit for the sample under observation [the control system is further configured to allow a user to set an electron dose rate limit for the sample under observation.| 0173].
Re. Claim 12, Waldon discloses:
The control system of claim 11, wherein the control system is further configured to monitor that the electron dose rate does not exceed the electron dose rate limit [the control system also monitors to ensure that the electron dose rate does not exceed a predetermined electron dose rate limit. |0173].
Re. Claim 13, Waldon discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the electron dose is represented as a cumulative electron dose [The control system can further set limits on a cumulative electron dose, in addition to limits on an electron dose rate |0173].
Re. Claim 14, Waldon discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to allow a user to set one or more safety limits to prevent damage to the sample [The control system can allow a user to set a safety limit to prevent irreversible damage to the sample |0174].
Re. Claim 15, Waldon discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to measure an impact of an electron beam on one or more of: a shape of the sample under observation, a composition of the sample under observation, a density of the sample under observation, an electrical characteristic of the sample under observation, a morphology of the sample under observation, and a microstructure of the sample under observation [The control system can further measure an impact of an electron beam on one or more of: a sample shape, a sample composition, a sample density, and an electrical characteristic of the sample. The control system can additionally record the registered movement over a period time to generate a three-dimensional map of a history of movements occurring in the region of interest. The control system can also provide a visual display of the history of movements in a three-dimensional path on a graphical user display device |0174].
Re. Claim 16, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 15, wherein the control system is further configured use image analysis to quantify degradation of crystalline structure to determine sample limits of the electron dose [FIG. 112 shows how the control software can help users quantify and determine how much cumulative dose or instantaneous dose rate is too much for a sample and save the limits as a dose budget | 0389].
Re. Claim 17, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 16, wherein the control system is further configured to: display a Fast Fourier Transform (“FFT”) on a graphical user interface [The control system is further configured to display, on a graphical user display device, an electron microscope control and a drift correction parameter applied to the region of interest in a same single user interface |0171], wherein the FFT is displayed in association with an image from the region of interest;
receive a user selection of an area of the FFT [ the control system generates a video based on consecutive images by applying various techniques such as, for example, a transform analysis such as FFT and CTF, an intensity plot, a pixel intensity statistic, a focal algorithm analysis, a brightness adjustment, a contrast adjustment, a gamma adjustment, a metadata overlay layer, and a shape overlay layer |0163];
and track an intensity in the selected area over time under specified electron beam conditions to identify a critical threshold [A user would have to track the sample by manually and continuously moving the sample holder or electron beam to keep a region of interest centered since the illumination, cameras, and detectors are fixedly positioned |0128].
Re. Claim 18, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 16, wherein the control system is further configured to: display an electron diffraction image on a graphical user interface [The control system is further configured to display, on a graphical user display device, an electron microscope control and a drift correction parameter applied to the region of interest in a same single user interface |0171], wherein the diffraction image is displayed in association with an image from the region of interest [ the control system generates a video based on consecutive images by applying various techniques such as, for example, a transform analysis such as FFT and CTF, an intensity plot, a pixel intensity statistic, a focal algorithm analysis, a brightness adjustment, a contrast adjustment, a gamma adjustment, a metadata overlay layer, and a shape overlay layer |0163];
receive a user selection of an area of electron diffraction image [ user can set trigger based on electron diffraction |0314];
and track an intensity in the selected area over time under specified electron beam conditions to identify a critical threshold [The control system can further provide for supporting statistics on a single sample site over time, plotting any metadata or derivations, intensity analysis, FFTs, and similar other statistics across multiple images to thereby provide for the ability to build a history of the analysis.|0304].
Re. Claim 19, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to display on a graphical user interface a listing of images of portions of the sample under observation [The control system is further configured to display, on a graphical user display device, a listing of images of portions of the sample exposed to a predefined level of electron radiation from an electron beam of the electron microscope |0175], wherein the listing of images includes images that were previously observed by a user along with an electron dose associated with each listed image [The control system can further display, on a graphical user display device, a listing of images of portions of the sample previously observed by a user along with a dose or a dose rate associated with each listed image|0175].
Re. Claim 20, Walden discloses:
The control system of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to display on a graphical user interface a listing of images of portions of the sample under observation [The control system is further configured to display, on a graphical user display device, a listing of images of portions of the sample exposed to a predefined level of electron radiation from an electron beam of the electron microscope |0175], wherein the listing of images includes images that were collected when the sample under observation was exposed to a pre-defined level of electron radiation from an electron beam of the electron microscope [a listing of images of portions of the sample exposed to a predefined level of electron radiation from an electron beam of the electron microscope. |0175].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOWARD D BROWN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-4371. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM - 5:00PM EST.
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, Sathyanarayanan Perungavoor can be reached at 5712727455. 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.
HOWARD D. BROWN JR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/HOWARD D BROWN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights