DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-23 in the reply filed on 7/07/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that t This is not found persuasive because the technical features in the magnetron are not special as they a. Claims 1-17 remain pending.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on December 4th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-17 remain pending in the application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitations are:
In Claims 1-2: Data Communicator Mechanism.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Reference is made to the Specification filed on 04/22/2022 for what each Generic Placeholder is interpreted as:
Interpretations:
Data Communicator Mechanism is made up of the following three components, an Identification Chip, an Electronic Circuit, and a Communication Channel such as a fiber optic cable (Paragraph 9) .
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 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.
Claims 1-2, and 9 recites “high voltage pulse connection”, the high voltage pulse connection is indefinite as there is no structure in the claims and the specification to describe the connection. Therefore, the high voltage pulse connection will be interpreted as any port or wire connection that is able to transmit data between two different components.
Claims 1, 5, and 6 recites “heater connection” the heater connection is indefinite as there is no structure in the claims and the specification to describe the connection. Therefore, the heater connection will be interpreted as any port or entry way into the enclosure that allows for other connections such as wires to pass through.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US Patent No. 20140138550) in view of Khoury (WO Patent No. 2016007417) and further in view of Park (WO Patent No. 2014134595), Welsh (US Patent No. 20030072411), and Crowley (US Patent No. 9312108).
Regrading Claim 1, Yang teaches a high-power device (Paragraph 1 and Figure 5, UV curing lamp with a magnetron) for supplying a radiofrequency electromagnetic field (Paragraph 7, Magnetron 29 is the source of Radio Frequency radiation), the device comprising: a magnetron (Paragraph 1 and Figure 5, UV curing lamp with a magnetron) configured to supply a radiofrequency electromagnetic field (Paragraph 7, Magnetron 29 is the source of Radio Frequency radiation); and a Magnetron control unit configured to control the magnetron to output radiofrequency energy (Paragraph 28, Master Computer processor 64 controls the operation of both the On-lamp Microprocessor Board 52 and the Magnetron 29), wherein: the magnetron comprises: a high voltage pulse connection enclosed in an enclosure (Figure 5 and 7, On Lamp microprocessor board 52, in an enclosure has Serial bus 90); a heater connection configured to allow an electrical connection to penetrate the enclosure (Paragraph 43-44 and Figure 5, Serial Bus Cable 63 is wired to the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 therefore it penetrates the enclosure therefore it reads as there being a heater connection to allow the wires through the enclosure); and a data communicator mechanism configured to transmit data between the magnetron and the magnetron control unit (Paragraph 28, Serial Bus Cable 63 communicates between the Magnetron in Irradiator 50 and the Master Computer Processor 64 in External Power Supply 60), a communication channel configured to route the data away from the high voltage pulse connection (Figure 6-7 and Paragraph 28, Master computer processor 64 within the external power supply 60 is configured to control and receive serial data to/from the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 though Serial bus cable 63 and Serial Bus Port 90).
Yang fails to teach a magnetron with a waveguide, and an enclosure that comprises an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield, and an electron gun to feed electrons to the waveguide; and control a gantry to rotate according to a treatment plan for a patient, and the communication channel is a fiber optic connection.
Khoury teaches a UV system for irradiating a substrate with a magnetron (Paragraph 10, UV system) configured to supply a radiofrequency electromagnetic field to a waveguide (Figure 1 and abstract, Magnetron 102 generates radiofrequency to waveguide 106).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate a magnetron with a waveguide as stated in Khoury. The waveguides are capable of directing the RF energy generated by a magnetron to the UV bulb to excite and ignite it (Paragraph 33, Waveguides).
Yang in view of Khoury fails to teach that enclosure comprises an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield.
Park teaches a magnetron apparatus (Abstract, Magnetron Apparatus) where the enclosure comprises an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield (Paragraph 139 and Figure 15, A shield Box for EM leakage).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury to incorporate an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield as stated in Park. The shield box helps avoid microwave power and EM leakage (Paragraph 139, Shield Box).
Yang in view of Khoury and Park fails to teach a magnetron control unit that controls an electron gun to feed electrons to the waveguide; and control a gantry to rotate according to a treatment plan for a patient.
Welsh teaches a radiation therapy device (Abstract, Radiation therapy device) with a magnetron control unit that controls (Figure 2 and Paragraph 33, Processor 40 controls the operation of the components in Radiation Therapy Device 10) an electron gun to feed electrons to the waveguide (Figure 2 and Paragraph 29, Electron Gun 110 generates electrons through accelerator tube 112 and treatment head); and control a gantry to rotate according to a treatment plan for a patient (Paragraph 42 and Figure 1, Gantry 26 rotates to place patient in right position and is controlled by Processor 40).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury and Park to incorporate an electron gun and a gantry as stated in Welsh. The electron gun and gantry work together to adjust the position of the patient for specific treatment needs (Paragraph 42, Electron Gun and Gantry).
Yang in view of Khoury, Park, and Welsh fails to teach that the communication channel is a fiber optic connection.
Crowley teaches a magnetron (Abstract, Magnetron Assembly) where the communication channel is a fiber optic connection (Col 8 Line 35-41, Fiber optic cable 224 is coupled to an optical transceiver inside control housing 106).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, and Welsh to incorporate a fiber optic connection as stated in Crowley. The fiber optic cables have the advantage of being immune to interference from electromagnetic noise. (Col 5-6 Line 65-5, Fiber optic Connection).
Regrading Claim 2, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley teaches that the mechanism comprises: an identification chip configured to include the data (Yang: Figure 7 and Paragraph 29 and 31, Intelligent Markers 54a-54n which can be semiconductor chips contains data), wherein the data pertains to the magnetron (Yang: Paragraph 31, Intelligent Markers 54a-54n contain manufacturing information, such as, but not limited to, a produced date, a part number, and a life time limit of the magnetrons); an electronic circuit configured to read the data on the identification chip (Yang: Paragraph 14, 31-34 and Figure 7, The on-lamp microprocessor board 52 is able to store ID information and Read Identification information regarding the Magnetron); and a communication channel configured to route the data away from the high voltage pulse connection to the control unit (Yang: Figure 6-7 and Paragraph 28, Master computer processor 64 within the external power supply 60 is configured to control and receive serial data to/from the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 though Serial bus cable 63 and Serial Bus Port 90).
Regrading Claim 3, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley teaches that the device further comprises at least one of stored data on the high-power device or stored data on a cloud-based repository (Yang: Figure 7 and Paragraph 29 and 31, Intelligent Markers 54a-54n which can be semiconductor chips contains data, they are located on the magnetrons inside the apparatus) wherein the stored data includes historical data pertaining to the magnetron (Yang: Paragraph 31, Intelligent Markers 54a-54n contain manufacturing information, such as, but not limited to, a produced date, a part number, and a life time limit of the magnetrons).
Regrading Claim 4, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, and Welsh fails to teach that the communication channel is a fiber optic connection.
Crowley teaches a magnetron (Abstract, Magnetron Assembly) where the communication channel is a fiber optic connection (Col 8 Line 35-41, Fiber optic cable 224 is coupled to an optical transceiver inside control housing 106).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, and Welsh to incorporate a fiber optic connection as stated in Crowley. The fiber optic cables have the advantage of being immune to interference from electromagnetic noise. (Col 5-6 Line 65-5, Fiber optic Connection).
Regrading Claim 5, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley teaches that the electronic circuit is mounted across one or more terminals of the heater connection (Yang: Paragraph 44 and Figure 5-6, Serial bus cable 63 and HV cable 62 are wired to the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 though a two connections seen on figure 6, therefore this reads as the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 being mounted across the heater connections), and wherein the heater connection is configured to provide power to the electronic circuit (Yang: Paragraph 43-44, Serial bus cable 63 is wired to the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 to provide power from the external power supply 60).
Regrading Claim 6, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley that the heater connection provides a connection between the electronic circuit (Yang: Paragraph 43-44 and Figure 5-6, Serial bus cable 63 is wired to the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 and the on the Master computer processor 64 in the external power supply 60 through a connection through the enclosure) and the identification chip (Yang: Paragraph 28 and Figure 6, The master computer processor 64 within the external power supply 60 is configured to control and receive serial data, therefore reads as having or fulfilling the function of a identification chip).
Regrading Claim 7, Yang in view of Khoury, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that enclosure comprises an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield.
Park teaches a magnetron apparatus (Abstract, Magnetron Apparatus) where the enclosure comprises an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield (Paragraph 139 and Figure 15, A shield Box for EM leakage).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate an electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) shield as stated in Park. The shield box helps avoid microwave power and EM leakage (Paragraph 139, Shield Box).
Regrading Claim 8, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley teaches a curing lamp with a magnetron (Yang: Paragraph 1 and Figure 5, UV curing lamp with a magnetron) where the data is low bandwidth data (Yang: Paragraph 29, The on-lamp microprocessor 80 may be any commercial 8/16-bit microprocessor which accommodates low bandwidth compared to other microcontroller).
Regrading Claim 9, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, and Welsh teaches a connection is configured to allow data transmission from the control unit to the high voltage pulse connection (Yang: Figure 6-7 and Paragraph 28, Master computer processor 64 within the external power supply 60 is configured to control and receive serial data to/from the on-lamp microprocessor board 52 though Serial bus cable 63 and Serial Bus Port 90).
Yang in view of Khoury fails to teach that the connection between the control unit and the high voltage pulse connection is a fiber optic connection.
Crowley teaches a magnetron (Abstract, Magnetron Assembly) where the connection between the control unit and the high voltage pulse connection is a fiber optic connection (Col 8 Line 35-41, Fiber optic cable 224 is coupled to an optical transceiver inside control housing 106).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, and Welsh to incorporate a fiber optic connection as stated in Crowley. The fiber optic cables have the advantage of being immune to interference from electromagnetic noise. (Col 5-6 Line 65-5, Fiber optic Connection).
Regrading Claim 10, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley teaches that the data comprises at least one of: a unique serial number, a name of a manufacturer, a manufacture date, a part number, a part revision schedule, or a manufacturer serial number (Yang: Paragraph 31, Intelligent Markers 54a-54n contain manufacturing information, such as, but not limited to, a produced date, a part number, and a life time limit of the magnetrons).
Regrading Claim 11, Yang in view of Park, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that the data is encrypted.
Khoury teaches a UV system for irradiating a substrate with a magnetron (Paragraph 10, UV system) where the data is encrypted via public key encryption, and wherein the unique serial number is part of a private key (Khoury: Paragraph 62, Data is Encrypted and Monitor and Controller have a private key generated signature for the monitor serial number that is embedded with the serial number).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Park, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate encryption for the data as stated in Khoury. The encryption protects sensitive data such as serial number of the magnetron. (Paragraph 62, Encryption).
Regrading Claim 12, Yang in view of Khoury, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that the magnetron contains magnets.
Park teaches a magnetron apparatus (Abstract, Magnetron Apparatus) where the magnetron further comprises at least one of: a permanent magnet or an electromagnet (Paragraph 84, Magnetron Contains Permanent Magnets).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate magnets as stated in Park. The permanent magnets have a lower temperature coefficients, therefore they maintain relatively smaller variations in the magnetic fields, which improve stability in magnetron operation. (Paragraph 130, Permanent Magnets).
Regrading Claim 17, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley teaches that the magnetron further comprises: a mechanical support (Yang: Figure 5, Showcases mechanical support for the Magnetron 29 and because it’s enclosed in an apparatus, therefore it reads as having a mechanical support).
Claim 13-14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US Patent No. 20140138550) in view of Khoury (WO Patent No. 2016007417) and further in view of Park (WO Patent No. 2014134595), Welsh (US Patent No. 20030072411), Crowley (US Patent No. 9312108), and Yamamoto (US Patent No. 20140034636).
Regrading Claim 13, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that the magnetron has a radio frequency (RF) tuner.
Yamamoto teaches a microwave irradiation apparatus with a Magnetron (Abstract and Figure 1, Microwave irradiation apparatus) where the magnetron further comprises: a radio frequency (RF) tuner, wherein the RF tuner is mounted outside the enclosure and is digitally connected to the control unit (Paragraph 30 and Figure 1and 5, The microwave introduction mechanism 3 includes microwave units 30 which includes Tuner 36 mounted outside of Magnetron 31 and is connected to control unit 9).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate a radio frequency (RF) tuner as stated in Yamamoto. Tuner can perform impedance matching between the processing chamber 1 and the magnetron 31 by adjusting the amount of power of the reflected wave (Paragraph 38, Radio Frequency Tuner).
Regrading Claim 14, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that the magnetron has a radio frequency (RF) tuner.
