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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/13/2026 has been entered into the prosecution of the application.
Claim objections are withdrawn due to the amendment filed on 01/13/2026.
Claim rejections for claims 4-6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn.
Currently, claim(s) 1-21 is/are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to claim 4, specification 08/12/2022 does not disclose “wherein the microwave cavity is configured to contain a first volume of gas therein and the reaction chamber is configured to contain a second volume of gas therein, wherein the first volume of gas and the second volume of gas are independent”. In particular, specification 08/12/2022 does not disclose the terms “a first volume of gas therein” and “a second volume of gas therein”.
Claims 5-6 are rejected for being dependent on claim 4.
As to claim 5, specification 08/12/2022 does not disclose “wherein the second volume of gas within the reaction chamber is configured to have an independent volume of gas therein that is less than the first volume of gas within the microwave cavity”. In particular, specification 08/12/2022 does not disclose the terms “the second volume of gas” and “the first volume of gas”.
Claims 6 are rejected for being dependent on claim 4.
As to claim 6, specification 08/12/2022 does not disclose “wherein the second volume of gas in the reaction chamber allows for a decrease in transit time and NO2 formation due to the second volume of gas in the reaction chamber being less than the first volume of gas in the microwave cavity”. In particular, specification 08/12/2022 does not disclose the term “the second volume of gas”.
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.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/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.
As to claim 4, The term “an independent volume” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “independent” is not defined by the claim (i.e., the applicant is to recite which structure is responsible for distinguishing an independent volume from a dependent volume, as in, to which in comparison is the volume independent from? It is not clear whether being independent is equivalent to being discrete or different), the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 5-6 are rejected for being dependent on claim 4.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 1-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert Stuart Ellis Bell of WO 2020/115473 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bell) in view of Xinyu Liu of US 10750606 B1 (hereinafter referred to as Liu) and Mark B. Moran of US 5169676 A (hereinafter referred to as Moran).
As to claim 1, Bell pertains to the instant invention because Bell relates to a system for generation of nitric oxide (NO) (Bell, paragraph [0001]).
Bell teaches to a system for generation of nitric oxide, comprising:
a microwave generator (2.45 GHz 6 kW microwave generator; Bell, paragraph [0042]) configured to produce microwave energy of varying pulse duration, pulse frequency, and power level (a microwave source to create a plasma; Bell, paragraph [0009]; variable parameters were … microwave power input; Bell, paragraph [0048]; the microwave source may be continuous or pulsed in its operation; Bell, paragraph [0028]; frequency… may be one of the available frequencies being either or 896, 900, 915, 2450 MHz; Bell, paragraph [0020]);
a microwave cavity configured to utilize the microwave energy to generate a plasma within a flow of reactant gas containing nitrogen and oxygen flowing through the microwave cavity to produce a product gas containing NO (nitrogen and oxygen is introduced into the plasma containment cylinder 4; Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1).
Bell does not explicitly teach at least one stub positioned in the microwave cavity and configured to focus the microwave energy at a location at which the plasma ball is formed; and
Bell does not explicitly teach the controller being configured to control the microwave generator to initiate and maintain the plasma ball such that the plasma ball is suspended in the flow of reactant gas and does not contact a surface of the at least one stub and the microwave cavity.
Liu pertains to the instant invention because Liu relates to a microwave plasma equipment (Liu, col. 1, ln. 19).
Liu teaches a microwave cavity (microwave source 1, microwave transmitting element 2, and cavity 3 are within the microwave cavity; Liu, Fig. 1) configured to utilize the microwave energy to generate a plasma ball (plasma ball 15; Liu, Fig. 1) within a flow of reactant gas containing nitrogen and oxygen (Liu; Fig. 8) flowing through the microwave cavity to produce a product gas containing NO (Liu, Fig. 1).
Liu teaches to a controller being configured to control the microwave generator to initiate and maintain the plasma ball such that the plasma ball is suspended in the flow of reactant gas and does not contact a surface of the at least one stub and the microwave cavity (controller 9 may control the pulse width, period, duration, voltage levels respectively applied to the plurality of electrode pairs of the pulse voltage; Liu, col. 6, ln. 27-43; the electrode pairs are each independently controlled so as to be applied with different voltage such that a gradient electric field is formed within the cavity; Liu, col. 5, ln. 33-54; the gradient electric field is generated at the plasma ball 15 by the gradient electrode; Liu, col. 8, ln. 28-29).
Both Bell and Liu pertain to a microwave plasma equipment (Liu, col. 4, ln. 61). Bell does not explicitly teach a plasma ball. Bell does not teach a controller being generate a plasma ball. Bell does teach a microwave cavity configured to utilize the microwave energy to generate a plasma within a flow of reactant gas containing nitrogen and oxygen flowing through the microwave cavity to produce a product gas containing NO (nitrogen and oxygen is introduced into the plasma containment cylinder 4; Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1). Bell does teach to a controller in electrical communication with the microwave generator (the applied power, pressure and mass flow can be adjusted for optimal conditions for plasma formation and thereby the production of excited state precursors for NO formation; Bell, paragraph [0047]; the microwave input power was chosen as 3.5, 4.0, or 4.5 kW; Bell, paragraph [0054]). Liu teaches to a microcavity configured to generate a plasma ball and a controller configured to maintain the plasma ball as described above.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell with the plasma ball and controller of Liu for utilizing microwave energy and generated plasma with higher electron temperature, higher electron density, and wider emission spectrum (Liu, col. 1, ln. 34-48).
Bell in view of Liu does not teach at least one stub in the microwave cavity.
Moran pertains to the instant invention because Moran relates to forming a plasma ball (plasma ball 36; Moran, Fig. 2) with microwaves (Moran, col. 4, ln. 40-44).
PNG
media_image1.png
764
1113
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Moran
Moran teaches to at least one stub (since reflected microwave energy from the chamber may be minimized by adjustment of tuning stubs 33; Moran, col. 4, ln. 31-39) in the microwave cavity and configured to focus the microwave energy at which the plasma ball is formed (Moran, Fig. 2).
Both Bell in view of Liu and Moran relate to a forming a plasma ball (plasma ball 36; Moran, Fig. 2). Bell in view of Liu does not explicitly teach at least one stub. Bell in view of Liu does teach a microwave cavity. Moran teaches using at least one stub (stubs 33; Moran, Fig. 2) for minimizing microwave reflection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell in view of Liu with the at least one stub of Moran for efficient microwave transfer with minimized wave reflection.
As to claim 2, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to control a concentration of NO in the product gas using one or more control parameters to adjust at least one of the pulse duration, the pulse frequency, and the power level of the microwave energy (controller 9 may control the pulse width, period, duration, voltage levels respectively applied to the plurality of electrode pairs of the pulse voltage; Liu, col. 6, ln. 27-43; the electrode pairs are each independently controlled so as to be applied with different voltage such that a gradient electric field is formed within the cavity; Liu, col. 5, ln. 33-54; the gradient electric field is generated at the plasma ball 15 by the gradient electrode; Liu, col. 8, ln. 28-29) and a reactant gas flow rate, the one or more control parameters being related to at least one of the reactant gas, the produced gas, an inspiratory gas into which at least a portion of the product gas flows, a prescribed amount of NO, and a patient receiving at least the portion of the product gas (flow for all gas feeds may be achieved by means of mass flow controllers; Bell, paragraph [0032]).
As to claim 3, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 1, further comprising a reaction chamber positioned within the microwave cavity such that the plasma ball is positioned within the reaction chamber (Moran, Fig. 2, teaches to further comprising a reaction chamber positioned within the microwave cavity such that the plasma ball is positioned within the reaction chamber, as Moran teaches to chamber 20 and associated apparatus within the microwave cavity such that the plasma ball 36 is positioned within the chamber 20 and associated apparatus).
As to claim 4, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 3, wherein the microwave cavity is configured to contain a first volume of gas therein (Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1, teaches to wherein the microwave cavity is configured to contain a first volume of gas therein, as Bell teaches to the plasma reaction chamber 1) and the reaction chamber is configured to contain a second volume of gas therein, wherein the first volume of gas and the second volume of gas are independent (Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1, teaches to and the reaction chamber is configured to contain a second volume of gas therein, wherein the first volume of gas and the second volume of gas are independent, as Bell teaches to outlet 11, wherein the diameter of the outlet 11 may be smaller than the diameter of the inner plasma containment cylinder 4 to cause a directed jet of plasma to leave the first reaction chamber 1; the smaller diameter of the outlet 11 results in the first volume of gas and the second volume of gas that are independent).
As to claim 5, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 4, wherein the second volume of gas within the reaction chamber is configured to have an independent volume of gas therein that is less than the first volume of gas within the microwave cavity (Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1, teaches to wherein the second volume of gas within the reaction chamber is configured to have an independent volume of gas therein that is less than the first volume of gas within the microwave cavity, as Bell teaches to outlet 11, wherein the diameter of the outlet 11 may be smaller than the diameter of the inner plasma containment cylinder 4 to cause a directed jet of plasma to leave the first reaction chamber 1; the smaller diameter of the outlet 11 results in the first volume of gas and the second volume of gas that are independent; further, the second volume of gas is less than the first volume of gas therein).
As to claim 6, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 5, wherein the second volume of gas in the reaction chamber allows for a decrease in transit time and NO2 formation due to the second volume of gas in the reaction chamber being less than the volume of gas in the microwave cavity (Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1, teaches to wherein the second volume of gas in the reaction chamber allows for a decrease in transit time and NO2 formation due to the second volume of gas in the reaction chamber being less than the volume of gas in the microwave cavity, as Bell teaches to outlet 11, wherein the diameter of the outlet 11 may be smaller than the diameter of the inner plasma containment cylinder 4 to cause a directed jet of plasma to leave the first reaction chamber 1; the smaller diameter of the outlet 11 results a decrease in transit time and NO2 formation due to the directed jet of plasma to leaving the first reaction chamber 1).
As to claim 7, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 3, further comprising a vacuum chamber associated with the reaction chamber to initiate the plasma ball below atmospheric pressure (the vacuum pump 10, vacuuming the cavity 3 of the plasma reaction device; Liu, col. 9, ln. 21-25, Fig. 1).
As to claim 8, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 1, further comprising a valve upstream of the microwave cavity (Liu, Fig. 1) and a pump downstream of the microwave cavity, the valve and the pump working in combination to decrease a pressure in the microwave cavity.
As to claim 9, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 8, wherein the controller (controller 9; Liu, Fig. 1) is configured to control one or more of the valve (solenoid valve 11; Liu, Fig. 1) and the pump to control the pressure in the microwave cavity (vacuum pump 10; Liu, Fig. 1).
As to claim 11, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to the system of claim 1, further including a cooling component to cool the reactant gas (a water-cooling component; Liu, col. 7, ln. 7-30) to increase NO production.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert Stuart Ellis Bell of WO 2020/115473 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bell) in view of Xinyu Liu of US 10750606 B1 (hereinafter referred to as Liu) and Mark B. Moran of US 5169676 A (hereinafter referred to as Moran) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kim, Taesoo, et al. "Formation of NOx from air and N2/O2 mixtures using a nonthermal microwave plasma system." Japanese journal of applied physics 49.12R (2010): 126201 (hereinafter referred to as Kim).
As to claim 10, Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein the reactant gas includes NO to facilitate plasma formation.”
Kim pertains to the instant invention because Kim relates to producing of nitric oxide (Kim, pg. 126201-1) using microwave-generated plasma. The term “to facilitate plasma formation” amounts to an intended use because the instant claim is directed to a system.
Kim teaches to “wherein the reactant gas includes NO” (the concentrations of NOx generated using mixtures of NO and NO2, combined with a N2/O2 mixture were measured to identify the effect of the initial NOx present in air; Kim, page 126201-1). Kim teaches that the initial NOx molecules present in the source gas had an effect on the plasma reactions, yielding higher concentration of NOx as a result (Kim, pg. 126201-8).
Both Bell in view of Liu and Moran and Kim relate to generation of nitric oxide using microwave-generated plasma. Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein the reactant gas includes NO to facilitate plasma formation.” Bell in view of Liu and Moran does teach using N2/O2 mixture for generating NO using microwave-generated plasma (Bell, Experiment 1). Kim teaches “wherein the reactant gas includes NO” (Kim, page 126201-1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell in view of Liu and Moran with the reactant gas of Kim for yielding higher NOx concentration as a result (Kim, pg. 126201-8).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert Stuart Ellis Bell of WO 2020/115473 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bell) in view of Xinyu Liu of US 10750606 B1 (hereinafter referred to as Liu) and Mark B. Moran of US 5169676 A (hereinafter referred to as Moran) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Warren Zapol of US 2019/0299188 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Zapol).
As to claim 12, Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein a temperature of the reactant gas is reduced up to 50 °C.”
Zapol pertains to the instant invention because Zapol relates to plasma synthesis of NO (Zapol, paragraph [0003]).
