Jump to content

Patent Application 17761832 - Electronic Structure Component for Logically - Rejection

From WikiPatents

Patent Application 17761832 - Electronic Structure Component for Logically

Title: Electronic Structure Component for Logically Connecting Qubits

Application Information

  • Invention Title: Electronic Structure Component for Logically Connecting Qubits
  • Application Number: 17761832
  • Submission Date: 2025-04-08T00:00:00.000Z
  • Effective Filing Date: 2022-03-18T00:00:00.000Z
  • Filing Date: 2022-03-18T00:00:00.000Z
  • National Class: 257
  • National Sub-Class: 024000
  • Examiner Employee Number: 98248
  • Art Unit: 2812
  • Tech Center: 2800

Rejection Summary

  • 102 Rejections: 3
  • 103 Rejections: 3

Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:

Office Action Text


    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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) based on an application filed in FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY on 09/20/2019. 

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.

The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.

Claims 23-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement.  The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. 

The definition of the term “quantum dot” appears to change without any consistency in the specification and claims which prevents one of ordinary skill in the art from understanding the basic terminology of the invention and consequently does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make/use the invention. The nature of this invention is not simplistic such that clear definitions are necessary for one of ordinary skill in the art to make and/or use the invention.

In the remarks filed on 01/15/2025, applicant has submitted both amendments and remarks/arguments which have not alleviated the problem of an unclear definition for what may constitute a quantum dot based on the level of understanding of one of ordinary skill in the art. Along with the provided remarks, applicant has provided a Wikipedia article entitled “Quantum Dot” from prior to the earliest priority date of the application in an effort to show the level of understanding of one of ordinary skill in the art. However, even this direction provided by the inventor has not clearly defined a quantum dot as will be explained further below. This Wikipedia article provides multiple definitions such that the level of predictability in the art for which definition is being considered is questionable and must be clearly delineated by the inventor, which it is not in the current application.

On page 10 of the remarks applicant has argued that “a quantum dot may be formed in a semiconductor material by applying potentials to the semiconductor material. These potentials define a space in the semiconductor material in which one or more charge carriers may be trapped” (i.e. a potential well). This definition seemingly describes an electronic structure such that “individual electrons can be captured in quantum dots” as stated in [0007] of the specification. In [0011], the specification says “an electron is moved from quantum dot to quantum dot” such that the applicant is here defining the quantum dot as a structure that a charge carrier is trapped in such as a quantum box or well in which a particle may be trapped. The provided Wikipedia article indicates a similar definition in bullet points 5 and 7 of the fabrication section: “Individual quantum dots can be created from two-dimensional electron or hole gases present in remotely doped quantum wells or semiconductor heterostructures called lateral quantum dots . . . by depositing metal electrodes (lift-off process) that allow the application of external voltages between the electron gas and the electrodes” and “Confinement in quantum dots can also arise from electrostatic potentials (generated by external electrodes, doping, strain, or impurities)”.  (Definition 1 – An electrostatically defined potential well in a substrate). Under this definition, the quantum dot does not move. It is locked in position by the applied potentials and may drive the transport of charge carriers between neighboring quantum dots, see bullet point 5 of the fabrication section of the applicant provided Wikipedia article “Such quantum dots are mainly of interest for experiments and applications involving electron or hole transport, i.e., an electrical current”. (i.e. the quantum dot is bound in a position within the crystal structure)

 Applicant appears to further modify their definition in the remarks by again referencing the Wikipedia as being “a structure with nanometer size generated in the semiconductor-crystal. It can therefore be considered as a nanoscopic material structure”.  Examiner further notes that the Wikipedia reference further recites that “quantum dots have properties between bulk semiconductors and discrete atoms” such quantum dots are nanoscopic particles instead of being the electrostatically defined potential well proposed above (Definition 2 – nanoscopic particles on the order of a few nanometers such as an ‘artificial atom’). An example of such a structure are the quantum dots commonly utilized in light emitting technologies for conversion of light between different wavelengths. The applicant provided Wikipedia article uses this definition in the opening paragraph: “Quantum dots (QDs) are tiny semiconductor particles a few nanometers in size . . . When the quantum dots are illuminated by UV light, an electron in the quantum dot can be excited to a state of higher energy . . . The excited electron can drop back into the valence band releasing its energy by the emission of light. This light emission (photoluminescence) is illustrated in the figure on the right. The color of that light depends on the energy difference between the conductance band and the valence band.” (i.e. the quantum dot is a freestanding nanoscopic particle which may be suspended in a solution, see paragraph four of the applicant provided Wikipedia article).