Yamamoto teaches a microwave irradiation apparatus with a Magnetron (Abstract and Figure 1, Microwave irradiation apparatus) where the magnetron further comprises: a radio frequency (RF) tuner (Figure 1, Tuner 36), wherein the RF tuner is mounted outside the enclosure and is digitally connected to the control unit via a tuner drive circuit (Paragraph 30 and Figure 1and 5, The microwave introduction mechanism 3 includes microwave units 30 which includes Tuner 36 mounted outside of Magnetron 31 and is connected to control unit 9 via Process controller 91), and wherein the fiber optic connection is connected to the control unit via the tuner drive circuit (Figure 5, Other parts of the apparatus sends data to the controller through a connection that passes through the Process controller 91).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate a radio frequency (RF) tuner as stated in Yamamoto. Tuner can perform impedance matching between the processing chamber 1 and the magnetron 31 by adjusting the amount of power of the reflected wave (Paragraph 38, Radio Frequency Tuner).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US Patent No. 20140138550) in view of Khoury (WO Patent No. 2016007417) and further in view of Park (WO Patent No. 2014134595), Welsh (US Patent No. 20030072411), Crowley (US Patent No. 9312108), Agustsson (US Patent No. 10609809), Dench (US Patent No. 3187220), and Treas (US Patent No. 20110188638).
Regrading Claim 15, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that the magnetron has a transition waveguide.
Agustsson teaches a linear accelerator head for use in a medical radiation therapy system with a magnetron (Abstract and Col 2 Line 51-52, Linear Accelerator Head) where the magnetron further comprises: an output radio frequency (RF) transition waveguide to output an RF field to the waveguide (Figure 1, Col 2 Line 51-52, and Col 4 Line 23-36, Microwave Generator, could be a Magnetron, has a isolator waveguide that transmits the RF power received from the microwave generator 130 to the RF window 140 and waveguide 110).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate a transition waveguide as stated in Agustsson. An isolator transmits the RF power to the RF window while preventing RF power from being transmitted in the opposite direction back to the microwave generator (Col 4 Line 29-32, Isolator).
Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, Crowley and Agustsson fails to teach that the magnetron has a RF transition waveguide seal.
Dench teaches a Magnetron Structure (Col 1 Line 9-11, Magnetron) with an RF transition waveguide seal (Figure 1 and Col 2 Line 42-44, Wave guide 18 with a ceramic window 21 sealed to the envelope 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, Crowley and Agustsson to incorporate an RF transition waveguide seal as stated in Dench. The seal provides a vacuum-tight seal between the waveguide and the enclosure to prevent hydraulic fluid leakage (Col 2 Line 42-44, Seal).
Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, Crowley, Agustsson and Dench fails to teach that the magnetron has dielectric gas.
Treas teaches a linear accelerator that use a magnetron (Abstract, Linear Accelerator) that has dielectric gas in the waveguide (Paragraph 69, Dielectric gas can be pumped into waveguides).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, Crowley, Agustsson and Dench to incorporate dielectric gas as stated in Treas. The Dielectric Gas increases the amount of peak power that can be transmitted through waveguides (Paragraph 69, Dielectric Gas).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US Patent No. 20140138550) in view of Khoury (WO Patent No. 2016007417) and further in view of Park (WO Patent No. 2014134595), Welsh (US Patent No. 20030072411), Crowley (US Patent No. 9312108), and Barry (US Patent No. 6445138).
Regrading Claim 16, Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley fails to teach that the magnetron has a water connection for cooling.
Barry teaches a water-cooled Magnetron (Abstract Water-cooled Magnetron) where the magnetron further comprises: a water connection for cooling at least one component of the device (Figure 2, Water Flow 120 cools down Magnetron 110 using water from water tank 106).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang in view of Khoury, Park, Welsh, and Crowley to incorporate a water connection for cooling as stated in Barry. The water cooling helps increase the life of the magnetron (Col 2 Line 49-64, Water cooled Magnetron).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed December 4th, 2025, with respect to Claims 1-2, 5-6, 9, and 13-14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-11, filed December 4th, 2025, with respect to the rejection of Claim under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
Applicants argues that the electromagnetic compatibility shield of the prior art is not strong enough to handle high energies. However, the applicant fails to claim the range that the shield is capable of handling. Furthermore, "The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference.... Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art." In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
Applicants argues that Yang does not teach that “the optical fiber communication channel routes data away from the high voltage pulse connection”. However, that limitation is taught by Crowley in combination with Yang. One cannot show non obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references (MPEP 2145(IV)).
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-11, filed December 4th, 2025, with respect to the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The Amended Claim 1 adds the new limitations of an Electron Gun and a Gantry. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Welsh.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new 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 HAMZEH HICHAM AMIN whose telephone number is (571)272-4235. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 4:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/HAMZEH HICHAM AMIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761