Zapol teaches an NO generation system that is configured to be cooled to maintain an NO generator of the system at or below temperatures safe for patient use and contact. While Zapol does not explicitly teach “reduced up to 50 °C”, the instant recitation includes temperatures less than 50 °C. Zapol does teach to temperature less than 50 °C because temperatures less than 50 °C (room temperature, for example; Zapol, paragraph [0033]) would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be safe for patient use and contact. The pump 106 is configured to ensure that the reactant gas is below 50 °C (Zapol, Fig. 1, paragraph [0006]).
Both Bell in view of Liu and Moran and Zapol relate to generating nitric oxide using plasma (Zapol, paragraph [0003]). Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein the temperature of the reactant gas is reduced up to 50 °C. Bell in view of Liu and Moran does teach a cooling component for cooling the NO generation system (Bell, Fig. 1). Zapol teaches a pump 106 configured to cool the reactant such that the temperature of the reactant gas would have been reduced up to 50 °C (Zapol, Fig. 1, paragraph [0006]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell in view of Liu and Moran with the pump of Zapol for cooling the nitric oxide generator for safe delivery of NO to a patient or medical use.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert Stuart Ellis Bell of WO 2020/115473 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bell) in view of Xinyu Liu of US 10750606 B1 (hereinafter referred to as Liu) and Mark B. Moran of US 5169676 A (hereinafter referred to as Moran) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Siegfried Egner of DE 10235036 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Egner).
As to claim 13, Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein the microwave generator includes a first antenna configured to initiate a plasma and a second antenna configured to sustain the plasma.”
Egner pertains to the instant invention because Egner relates to generating plasma with microwaves (Egner, paragraph [0007]).
Egner teaches to “a first antenna configured to initiate a plasma and a second antenna configured to sustain plasma” (a first antenna 23, a second antenna 25; Egner, paragraph [0040] – [0043], Fig. 3). Egner teaches to a microwave generator for the antennas (Egner, paragraph [0042]).
Both Bell in view of Liu and Moran and Egner relate to a microwave generator (Egner, paragraph [0042]). Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach a first antenna and a second antenna. Bell in view of Liu and Moran does teach a microwave generator with a waveguide (waveguide 22; Bell, paragraph [0028]). Egner teaches to a first antenna and a second antenna configured to initiate and sustain plasma (Egner, paragraph [0040] – [0043], Fig 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell in view of Liu and Moran with the antennas of Egner for radiating electrical waves, in particular microwaves, for initiating and sustaining plasma (Egner, paragraph [0042]).
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert Stuart Ellis Bell of WO 2020/115473 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bell) in view of Mark B. Moran of US 5169676 A (hereinafter referred to as Moran).
As to claim 14, Bell pertains to the instant invention because Bell relates to a system for generation of nitric oxide (NO) (Bell, paragraph [0001]).
Bell teaches to a system for generation of nitric oxide, comprising:
a microwave generator (2.45 GHz 6 kW microwave generator; Bell, paragraph [0042]) configured to produce microwave energy of varying pulse duration, pulse frequency, and power level (a microwave source to create a plasma; Bell, paragraph [0009]; variable parameters were … microwave power input; Bell, paragraph [0048]; the microwave source may be continuous or pulsed in its operation; Bell, paragraph [0028]; frequency… may be one of the available frequencies being either or 896, 900, 915, 2450 MHz; Bell, paragraph [0020]);
a microwave cavity configured to utilize the microwave energy to generate a plasma within a flow of reactant gas containing nitrogen and oxygen flowing through the microwave cavity to produce a product gas containing NO (nitrogen and oxygen is introduced into the plasma containment cylinder 4; Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1);
a reaction chamber (a first inner plasma containment cylinder 4; Bell, Fig. 1) positioned within the microwave cavity (a first plasma reaction chamber 1; Bell, Fig. 1) and having a gas volume less than a gas volume of the microwave cavity (Bell, Fig. 1).
Bell does not explicitly teach generating a plasma ball.
Bell does not explicitly teach at least one stub in the microwave cavity.
Bell does not explicitly teach a controller configured to control the microwave generator to initiate and maintain the plasma ball in the reaction chamber.
Moran pertains to the instant invention because Moran relates to forming a plasma ball (plasma ball 36; Moran, Fig. 2) with microwaves (Moran, col. 4, ln. 40-44).
Moran teaches to at least one stub (since reflected microwave energy from the chamber may be minimized by adjustment of tuning stubs 33; Moran, col. 4, ln. 31-39) in the microwave cavity and configured to focus the microwave energy at which the plasma ball is formed (Moran, Fig. 2).
