Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/786,501

INBOARD SHAPING USING A MODIFIED SOLENOID

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jun 16, 2022
Examiner
KIL, JINNEY
Art Unit
3646
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Tokamak Energy Ltd
OA Round
4 (Final)
46%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 46% of resolved cases
46%
Career Allow Rate
81 granted / 176 resolved
-6.0% vs TC avg
Strong +53% interview lift
Without
With
+53.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
225
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
37.8%
-2.2% vs TC avg
§102
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
§112
36.3%
-3.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 176 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Status of Claims A reply was filed on 01/20/2026. Claims 1, 3, and 5-9 are pending in the application with claim 5 withdrawn. Claims 1, 3, and 6-9 are examined herein. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1: “a number of turns per unit length of the outer portion” should be amended to recite “a number of turns per unit length of each of the outer portions” Claim 1: “the second windings in the outer portion” should be amended to recite “the second windings in each of the outer portions” Claim 8: “a stack of HTS tapes” should be amended to recite “a stack of the HTS tapes” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 9 recites “wherein stacks of HTS tapes in the inner portion comprise fewer HTS tapes than stacks of HTS tapes in the outer portions”. Parent claim 8 previously recites “wherein the first and second windings each comprise a stack of HTS tapes”. It is unclear the relationship between the previously recited “stack[s] of HTS tapes” and the “stacks of HTS tapes in the inner portion” and “stacks of HTS tapes in the outer portions” as recited in claim 9. Is the claim intending to recite, for example, “wherein a number of the HTS tapes in each of the stacks of the first windings is less than a number of the HTS tapes in each of the stacks of the second windings”? Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP Publication No. 2007-033144 (“Toshiba”) in view of WO Publication No. 2015/101240 (“Hasegawa”). Citations to Hasegawa refer to the machine translation provided with the attached PTO-892. Regarding claim 1, Toshiba (previously cited) (see FIGS. 1-2) discloses a tokamak (1) comprising a vacuum chamber (3) ([0022]), a toroidal field coil (8) ([0025]), and a solenoid (20) wherein the solenoid is wound within a central column region (12) of the tokamak ([0024]-[0025]); the solenoid comprising: an inner portion (C) comprising first windings extending axially for a first distance on either side of a midpoint of a length of the solenoid; and two outer portions (B, D), each comprising second windings, each of the two outer portions extending axially from a respective end of the inner portion; and wherein the inner portion has a number of turns per unit length which is greater than a number of turns per unit length of each of the outer portions ([0010], [0031]-[0032], [0034]). Toshiba appears to disclose a number of radial layers of the first windings in the inner portion is the same as a number of radial layers of the second windings in each of the outer portions (FIG. 2). However, Toshiba discloses generating a magnetomotive force distribution along the length of the solenoid such that the magnetomotive force in the inner portion of the solenoid is greater than the magnetomotive force in the outer portions of the solenoid ([0006]-[0010]). Toshiba discloses the magnetomotive force distribution is generated by having a winding density (e.g., the number of turns per unit length of the first windings) in the inner portion that is greater than a winding density (e.g., the number of turns per unit length of the second windings) in each of the outer portions ([0006]-[0010], [0031]-[0032], [0034]). It was well-known that increasing winding density is achieved by either increasing a number of turns per unit length of the winding (e.g., by decreasing a pitch between turns; see Remarks dated 05/02/2025) or by increasing a number of radial layers of the windings, thereby also increasing a number of turns per unit length of the winding. For example, Hasegawa (newly cited) similarly teaches a solenoid comprising windings (“coil”) (p. 7). Hasegawa teaches winding density may be increased by increasing the number of radial layers of the windings (p. 7). Hasegawa further teaches this manner of increasing winding density may be used when space is limited in order to enhance magnetic field strength (p. 7). It would have therefore been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date (“POSA”) to increase the winding density in Toshiba’s inner portion by increasing the number of radial layers in the first portion, thereby resulting in a number of radial layers of the first windings that is greater than a number of radial layers of the second windings, as taught by Hasegawa, for the space saving benefits thereof. Additionally, such modification would have been “obvious to try”, choosing from a finite number of identified, predicable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Regarding claim 6, Toshiba in view of Hasegawa teaches the tokamak according to claim 1. Toshiba discloses the solenoid is wound radially inward of the toroidal field coil in the central column region (FIG. 2). Claims 3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiba in view of Hasegawa, further in view of US Publication No. 2016/0232988 (“Sykes”). Regarding claim 3, Toshiba in view of Hasegawa teaches the tokamak according to claim 1. Toshiba discloses the first windings of the inner portion are formed from a first conductor having a first cross section, and the second windings of each of the two outer portions are formed from a second conductor having a second cross section (FIG. 2, [0024], [0030]-[0032]), but does not appear to disclose a radial thickness of the first cross section is less than a radial thickness of the second cross section. However, as discussed above, Toshiba discloses increasing a magnetic field strength in the inner portion of the solenoid, while effectively using the limited space in the central column region, by, for example, increasing a winding density in the inner portion ([0008]-[0010], [0029], [0038]). Sykes (previously cited) (see FIGS. 1A, 2-3, 6A, 7A) is similarly directed towards windings (109, 601, 602) of a central column region (108) of a tokamak ([0001]), the windings formed from a conductor ([0042]). Sykes teaches decreasing a radial thickness of the conductor allows for the use of a greater number of windings within a same space ([0051]-[0056]). Sykes further teaches this increase in the number of windings allows for an increase in current density without increasing current through the windings ([0030], [0051]-[0056]). The skilled artisan would have recognized that a higher current density would result in a higher magnetic field1 (see also Toshiba, [0008]-[0010]). Thus, the skilled artisan would have further recognized that decreasing a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first conductor in the inner portion of the solenoid would provide the advantages of efficiently increasing magnetic field strength in the inner portion without requiring additional space, as suggested by Sykes. It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to reduce a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first conductor, thereby resulting in the radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first conductor being less than a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s second conductor, as taught by Sykes, for the efficiency benefits thereof. Thus, further modification of Toshiba in order to enhance the magnetic field properties, as suggested by Sykes, would have been obvious to a POSA. Regarding claim 7, Toshiba in view of Hasegawa teaches the tokamak according to claim 1. Toshiba discloses the first windings and the second windings each comprise a superconductor ([0024]), but does not appear to disclose the first windings and the second windings each comprise HTS tapes. Sykes (see FIGS. 1A, 2-3, 6A, 7A) is similarly directed towards windings (109, 601, 602) of a central column region (108) of a tokamak ([0001], [0042]). Sykes teaches the windings comprise HTS tapes (200, 301) ([0042]-[0043], [0047]). Sykes further teaches the HTS tapes provide the advantages of allowing for higher magnetic fields, increased current carrying capabilities, and reduced complexity of cooling means while occupying a relatively limited space ([0036]-[0040]). It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to form each of the modified Toshiba’s first and second windings of HTS tapes, as taught by Sykes, for the performance benefits thereof. Thus, further modification of Toshiba in order to enhance magnetic performance, as suggested by Sykes, would have been obvious to a POSA. Regarding claim 8, Toshiba in view of Hasegawa and Sykes teaches the tokamak according to claim 7. Sykes teaches the first and second windings each comprise a stack (102) of the HTS tapes (102) (FIGS. 2-3, [0047]), each of the HTS tapes including an HTS layer (203) (FIG. 2, [0043]), and each of the HTS layers faces radially inward towards an axis of the solenoid or outwards away from the axis of the solenoid ([0043], [0047]-[0049]). Thus, Toshiba, modified in view of the winding density teachings of Hasegawa and to include HTS tapes as taught by Sykes, would have resulted in the features of claim 8. Regarding claim 9, Toshiba in view of Hasegawa and Sykes teaches the tokamak according to claim 8. As discussed above, Toshiba discloses increasing a magnetic field strength in the inner portion of the solenoid, while effectively using the limited space in the central column region, by, for example, increasing a winding density in the inner portion ([0008]-[0010], [0029], [0038]). Sykes teaches increasing current density by utilizing windings having a smaller cross-section, which allows for the use of a greater number of windings within a same space and increased current density (FIG. 6A, [0030], [0051]-[0056]). The skilled artisan would have recognized that a higher current density would result in a higher magnetic field2 (see also Toshiba, [0008]-[0010]). Thus, the skilled artisan would have further recognized that decreasing a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first windings in the inner portion of the solenoid would provide the advantages of efficiently increasing magnetic field strength in the inner portion without requiring additional space, as suggested by Sykes. It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to reduce a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first windings, as taught by Sykes, for the efficiency benefits thereof. Thus, further modification of Toshiba in order to enhance the magnetic field properties, as suggested by Sykes, would have been obvious to a POSA. The skilled artisan would reasonably expect that a smaller winding (e.g., the first windings in the modified Toshiba) would comprise fewer HTS tapes than a larger winding (e.g., the second windings in the modified Toshiba). Thus, Toshiba, modified in view of the winding density teachings of Hasegawa and to include HTS tapes as taught by Sykes and the smaller first windings as suggested by Sykes, would have resulted in the features of claim 9. Claims 1, 3, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiba in view of US Publication No. 2019/0263060 (“Goodrich”). Regarding claim 1, Toshiba (see FIGS. 1-2) discloses a tokamak (1) comprising a vacuum chamber (3) ([0022]), a toroidal field coil (8) ([0025]), and a solenoid (20) wherein the solenoid is wound within a central column region (12) of the tokamak ([0024]-[0025]); the solenoid comprising: an inner portion (C) comprising first windings extending axially for a first distance on either side of a midpoint of a length of the solenoid; and two outer portions (B, D), each comprising second windings, each of the two outer portions extending axially from a respective end of the inner portion; and wherein the inner portion has a number of turns per unit length which is greater than a number of turns per unit length of each of the outer portions ([0010], [0031]-[0032], [0034]). Toshiba appears to disclose a number of radial layers of the first windings in the inner portion is the same as a number of radial layers of the second windings in each of the outer portions (FIG. 2). However, Toshiba discloses generating a magnetomotive force distribution along the length of the solenoid such that the magnetomotive force in the inner portion of the solenoid is greater than the magnetomotive force in the outer portions of the solenoid ([0006]-[0010]). Toshiba discloses the magnetomotive force distribution is generated by having a winding density (e.g., the number of turns per unit length of the first windings) in the inner portion that is greater than a winding density (e.g., the number of turns per unit length of the second windings) in each of the outer portions ([0006]-[0010], [0031]-[0032], [0034]). It was well-known that increasing winding density is achieved by either increasing a number of turns per unit length of the winding (e.g., by decreasing a pitch between turns; see Remarks dated 05/02/2025) or by increasing a number of radial layers of the windings, thereby also increasing a number of turns per unit length of the winding. For example, Goodrich (newly cited) (see FIGS. 7-8) similarly teaches a solenoid comprising windings (“coil”) for generating a magnetic field ([0006], [0011], [0073]). Goodrich teaches winding density (“turn density”), and, therefore, magnetic field strength, may be increased by increasing the number of radial layers of the windings ([0073]). Goodrich further teaches many solenoid design parameters, including number of radial layers, can be adjusted to achieve a stronger magnetic field ([0073]). It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to increase the winding density in Toshiba’s inner portion by increasing the number of radial layers in the first portion, thereby resulting in a number of radial layers of the first windings that is greater than a number of radial layers of the second windings, because Goodrich teaches this as a suitable manner for increasing winding density and magnetic field strength. Additionally, such modification would have been “obvious to try”, choosing from a finite number of identified, predicable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Regarding claim 3, Toshiba in view of Goodrich teaches the tokamak according to claim 1. Toshiba discloses the first windings of the inner portion are formed from a first conductor having a first cross section, and the second windings of each of the two outer portions are formed from a second conductor having a second cross section (FIG. 2, [0024], [0030]-[0032]), but does not appear to disclose a radial thickness of the first cross section is less than a radial thickness of the second cross section. However, as discussed above, Toshiba discloses increasing a magnetic field strength in the inner portion of the solenoid by, for example, increasing a winding density in the inner portion ([0008]-[0010], [0029], [0038]). Goodrich also teaches the windings are formed of a conductor (“wire”) and teaches decreasing a radial thickness of the conductor increases winding density and magnetic field strength ([0073]). It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to reduce a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first conductor, thereby resulting in the radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first conductor being less than a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s second conductor, as taught by Goodrich, for the benefits thereof. Thus, further modification of Toshiba in order to enhance the magnetic field properties, as suggested by Goodrich, would have been obvious to a POSA. Regarding claim 6, Toshiba in view of Goodrich teaches the tokamak according to claim 1. Toshiba discloses the solenoid is wound radially inward of the toroidal field coil in the central column region (FIG. 2). Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiba in view of Goodrich, further in view of Sykes. Regarding claim 7, Toshiba in view of Goodrich teaches the tokamak according to claim 1. Toshiba discloses the first windings and the second windings each comprise a superconductor ([0024]), but does not appear to disclose the first windings and the second windings each comprise HTS tapes. Sykes (see FIGS. 1A, 2-3, 6A, 7A) is similarly directed towards windings (109, 601, 602) of a central column region (108) of a tokamak ([0001], [0042]). Sykes teaches the windings comprise HTS tapes (200, 301) ([0042]-[0043], [0047]). Sykes further teaches the HTS tapes provide the advantages of allowing for higher magnetic fields, increased current carrying capabilities, and reduced complexity of cooling means while occupying a relatively limited space ([0036]-[0040]). It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to form each of the modified Toshiba’s first and second windings of HTS tapes, as taught by Sykes, for the performance benefits thereof. Thus, further modification of Toshiba in order to enhance magnetic performance, as suggested by Sykes, would have been obvious to a POSA. Regarding claim 8, Toshiba in view of Goodrich and Sykes teaches the tokamak according to claim 7. Sykes teaches the first and second windings each comprise a stack (102) of the HTS tapes (102) (FIGS. 2-3, [0047]), each of the HTS tapes including an HTS layer (203) (FIG. 2, [0043]), and each of the HTS layers faces radially inward towards an axis of the solenoid or outwards away from the axis of the solenoid ([0043], [0047]-[0049]). Thus, Toshiba, modified in view of the winding density teachings of Goodrich and to include HTS tapes as taught by Sykes, would have resulted in the features of claim 8. Regarding claim 9, Toshiba in view of Goodrich and Sykes teaches the tokamak according to claim 8. As discussed above, Toshiba discloses increasing a magnetic field strength in the inner portion of the solenoid, while effectively using the limited space in the central column region, by, for example, increasing a winding density in the inner portion ([0008]-[0010], [0029], [0038]). Goodrich teaches increasing winding density and magnetic field strength by utilizing windings having a smaller cross-section ([0073]). Sykes similarly teaches increasing current density by utilizing windings having a smaller cross-section, which allows for the use of a greater number of windings within a same space and increased current density (FIG. 6A, [0030], [0051]-[0056]). The skilled artisan would have recognized that a higher current density would result in a higher magnetic field3 (see also Toshiba, [0008]-[0010]). Thus, the skilled artisan would have further recognized that decreasing a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first windings in the inner portion of the solenoid would provide the advantages of efficiently increasing magnetic field strength in the inner portion without requiring additional space, as suggested by Goodrich and Sykes. It would have therefore been obvious to a POSA to reduce a radial thickness of the modified Toshiba’s first windings, as taught by Goodrich and Sykes, for the efficiency benefits thereof. Thus, further modification of Toshiba in order to enhance the magnetic field properties, as suggested by Goodrich and Sykes, would have been obvious to a POSA. The skilled artisan would reasonably expect that a smaller winding (e.g., the first windings in the modified Toshiba) would comprise fewer HTS tapes than a larger winding (e.g., the second windings in the modified Toshiba). Thus, Toshiba, modified in view of the winding density teachings of Goodrich and Sykes and to include HTS tapes as taught by Sykes, would have resulted in the features of claim 9. Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the prior drawing and claim objections and prior 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections, but have created new issues as discussed above. Applicant’s arguments directed towards the prior art rejections have been fully considered, but are directed towards newly added and/or amended claim language and are therefore addressed in the rejections above. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Prosecution on the merits is closed. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. RCE Eligibility Since prosecution is closed, this application is now eligible for a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114. Filing an RCE helps to ensure entry of an amendment to the claims, specification, and/or drawings. Interview Information 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. Contact Information Examiner Jinney Kil can be reached at (571) 272-3191, on Monday-Thursday from 8:30AM-6:30PM ET. Supervisor Jack Keith (SPE) can be reached at (571) 272-6878. /JINNEY KIL/Examiner, Art Unit 3646 1 http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magin.html 2 http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magin.html 3 http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magin.html
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 16, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 04, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 28, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 17, 2025
Interview Requested
Jan 15, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 15, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 20, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592324
RADIATION SHIELDING FOR COMPACT AND TRANSPORTABLE NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580089
ROBUST AUTOMATIC TRACKING OF INDIVIDUAL TRISO-FUELED PEBBLES THROUGH A NOVEL APPLICATION OF X-RAY IMAGING AND MACHINE LEARNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573509
Micro-Reactor Fuel Sleeve Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562289
FISSION PRODUCT TRAP FOR SALT PIPE AND PUMP SHAFT SEALS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12548687
USE OF SUB-CRITICAL NEUTRON MULTIPLICATION DRIVEN BY ELECTRONIC NEUTRON GENERATORS TO PRODUCE RADIOISOTOPES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
46%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+53.2%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 176 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month