Finally, on page 11 of the remarks applicant provides an additional possible definition by stating “Regarding the expression "splitting the quantum dots," . . . two charge carriers are trapped in the potential well . . . The two charge carriers may be split into two separate charge carriers, wherein one of these two charge carriers may tunnel to another potential well . . . a quantum dot may be formed in a semiconductor crystal by applying potentials to the semiconductor material. These potentials define a space in the semiconductor material in which one or more charge carriers may be trapped. Therefore, the two electrons trapped in two different potential wells as shown in step C of FIG. 12 correspond to two quantum dots”. According to this definition, the quantum dot is drawn now to a charge carrier in the wells which may be separated into different wells since the well itself is not being split, the charge carriers are being split. (Definition 3 – subatomic particle such as a charge carrier being transported through a substrate). This seems to agree with [0031] of the specification which states that “the potential well then moves continuously and in a directed manner through the substrate and carries the quantum dot” such that the quantum dot is now a particle trapped in a moving well, such as a subatomic particle like an electron or hole, instead of an electrostatic well structure or a nanoscopic particle.

Each of these definitions contradicts one-another particularly when the terminology in the claims as amended is considered such that the breadth of the claims and which definition they encompass is unclear. For example, amended claim 23 recites “at least a continuously moving potential well for processing quantum dots in the substrate” such that the quantum dot is separate from the potential well (i.e. definition 1 fails since the electrostatic well is used for “processing” the quantum dots instead of defining them). Then claim 24 is amended to recite “a functional element for continuously moving a quantum dot of the quantum dots” such that the quantum dot is no longer a nanoscopic particle which is bound to the crystal structure (i.e. definition 2 fails since it otherwise requires the structure to be bound to the substrate’s crystal). Lastly, amended claim 35 recites “a static potential well in which a charge carrier with a known quantum mechanical state is provided, and wherein a sensor element is provided for detecting changes in the charge, which detects the charge in the static potential well, whereby the first quantum dot is transported to a second quantum dot of the quantum dots” such that the charge carrier, or sub-atomic particle, enters the quantum dot to modify its charge state and that the sub-atomic particle is not the quantum dot (i.e. definition 3 fails since a modified charge state is a consequence of charge carriers moving in/out of the quantum dot). Based on this, the applicant has not provided a single clear direction for what may constitute “a quantum dot“.

Based on the lack of clarity of what may constitute a quantum dot in view of the specification, the claims, and the amendment remarks, the application does not enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. All claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for a lack of enablement as they all include limitations pertaining to undefined “quantum dot(s)”.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 26-28, 32, and 36-42 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.

Claim 26 recites the limitation "further comprising the functional element" in line 2 of the claim which depends indirectly on claim 24. Claim 24 has already recited the limitation “further comprising a functional element”. The use of the phrasing “further comprising” creates an issue of clarity which renders the claim indefinite. The phrase “further comprising” implies that the subsequent language will recite additional elements which the device is not already comprising. Thus it remains unclear if “the functional element” is a new element of not because it derives its antecedent basis from a previously recited element but is preceded by the language “further comprising”. Therefore, claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity and claims 27-28 are rejected at least for their dependence. For the purposes of this examination, claim 26 will be interpreted to read as “ wherein the functional element is . . .”

Claim 32 recites the limitation “the manipulator comprises at least one of means for generating an oscillating magnetic field and a gradient magnetic field in the manipulation zone”. The combination of the language “at least one of” along with the word “and” between a list of elements creates a lack of clarity. It is unclear if the claim requires the device to have only one of the two elements (i.e. either the first or second element would suffice such that “and” could effectively be replaced by “or”) or if at least one of each element is required (i.e. at least one of both the first and second element are required such that the claim should recite “at least one of both means . . .”). Therefore, claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 32 will be interpreted to read as “the manipulator comprises at least one of means for generating an oscillating magnetic field [[and]] or a gradient magnetic field in the manipulation zone”.

Claim 36 recites the limitation “initialize the quantum mechanical state of the quantum dot of the static potential well”. This limitation has unclear antecedent basis. At least three quantum dots have been recited in the claims on which claim 36 depends, including “a quantum dot” (claim 23), “a first quantum dot” (claim 35), and “a second quantum dot” (claim 35). However, claim 35 only recited “the static potential well” in relation to the first and second quantum dots (“detects the charge in the static potential well, whereby the first quantum dot is transported to a second quantum dot of the quantum dots”, i.e. the first and second quantum dots appear to both be “a quantum dot of the static potential well” as required by claim 36). It is therefore unclear which of the three quantum dots applicant intends this to refer to.  Therefore, claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 36 will be interpreted to read as “initialize the quantum mechanical state of [[the]] a quantum dot of the static potential well” such that any of the three quantum dots recited up to this point, or any other quantum dot, may read on the claim language.

Claim 37 recites the limitation “the second gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies”. This limitation lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 35 previously recited “a second gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies”. However, claim 37 does not depend on claim 35, it depends on claim 34. Thus it is unclear if claim 37 should depend on claim 35 to provide proper antecedent basis or if claim 37 is intended to recite a new “second gate electrode assembly”. Therefore, claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 37 will be interpreted to read as “[[the]] a second gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies”.
Claim 37 recites the limitation “each of the static potential wells has a quantum dot of the quantum dots with different quantum mechanical states”. This limitation creates an issue of clarity due to improper antecedent basis. Claim 34, which claim 37 depends on, previously recited “a quantum dot of the quantum dots”. Thus it is unclear if claim 37 is referring to new quantum dots of the quantum dots or is referring to the same quantum dot of claim 34. Therefore, claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 37 will be interpreted to read as “each of the static potential wells has [[a]] separate quantum dots of the quantum dots with different quantum mechanical states”.

Claim 38 recites the limitation “the quantum mechanical state of a quantum dot of the quantum dots”. This limitation lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 34 previously recited “a quantum mechanical state of a qubit in a quantum dot of the quantum dots”. However, claim 38 does not depend on claim 34, it depends on claim 23. Thus it is unclear if claim 38 should depend on claim 34 to provide proper antecedent basis or if claim 38 is intended to recite a new “quantum mechanical state”. Therefore, claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 38 will be interpreted to read as “[[the]] a quantum mechanical state of a quantum dot of the quantum dots”.

Claim 39 recites the limitation “the quantum mechanical state of a quantum dot of the quantum dots”. This limitation lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 34, which claim 39 depends on, previously recited “a quantum mechanical state of a qubit in a quantum dot of the quantum dots”. Thus it is unclear if claim 39 is reciting a new “quantum mechanical state” or is referencing the same quantum mechanical state as claim 34. Therefore, claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity and claim 40 is rejected at least for its dependence. For the purposes of this examination, claim 38 will be interpreted to read as “[[the]] a quantum mechanical state of a quantum dot of the quantum dots”.

Claim 41 recites the limitation “said electronic component comprises at least one of gallium arsenide (GaAs) and silicon germanium (SiGe)”. The combination of the language “at least one of” along with the word “and” between a list of materials creates a lack of clarity. It is unclear if the claim requires the device to have only one of the two materials (i.e. either the first or second material would suffice such that “and” could effectively be replaced by “or”) or if at least one region of each material is required (i.e. both the first and second materials are required such that the claim should recite “at least one of both . . .”). Therefore, claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 41 will be interpreted to read as “said electronic component comprises at least one of gallium arsenide (GaAs) [[and]] or silicon germanium (SiGe)”.

Claim 42 recites the limitation “respectively interconnected gate electrodes for the continuously moving potential well are configured such that at least one of a periodic and phase-shifted voltage can be applied to them”. The combination of the language “at least one of” along with the word “and” between a list of voltage signal parameters creates a lack of clarity. It is unclear if the claim requires the voltage signal to have only one of the two properties (i.e. either the first or second property would suffice such that “and” could effectively be replaced by “or”) or if at least both properties are required (i.e. both the first and second signal properties are required such that the claim should recite “at least one of both . . .”). Therefore, claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for a lack of clarity. For the purposes of this examination, claim 42 will be interpreted to read as “respectively interconnected gate electrodes for the continuously moving potential well are configured such that at least one of a periodic  [[and]] or phase-shifted voltage can be applied to them”.
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)(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.

(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) 23-25 and 29-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 10,756,004 B1; Elsherbini et al.; 08/2020; (“004”).

Regarding Claim 23. 004 discloses an electronic structure component (#100, Figure 5, quantum computing assembly) for logically connecting qubits of a quantum computer (column 4, line 5, “the quantum computing assembly includes . . . a quantum processing die” and column 6, line 51, “qubit elements (e.g., superconducting qubit elements and/or spin qubit elements) included in the quantum processing die”), which is formed by a semiconductor component (column 7, line 48, “a quantum processing die 104 may include a semiconductor substrate”), comprising:
a substrate (#702 and #704, Figure 14B, base and fins) with a two-dimensional electron gas or electron hole gas (column 19, line 21, “The base 702 may include at least some of the substrate” and column 19, line 44, “The quantum well layer included in the fins 704 may be arranged normal to the z-direction, and may provide a layer in which a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) may form”); 
gate electrode assemblies (#706 and #708, Figure 14C, gates) having gate electrodes (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2, Figure 14C, gates), which are arranged on a surface of the electronic structure component (Figure 14B and 14C, the gates are on a surface of the device); 
electrical contacts (#720 and #722, Figure 14B and 14C, vias) for connecting the gate electrode assemblies to voltage sources (Figure 14B, vias #720 and #722 electrically connect to gate electrodes to provide voltage signals); and 
parallel electrode fingers being part of the gate electrodes of the gate electrode assemblies (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2 of Figure 14C are parallel electrodes which are part of #706 and #708), 
wherein logical connections of functional components have gate electrode assemblies configured to generate at least a continuously moving potential well for processing quantum dots in the substrate (column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction and thereby constrain the x-location of quantum dots within quantum wells (discussed in detail below with reference to the gates 706/708)”, Examiner note: the phrase continuously moving here is interpreted to mean capable of moving from location to location, not that it requires a perfect continuum of positions. Figure 14 of the instant application does not show a continuum and instead shows a series of discrete positions designated by the gate electrodes which have spaces therebetween).

Regarding Claim 24. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, further comprising a functional element for continuously moving a quantum dot of the quantum dots in the substrate (column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction and thereby constrain the x-location of quantum dots within quantum wells (discussed in detail below with reference to the gates 706/708)”, i.e. the gate electrodes are a functional element which move the quantum dots through the substrate in the x-direction, Examiner note: the phrase continuously moving here is interpreted to mean capable of moving from location to location, not that it requires a perfect continuum of positions. Figure 14 of the instant application does not show a continuum and instead shows a series of discrete positions designated by the gate electrodes which have spaces therebetween).

Regarding Claim 25. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 24, wherein the parallel electrode fingers are interconnected in a periodically alternating manner (Figure 14C, #706 and #708 are interwoven in an alternating manner from bottom to top in the order of #706-1, #708-1, #706-2, #708-2, #706-3), which effects a continuous movement of the continuously moving potential well through the substrate, whereby the quantum dot is transported with the continuously moving potential well (column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction and thereby constrain the x-location of quantum dots within quantum wells (discussed in detail below with reference to the gates 706/708)”, i.e. by altering the position of the quantum well a continuum of positions within the substrate may be transported to, Examiner note: the phrase continuously moving here is interpreted to mean capable of moving from location to location, not that it requires a perfect continuum of positions. Figure 14 of the instant application does not show a continuum and instead shows a series of discrete positions designated by the gate electrodes which have spaces therebetween).

Regarding Claim 29. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, further comprising a functional element (#721, Figure 14C, magnet line) for manipulating qubits in the quantum dots (column 24, line 7, “The magnet line 721 may be formed of a conductive material, and may be used to conduct current pulses that generate magnetic fields to influence the spin states of one or more of the quantum dots 742 that may form in the fins 704.”).
Regarding Claim 30. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 29, 
wherein the functional element (#721, Figure 14C, magnet line) comprises a manipulator (column 24, line 7, “The magnet line 721  . . . may be used to conduct current pulses that generate magnetic fields”) that sets a qubit of a quantum dot of the quantum dots to a definable quantum state (Column 24, line 13, “In some embodiments, the magnet line 721 may conduct a pulse to initialize an electron in a quantum dot in a particular spin state.”) in a manipulation zone (#771, Figure 14A, width of #721 which generates the magnetic field), 
wherein the manipulation zone is provided in an adjacent region formed by first and second gate electrode assemblies of the gate electrode assemblies (Figure 14A-C, #771 of #721 is adjacent to the gate electrode assemblies #706 and #708).

Regarding Claim 31. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 29, further comprising means for a switchable magnetic field for splitting electronic states with respect to their quantum mechanical states in the quantum dots (column 24, line 16, “the magnet line 721 may conduct current to provide a continuous, oscillating magnetic field to which the spin of a qubit may couple.”, i.e. the magnetic field may couple with the qubit to switch the electronic spin state of the qubit by switching the magnetic field).

Regarding Claim 32. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 30, wherein the manipulator comprises at least one of means for generating an oscillating magnetic field or a gradient magnetic field in the manipulation zone (column 24, line 16, “the magnet line 721 may conduct current to provide a continuous, oscillating magnetic field to which the spin of a qubit may couple.”, i.e. the magnetic field may be oscillating within the region of #721).

Regarding Claim 33. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 30, wherein the manipulator comprises a microwave generator (column 5, line 1, “if the quantum processing die 104 implements superconducting qubits, the control die may provide and/or detect appropriate electrical signals in any of  . . . microwave lines”), which radiates microwaves into the manipulation zone to manipulate the quantum state of the quantum dot (column 17, line 21, “microwave lines used for controlling the state of the qubit elements may be referred to as drive lines  . . .The drive lines may control the state of their respective qubit elements by providing a microwave pulse at the qubit frequency, which in turn stimulates a transition between the states of the qubit element”).

Regarding Claim 34. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, further comprising a functional element (column 19, line 31, “the fins 704 organized into pairs including . . .one read fin 704”) for reading out a quantum mechanical state of a qubit in a quantum dot of the quantum dots (column 25, line 21, “The quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-2 may be used as “read” quantum dots in the sense that these quantum dots 742 may sense the quantum state of the quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-1 by detecting the electric field generated by the charge in the quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-1, and may convert the quantum state of the quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-1 into electrical signals that may be detected by the gates 706/708 on the fin 704-2”).

Regarding Claim 35. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 34, 
wherein the gate electrodes of the gate electrode assemblies have parallel electrode fingers (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2 of Figure 14C are parallel electrodes which are part of #706 and #708),whereby 
in a first gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies (#704-1, Figure 14C, “active” fin), the parallel electrode fingers are interconnected in a periodically alternating manner (Figure 14C, #706 and #708 are interwoven in an alternating manner from bottom to top in the order of #706-1, #708-1, #706-2, #708-2, #706-3 within #704-1), which effects a continuous movement of the continuously moving potential well through the substrate, whereby a first quantum dot of the quantum dots is transported together with the continuously moving potential well (column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction and thereby constrain the x-location of quantum dots within quantum wells (discussed in detail below with reference to the gates 706/708)”, i.e. by altering the position of the quantum well a continuum of positions within the substrate may be transported to), and 
the parallel electrode fingers of a second gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies (#704-2, Figure 14C, “read” fin) form a static potential well in which a charge carrier with a known quantum mechanical state is provided (column 25, line 21, “The quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-2 may be used as “read” quantum dots in the sense that these quantum dots 742 may sense the quantum state of the quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-1 by detecting the electric field generated by the charge in the quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-1”, i.e. the quantum mechanical states of the “read” quantum dots necessarily need to be known to accurately read the “active” quantum dots), and 
wherein a sensor element is provided for detecting changes in the charge, which detects the charge in the static potential well, whereby the first quantum dot is transported to a second quantum dot of the quantum dots (Column 25, line 26, “may convert the quantum state of the quantum dots 742 in the fin 704-1 into electrical signals that may be detected by the gates 706/708 on the fin 704-2. Each quantum dot 742 in the fin 704-1 may be read by its corresponding quantum dot 742 in the fin 704-2. Thus, the spin qubit-type quantum device 700 enables both quantum computation and the ability to read the results of a quantum computation.”).

Regarding Claim 36. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 35, further comprising a magnetic field generator (#721, Figure 14C, magnet line) for generating a gradient magnetic field in order to initialize the quantum mechanical state of [[the]] a quantum dot of the static potential well (Column 24, line 13, “In some embodiments, the magnet line 721 may conduct a pulse to initialize an electron in a quantum dot in a particular spin state.” wherein the magnetic pulse necessarily has a gradient).

Regarding Claim 37. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 34, 
wherein [[the]] a second gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies (#704-2, Figure 14C, “read” fin) comprises two further gate electrodes (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2 of Figure 14C are parallel electrodes which are part of #704-2), which together form a static double potential well (Figure 14C, column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction” such that voltages may be appropriately applied to #706-2 and #708-1 to create a double potential well in the neighboring electrodes of #740-2), 
wherein each of the static potential wells has [[a]] separate quantum dots of the quantum dots with different quantum mechanical states (It should be noted the limitation “each of the static potential wells has [[a]] separate quantum dots of the quantum dots with different quantum mechanical states” is interpreted as an intended use, wherein a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. (See MPEP 2114 II.) The apparatus of 004 could reasonably have any number of opposing or similar quantum dots with respective quantum mechanical states in each of the wells).

Regarding Claim 38. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, further comprising a functional element (#721, Figure 14C, magnet line) for initializing [[the]] a quantum mechanical state of a quantum dot of the quantum dots (Column 24, line 13, “In some embodiments, the magnet line 721 may conduct a pulse to initialize an electron in a quantum dot in a particular spin state.”).

Regarding Claim 39. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 36, further comprising a functional element (#721 and #740, Figure 14B and 14C, magnet line and doped regions) for initializing [[the]] a quantum mechanical state of a quantum dot of the quantum dots (Column 24, line 13, “In some embodiments, the magnet line 721 may conduct a pulse to initialize an electron in a quantum dot in a particular spin state.” wherein the magnetic pulse necessarily has a gradient), comprising:
a reservoir, which is provided as a donor of charge carriers (column 22, line 35, “The fins 704 may include doped regions 740 that may serve as a reservoir of charge carriers for the spin qubit-type quantum device 700”), 
wherein the gate electrodes of the gate electrode assemblies have parallel electrode fingers (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2 of Figure 14C are parallel electrodes which are part of #706 and #708); 
wherein the gate electrodes of a first gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies in the substrate (#704-2, Figure 14C, “read” fin)  form a static double potential well, or the gate electrodes of a first gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies in the substrate form a static potential well (Figure 14C, column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction” such that voltages may be appropriately applied to #706-2 and #708-1 to create a double potential well in the neighboring electrodes of #740-2), in which charge carriers are introduced from the reservoir into the quantum dots (column 22, line 37, “an n-type doped region 740 may supply electrons for electron-type quantum dots 742, and a p-type doped region 740 may supply holes for hole-type quantum dots 742”), 
wherein the gate electrodes of a second gate electrode assembly of the gate electrode assemblies (#704-1, Figure 14C, “active” fin) form the continuously moving potential well in the substrate (column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction and thereby constrain the x-location of quantum dots within quantum wells (discussed in detail below with reference to the gates 706/708)”), wherein a charge carrier with its quantum mechanical state can be transported with the continuously moving potential well (column 22, line 37, “an n-type doped region 740 may supply electrons for electron-type quantum dots 742, and a p-type doped region 740 may supply holes for hole-type quantum dots 742”); 
means for transferring two charge carriers from the reservoir into the static potential well (The apparatus of 004 could reasonably transfer any number of opposing or similar charge carriers into each of the static wells from #740 by appropriately applying gate voltages); 
a stimulator (#721, Figure 14C, magnet line) for orienting or splitting the quantum dots (column 24, line 16, “the magnet line 721 may conduct current to provide a continuous, oscillating magnetic field to which the spin of a qubit may couple.”, i.e. the magnetic field may couple with the qubit to orient the electronic spin state of the qubit by switching the magnetic field); and 
means for transferring a charge carrier from the static potential well into the continuously moving potential well (The apparatus of 004 could reasonably transfer any number of opposing or similar charge carriers between both moving and static wells by appropriately applying gate voltages).

Regarding Claim 40. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 39, wherein the stimulator (#721, Figure 14C, magnet line)  is designed as a magnet, which generates a gradient magnetic field for initializing the quantum mechanical states in the two quantum dots in the continuously moving potential well (Column 24, line 13, “In some embodiments, the magnet line 721 may conduct a pulse to initialize an electron in a quantum dot in a particular spin state.” wherein the magnetic pulse necessarily has a gradient which could initialize spin states in any number of quantum dots).

Regarding Claim 41. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, wherein the substrate of said electronic component comprises at least one of gallium arsenide (GaAs) [[and]] or silicon germanium (SiGe) (column 26, line 25, “the barrier layer may be formed of silicon germanium” and the barrier layer is part of the quantum well stack, see column 26, line 12, “a quantum well stack 746 including a quantum well layer 752 and a barrier layer 754”).

Regarding Claim 42. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, wherein respectively interconnected gate electrodes for the continuously moving potential well are configured such that at least one of a periodic [[and]] or phase-shifted voltage can be applied to them  (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2 of Figure 14C are interconnected gate electrodes which could be sent any required voltage signal through vias #720 and #722, including both periodic and phase-shifted voltage signals).
Regarding Claim 43. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 23, wherein every third parallel electrode finger is connected to a gate electrode for the continuously moving potential well (column 19, line 55, “To control the x-location of quantum dots in the fins 704, voltages may be applied to gates disposed on the fins 704 to adjust the energy profile along the fins 704 in the x-direction and thereby constrain the x-location of quantum dots within quantum wells (discussed in detail below with reference to the gates 706/708)”, i.e. every electrode finger is part of the system for the movable potential well, necessarily including every third gate electrode).

Regarding Claim 44. 004 discloses the structure electronic component according to claim 23, further comprising means of connection for connecting to a qubit of a quantum computer (#100 of Figure 5 is quantum computing assembly which includes qubit processing as described above such that it necessarily includes connections for qubit quantum computers).

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.

Claim(s) 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 004 as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of US 2015/0279981 A1; Eriksson et al.; 10/2015; (“981”).

Regarding Claim 26. 004 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 25.

004 does not disclose wherein the functional element is for branching the movement of the quantum dot.

However, 981 teaches a quantum semiconductor device (#400, Figure 4a-c, [0042]-[0057]) comprising a structure for branching the movement of a quantum dot in orthogonal directions (Figure 4B, left-right and up-down) within the plane of 2DEG regions (#412) in a quantum well layer (#410) formed from semiconductor material Si ([0043], “tunnel barriers 418 in are formed in quantum well layer 410 between adjacent 2DEG regions of the plurality of 2DEG regions 412. Quantum well layer 410 and cap layer 416 may be formed of Si.”) and the directional arrows in Figure 4b represent the tunnel barriers through which the electrons, or quantum dots, can move ([0052], “Directional arrows indicate the location of tunnel barriers through which the electrons can move between the quantum dot regions QD1, QD2, QD3, QD4. The quantum dot reservoir regions are referenced as QR1, QR2, QR3, QR4 in FIGS. 4b and 4c. Directional arrows also indicate the location of tunnel barriers through which the electrons can move between the respective quantum dot reservoir region and quantum dot region.”).

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to introducing the branching functionality of 981 into the device of 004 in order to simultaneously accumulate electrons in the quantum dot regions (#QD) from the reservoirs (#QR) while preventing leakage between adjacent quantum dot regions (#QD) (see [0057] of 981) and providing a higher density of pathways (see Figure 4b of 981).

Regarding Claim 27. 004 in view of 981 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 26, wherein the functional element (Figure 4 of 981) comprises 
a first (981, plurality of #406a-b, Figure 4b, electrodes) and a second branching gate electrode (981, plurality of #406c, Figure 4b, electrodes) assembly of the gate electrode assemblies with gate electrodes in different directions (981, Figure 4b, #406a-c are observed to include portions which extend in a vertical direction and extend in a horizontal direction), 
wherein the parallel electrode fingers of the gate electrodes are interconnected in a periodically alternating manner (981, Figure 4b, the electrodes #406a-c are observed to alternate in a periodic manner throughout the device), which effects a continuous movement of the continuously moving potential well through the substrate (981, Figure 4b, the directional arrows indicate a continuum of movement positions the electron/quantum dot can be moved into and out of), whereby 
the quantum dot is transported in one direction with the continuously moving potential well of the first branching gate electrode assembly (981, [0057], “A positive or negative voltage applied to first electrode 406a and/or to second electrode 406b exponentially controls the tunnel rate through the tunnel barrier directly below each electrode 406a, 406b.”, i.e. #406a-b controls transport of the quantum dot in the vertical direction), and 
the quantum dot can be moved in a different direction of travel with the continuously moving potential well in the second branching gate electrode assembly (981, [0057], “a positive voltage is applied to third electrode 406c to accumulate electrons in QD1”, i.e. #406c controls transport of the quantum dot in the horizontal direction).

Regarding Claim 28. 004 in view of 981 discloses the electronic structure component according to claim 27, further comprising a third gate electrode assembly (981, plurality of #406d-e, Figure 4b, electrodes) of the gate electrode assemblies for generating a switchable potential barrier arrangement in a region of a branch, which is switched for the branching of the quantum dot (981, [0057], “fourth electrode 406d and fifth electrode 406e can be held at a fixed negative voltage to prevent leakage from one area to an adjacent area while a positive voltage is applied to third electrode 406c to accumulate electrons in QD1”, i.e. #406d-e provide a switchable potential barrier while #406c controls transport of the quantum dot in the horizontal direction).

Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims and corresponding arguments, see page 10 of the remarks, filed 01/15/2025, with respect to the objections to the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive.  The objections to all claims have been withdrawn. 

Applicant’s arguments relating to the definition of what may constitute a “quantum dot”, see pages 10-12 of the remarks, filed 01/15/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections of all claims have been fully considered but are not persuasive.  The examiner has attempted to further clarify the issue above. The applicant’s remarks continue to provide an unclear definition of what may constitute a “quantum dot” in view of the claims, specification, and arguments. It remains unclear if the quantum dot’s boundaries refer to Definition 1 – An electrostatically defined potential well in a substrate, or Definition 2 – nanoscopic particles on the order of a few nanometers such as an ‘artificial atom’, or lastly Definition 3 – subatomic particle such as a charge carrier being transported through a substrate. The examiner maintains the position that these three definitions are contradictory and one of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to make and/or use the invention in view of the unclear definition. Claims 23-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).

Applicant’s amendments to the claims to address 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issues, see page 10 of the remarks, filed 01/15/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of several claims have been fully considered.  While some of the issues have been addressed, several issues either remain or have been newly created as a result of the amendments.  Claims 26-28, 32, and 36-42 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).

Applicant’s amendments to claim 23 and corresponding arguments, see page 13 of the remarks, filed 01/15/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 23 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that US 10,756,004 B1; Elsherbini et al.; 08/2020; (“004”) does not disclose all of the limitations of amended claim 23. In particular, applicant argues the 004 does not disclose:
“gate electrode assemblies having gate electrodes, which are arranged on a surface of the electronic structure component” based on applicant’s interpretation that the gate electrodes are located “inside” the device instead of “on a surface”.
“parallel electrode fingers being part of the gate electrodes of the gate electrode assemblies” because the gates are interpreted as not being interconnected.
“gate electrode assemblies configured to generate at least a continuously moving potential well for processing quantum dots in the substrate” because the reference is interpreted by the applicant static potential wells (quantum dots) as opposed to continuously moving potential wells (quantum dots).

Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s arguments and believes that 004 adequately discloses all of the argued features/limitations of claim 23.
With regard to argument “a”, applicant has not provided any clear boundaries as to what may constitute the “electronic structure component” such that any given boundaries may apply. Furthermore, the use of the word “surface” does not indicate any difference between an internal surface vs. an external surface. Therefore, even if it is the applicant’s position that the interpreted gate electrodes are inside of the device (which necessarily puts boundaries on the device which are not required by the claim), the gate electrodes are still necessarily on a surface of the device that is internal to it as the “surface” is not required to be “external”. Furthermore, the claim requires the gate electrodes to be part of the device as evidenced by the claim requiring “an electronic structure component . . . comprising: . . . gate electrode assemblies, which are arranged on a surface of the electronic structure component”. i.e. the gate electrodes are part of the device such that if they applicant wishes to argue they are on an external surface, it would be unclear how the gate electrodes may simultaneously be part of the device while also being on an external surface of the device since they would necessarily be the external surface at that point.
With regard to argument “b”, the claim requires “gate electrode assemblies (#706 and #708, Figure 14C, gates) having gate electrodes (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2, Figure 14C, gates), which are arranged on a surface of the electronic structure component (Figure 14B and 14C, the gates are on a surface of the device); electrical contacts (#720 and #722, Figure 14B and 14C, vias) for connecting the gate electrode assemblies to voltage sources (Figure 14B, vias #720 and #722 electrically connect to gate electrodes to provide voltage signals); and parallel electrode fingers being part of the gate electrodes of the gate electrode assemblies (#706-1,2,3 and #708-1,2 of Figure 14C are parallel electrodes which are part of #706 and #708).” The fact that the claim requires the “parallel electrode fingers being part of the gate electrodes” does not require any interconnectedness between the plurality of fingers or the plurality of gate electrodes. It only requires that they be part of the same general structure (i.e. they are part of the gates, #706/#708). It is the examiners position that each of the assemblies (#706/#708) has gate electrodes (#706-1,2,3) for which the parallel electrode fingers (#706-1,2,3) are part of the gates because they are the gates. Furthermore, examiner notes that 004 provides that the routing, arrangements, and electrical connections of the vias may be modified as needed for implementation (see column 25, lines 1-5) such that a future amendment requiring the fingers of separate gate electrodes to be electrically interconnected would likely be considered obvious.
With regard to argument “c”,  as described above there is an issue of enablement (rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)) for the relationship between the quantum dots, potential wells, charge carriers, and regions under the various gate electrodes which may be interpreted to be nanoscopic structures. It is the examiner’s interpretation that the ability to control the location of the quantum dots and move charge carriers between the various wells within the device constitutes a continuously moving well carrying a charge carrier (or quantum dot) through the device. If the applicant is attempting to argue that the reference is not sufficient to be “continuous” due to the discrete nature of the wells’ positions, the examiner points to Figure 17 of the instant application which clearly shows a grouping of static quantum wells in discrete positions and charge carriers (#448) being transported between these discrete positions such that the application being examined does not provide a perfect continuum of motion for the well, quantum dot, charge carrier, etc. 
Claim(s) 23 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 10,756,004 B1; Elsherbini et al.; 08/2020; (“004”).

Applicant’s amendments to claim 23 and corresponding arguments, see pages 13-14 of the remarks, filed 01/15/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been fully considered but are moot. As stated above Claim(s) 23-25 and 29-44  stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 10,756,004 B1; Elsherbini et al.; 08/2020; (“004”). Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of dependent claims are not withdrawn. Claim(s) 26-28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 004 as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of US 2015/0279981 A1; Eriksson et al.; 10/2015; (“981”).

Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the modified ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TYLER JAMES WIEGAND whose telephone number is (571)270-0096. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8AM-5PM.
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, CHRISTINE KIM can be reached on (571) 272-8458. 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.



/TYLER J WIEGAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2812           
 
/CHRISTINE S. KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812                                                                                                                                                                                                        


    
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
    


Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.