Moran teaches to a controller (power controller 32; Moran, Fig. 2) in electrical communication with the microwave generator, the controller being configured to control the microwave generator to initiate and maintain the plasma ball in the reaction chamber (Moran, Fig. 2).
Both Bell and Moran relate to a forming a plasma ball (plasma ball 36; Moran, Fig. 2). Bell does not explicitly teach at least one stub and a controller in electrical communication with the microwave generator. Bell does teach a microwave cavity. Bell does teach to a controller in electrical communication with the microwave generator (the applied power, pressure and mass flow can be adjusted for optimal conditions for plasma formation and thereby the production of excited state precursors for NO formation; Bell, paragraph [0047]; the microwave input power was chosen as 3.5, 4.0, or 4.5 kW; Bell, paragraph [0054]). Moran teaches forming a plasma ball (Moran, Fig. 2). Moran teaches using at least one stub (stubs 33; Moran, Fig. 2) for minimizing microwave reflection. Moran teaches a power controller 32 for initiating and maintaining a plasma ball (Moran, Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell with the at least one stub and a controller of Moran for efficient microwave transfer with minimized wave reflection and for generating plasma ball for a reaction, respectively.
As to claim 15, Bell in view of Moran teaches to the system of claim 14, wherein the plasma ball is suspended in the flow of reactant gas (Moran, Fig. 2) and does not contact a surface of the at least one stub and the microwave cavity (Moran, Fig. 2).
As to claim 16, Bell in view of Moran teaches to the system of claim 14, wherein a controller is configured to control a concentration of NO in the product gas using one or more parameters to adjust at least one of a reactant gas flow rate, the control parameters being related to at least one of the reactant gas (flow for all gas feeds may be achieved by means of mass flow controllers; Bell, paragraph [0032]).
As to claim 17, Bell pertains to the instant invention because Bell relates to generation of nitric oxide (NO) (Bell, paragraph [0001]).
Bell teaches to a method of generating nitric oxide, comprising:
generating a plasma from a flow of reactant gas through a microwave cavity using microwave energy directed therein for producing a product gas containing nitric oxide form the flow of the reactant gas through the microwave cavity (nitrogen and oxygen is introduced into the plasma containment cylinder 4; Bell, paragraph [0040], Fig. 1);
controlling, using a controller, an amount of nitric oxide in the product gas using one or more parameters as input to a control algorithm used to control the generation of the plasma (flow for all gas feeds may be achieved by means of mass flow controllers, wherein the mass flow controllers are well-known by one of ordinary skill in the art to use an algorithm, such as PID, for controlling flow rates of reactant gases as parameters; Bell, paragraph [0032]);
Bell does not explicitly teach “focusing the microwave energy to a focal point in the microwave cavity using at least one stub positioned in the microwave cavity such that focal point is the location of the plasma ball.”
Moran pertains to the instant invention because Moran relates to forming a plasma ball (plasma ball 36; Moran, Fig. 2) with microwaves (Moran, col. 4, ln. 40-44).
Moran teaches to at least one stub (since reflected microwave energy from the chamber may be minimized by adjustment of tuning stubs 33; Moran, col. 4, ln. 31-39) in the microwave cavity and configured to focus the microwave energy at which the plasma ball is formed (Moran, Fig. 2).
Both Bell and Moran relate to a forming a plasma using microwave (Moran, Fig. 2). Bell does not explicitly teach at least one stub. Bell does not explicitly teach forming a plasma ball. Bell does teach a microwave cavity. Moran teaches using at least one stub (stubs 33; Moran, Fig. 2) for minimizing microwave reflection. Moran teaches generating a plasma ball by focusing microwave energy to a focal point in the microwave cavity using at least one stub positioned in the microwave cavity such that focal point is the location of the plasma ball (Moran, Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell with the at least one stub of Moran for efficient microwave transfer with minimized wave reflection, and with the plasma ball of Moran for promoting a reaction.
As to claim 18, Bell in view of Moran teaches to the method of claim 17, wherein focusing the microwave energy further comprises focusing the microwave energy in a reaction chamber (please see above; Moran, Fig. 2) positioned within the microwave cavity such that the plasma ball is positioned within the reaction chamber.
As to claim 19, Bell in view of Moran teaches to the method of claim 17, wherein the controller is configured to control a concentration of NO in the product gas using one or more control parameters to adjust at least one of a reactant gas flow rate, the control parameters being related to at least the reactant gas (flow for all gas feeds may be achieved by means of mass flow controllers, wherein the mass flow controllers are well-known by one of ordinary skill in the art to use an algorithm, such as PID, for controlling flow rates of reactant gases as parameters; Bell, paragraph [0032]).
As to claim 20, Bell in view of Moran teaches to the method of claim 17, further comprising cooling the reactant gas using a cooling component to increase NO production (auxiliary cooling gas 9; Bell, Fig. 1; cooling the plasma cools the reactant gas in a reaction and improved efficiency amounts to increasing NO production at a fixed flow rates of reactants; paragraph [0019]).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert Stuart Ellis Bell of WO 2020/115473 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bell) in view of Mark B. Moran of US 5169676 A (hereinafter referred to as Moran), as applied to claim 17 above, and in further view of Warren Zapol of US 2019/0299188 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Zapol).
As to claim 21, Bell in view of Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein a temperature of the reactant gas is reduced up to 50 °C.”
Zapol pertains to the instant invention because Zapol relates to plasma synthesis of NO (Zapol, paragraph [0003]).
Zapol teaches an NO generation system that is configured to be cooled to maintain an NO generator of the system at or below temperatures safe for patient use and contact. While Zapol does not explicitly teach “reduced up to 50 °C”, the instant recitation includes temperatures less than 50 °C. Zapol does teach to temperature less than 50 °C because temperatures less than 50 °C (room temperature, for example; Zapol, paragraph [0033]) would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be safe for patient use and contact. The pump 106 is configured to ensure that the reactant gas is below 50 °C (Zapol, Fig. 1, paragraph [0006]).
Both Bell in view of Moran and Zapol relate to generating nitric oxide using plasma (Zapol, paragraph [0003]). Bell in view of Liu and Moran does not explicitly teach “wherein the temperature of the reactant gas is reduced up to 50 °C. Bell in view of Moran does teach a cooling component for cooling the NO generation system (Bell, Fig. 1). Zapol teaches a pump 106 configured to cool the reactant such that the temperature of the reactant gas would have been reduced up to 50 °C (Zapol, Fig. 1, paragraph [0006]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the system of Bell in view of Moran with the pump of Zapol for cooling the nitric oxide generator for safe delivery of NO to a patient or medical use.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pg. 7 of 10, the Applicant asserts that none of the references teach or suggest at least one stub positioned in the microwave cavity and configured to focus the microwave energy at a location at which the plasma ball is formed because “the tuning stub 3 of Moran is not equivalent to the claimed stub as the claimed stub is positioned in the microwave cavity and the claimed stub is used to focus the energy for plasma ball formation.”
The Applicant’s assertion depends on a conclusory statement that the tuning stub 3 of Moran is not equivalent to the claimed stub. The premise “as the claimed stub is positioned in the microwave cavity and the claimed stub is used to focus the energy for plasma ball formation” lacks a clear connection as to how the premise supports the conclusory statement that the tuning stub 3 of Moran is not equivalent to the claimed stub because the determination of whether prior art, as combined, reads into the claimed invention relies not on what the claimed invention teaches but instead on what the prior art teaches.
In the Office Action of 10/14/2025, Bell in view of Liu and Moran teaches to at least one stub (Moran, Fig. 2, teaches to at least one stub, as Moran teaches to adjustment of tuning stubs 33) positioned in the microwave cavity (Moran, Fig. 2, teaches to positioned in the microwave cavity, as Moran teaches that the tuning stub 33 is positioned in the microwave cavity; a microwave cavity in the associated apparatus of Moran in Fig. 2, confines, reflects, and resonates electromagnetic waves for providing efficient power transfer; the tuning stub 33 of Moran is positioned in the microwave cavity) and configured to focus the microwave energy at which the plasma ball is formed (Moran, Fig. 2, teaches to and configured to focus the microwave energy at which the plasma ball is formed, as Moran teaches to forming a plasma ball 36 from passed microwave energy through a quartz window 35).
Further, the Examiner points out that the turning stub 3 of Moran does not have to be equivalent to the claimed stub for the rejection of the claimed invention under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on the combined prior art. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
For these reasons, the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Vineel Kondiboyina of US 2021/0214222 A1 teaches a device for generating nitric oxide.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1254. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:00-16:00.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/JOHN LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
/JAMES LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights