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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant arguments/remarks, filed 10/06/2025, with respect to the previous 112 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous prior art rejections of claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 7-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims disclose the phrase “the range of frequency”. However, it is unclear if this is meant to be “the range of frequency” or “the range of frequencies” because the wording does not seem correct when being read. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for outputting each of the plurality of transmission signals to an NMR detection circuit in an NMR probe via a separate port, does not reasonably provide enablement for outputting via a single port. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Regarding claim 1, Claim 1 was amended with the features wherein " each of the plurality of transmission signals including a different component of respective irradiation frequencies of the plurality of different irradiation frequencies" and wherein the demultiplexing circuit is "configured to output the plurality of transmission signals to an NMR detection circuit".
The combination of the above two features comprises the possibility that the plurality of transmission signals are combined together and output to the NMR detection circuit in the NMR probe via a single port.
The description, however, only appears supporting outputting each of the plurality of transmission signals to an NMR detection circuit in an NMR probe via a separate port.
Claims 2-13 are rejected for depending on claim 1.
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 1-13 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim discloses “a controller configured to set a condition for generating the plurality of different irradiation frequencies as a condition for frequency conversion by the mixer”. However, it is not clear from the claim wording whether the generation of the frequency-converted signal by the mixer is indeed done under said condition. This should be clarified in accordance with the support by the description, most probably in accordance with the paragraph bridging p.4-5. When doing this, it is necessary to ensure compatibility with claims 2 and 4, which also refer to "the condition for the frequency conversion". An analogous objection relates also to the feature wherein "a difference method or a summation method is employed as a frequency conversion method' of claim 3. It should be defined in claim 3 or claim 1 that the generation of the frequency-converted signal by the mixer is done in accordance with a frequency conversion method.
Claims 2-13 are rejected for depending on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Izumi (JP 2014119346 A. See English translation provided by Espacenet and attached to this office action.).
Regarding claim 1, Izumi teaches a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) measurement apparatus comprising:
a mixer configured to multiply a transmission signal having a plurality of different frequency components by a local signal to generate a frequency-converted transmission signal [See mixers 60/66. See ¶0023. See also rest of reference.];
a power amplifier configured to amplify the frequency-converted transmission signal and output an amplified transmission signal [See amplifier 70 See ¶0025. See also rest of reference.];
a demultiplexing circuit including a plurality of filters arranged in parallel with each other, each filter of the plurality of filters having a different frequency characteristic, wherein the plurality of filters is configured to enable the amplified transmission signal to pass simultaneously in parallel through the plurality of filters to generate[See BPF 88/90. See ¶0033-0038. See also rest of reference.]; and
a controller configured to set a condition for generating the plurality of different irradiation frequencies as a condition for frequency conversion by the mixer [¶0022, wherein a system control unit that controls the entire system. Therefore, there is a controller that controls the mixer to generate the different frequencies. ¶0023, wherein DDS 56 is used to control the frequency for the intermediate frequency which is used with the mixer. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 13, Izumi further teaches wherein during reception, the demultiplexing circuit functions as a combining circuit, and a combined reception signal is extracted from between the power amplifier and the demultiplexing circuit [¶0033-0035. See also rest of reference.].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 2-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Izumi, in view of Kolem (US 5,442,292).
Regarding claim 2, Izumi teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Izumi further teaches wherein the plurality of transmission signals comprise a first transmission signal having a first irradiation frequency and a second transmission signal having a second irradiation frequency [¶0023. See also rest of reference.], the condition for frequency conversion comprises a frequency of the local signal [¶0023. See also rest of reference.].
However, Izumi is silent in teaching the frequency of the local signal is calculated based on at least one of the first irradiation frequency or the second irradiation frequency.
Kolem teaches wherein the plurality of transmission signals comprise a first transmission signal having a first irradiation frequency and a second transmission signal having a second irradiation frequency, the condition for frequency conversion comprises a frequency of the local signal, and the frequency of the local signal is calculated based on at least one of the first irradiation frequency or the second irradiation frequency [Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 3, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 2, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching wherein one of the first irradiation frequency of the first transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals and the second irradiation frequency of the second transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals is a primary reference frequency, a difference method or a summation method is employed as a frequency conversion method, and the frequency of the local signal is calculated based on the primary reference frequency and the frequency conversion method.
Kolem further teaches wherein one of the first irradiation frequency of the first transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals and the second irradiation frequency of the second transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals is a primary reference frequency, a difference method or a summation method is employed as a frequency conversion method, and the frequency of the local signal is calculated based on the primary reference frequency and the frequency conversion method [Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 4, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 3, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 4.
Kolem further teaches wherein the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal comprise a first frequency component having a first frequency and a second frequency component having a second frequency [See synthesizers 17a-17b. See also rest of reference.], the other of the first irradiation frequency of the first transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals and the second irradiation frequency of the second transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals is a sub reference frequency [Figs. 5-6. Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See also rest of reference.], the condition for the frequency conversion comprises the first frequency of the first frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal and the second frequency of the second frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal [Figs. 5-6. Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See also rest of reference.], and at least one of the first frequency of the first frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal or the second frequency of the second frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal is calculated based on the sub reference frequency, the frequency of the local signal, and the frequency conversion method [Figs. 5-6, wherein the hydrogen or phosphorus resonant frequency can be calculated based on the sub reference frequency, the frequency of the local signal, and the frequency conversion method. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 5, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 4, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 5.
Kolem further teaches wherein a frequency, among the first frequency of the first frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal and the second frequency of the second frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal, which corresponds to the primary reference frequency, is a designated frequency that is designated within a range of frequency which the NMR apparatus is configured to generate as an intermediate frequency [See synthesizers 17a-17b. See also rest of reference.], a frequency, among the first frequency of the first frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal and the second frequency of the second frequency component of the plurality of different frequency components of the transmission signal, which corresponds to the sub reference frequency, is a calculated frequency that is calculated within the range of frequency [Figs. 5-6. Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See also rest of reference.], the frequency of the local signal is calculated based on the primary reference frequency, the designated frequency, and the frequency conversion method [See mixer 13B. See also rest of reference.], and the calculated frequency is a frequency calculated based on the sub reference frequency, the frequency of the local signal, and the frequency conversion method [Figs. 5-6. Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 6, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 5, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 6.
Kolem further teaches wherein the frequency conversion method is the difference method, the designated frequency is a frequency exceeding 1/2 of the range of frequency, and the primary reference frequency is a lower frequency among the first irradiation frequency of the first transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals and the second irradiation frequency of the second transmission signal of the plurality of transmission signals [See difference frequency and difference signal. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 7, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 5, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 7.
Kolem further teaches wherein the frequency conversion method is the difference method, the designated frequency is a frequency below 1/2 of the range of frequency, and the primary reference frequency is a higher frequency among the first irradiation frequency and the second irradiation frequency [See difference frequency and difference signal. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 8, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 5, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 8.
Kolem further teaches wherein the frequency conversion method is the summation method, the designated frequency is a frequency below 1/2 of the range of frequency, and the primary reference frequency is a lower frequency among the first irradiation frequency and the second irradiation frequency [Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See the adding of the ωH + ωZF and ωP + ωZF. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 9, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 5, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 9.
Kolem further teaches wherein the frequency conversion method is the summation method, the designated frequency is a frequency exceeding 1/2 of the range of frequency, and the primary reference frequency is a higher frequency among the first irradiation frequency and the second irradiation frequency [Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See the adding of the ωH + ωZF and ωP + ωZF. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 10, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 5, which this claim depends from.
Izumi is silent in teaching the limitations of claim 10.
Kolem further teaches wherein the difference method or the summation method is selected as the frequency conversion method, and the designated frequency is designated in such a manner that the calculated frequency is not a negative frequency, and the calculated frequency does not exceed an upper limit of the range of frequency [Col. 5, lines 8-59. The controller 18 controls switches 32-33. The switching of the switches also results in different frequency input to the mixer. The central frequency of an excitation pulse may be regarded as the frequency based on which the frequency input into the mixer is calculated. See the adding of the ωH + ωZF and ωP + ωZF. See difference frequency and difference signal. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Kolem because both references are in the field of NMR and both references teach transmitting signals at at least two different frequencies.
Regarding claim 11, Izumi and Kolem teach the limitations of claim 2, which this claim depends from.
Izumi and Kolem both further teach wherein the plurality of filters comprise a first filter having a first frequency characteristic for generating the first transmission signal, and a second filter having a second frequency characteristic for generating the second transmission signal [Izumi - See BPF 88/90. See ¶0033-0038. Kolem - See HPF 21 and LPF 31. See also rest of references.].
Claim 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Izumi, in view of Hachitani (US 2016/0187437).
Regarding claim 12, Izumi teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Izumi further teaches further comprising: a probe having the NMR detection circuit [See probe 44. See also rest of reference.].
However, Izumi is silent in teaching a filter bank provided between the mixer and the power amplifier; and a bypassing path provided between the mixer and the power amplifier, and that bypasses the filter bank, wherein the bypassing path functions when the demultiplexing circuit is to function between the power amplifier and the probe, and the filter bank functions when the demultiplexing circuit is not to function between the power amplifier and the probe.
Hachitani, which is also in the field of NMR, teaches a filter bank provided between the mixer and the power amplifier; and a bypassing path provided between the mixer and the power amplifier, and that bypasses the filter bank, wherein the bypassing path functions when the demultiplexing circuit is to function between the power amplifier and the probe, and the filter bank functions when the demultiplexing circuit is not to function between the power amplifier and the probe [See Figs. 2-5, 7, 11-15 and bypassing route. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Izumi and Hachitani because both references are in the field of NMR and teach bypass routes and because Hachitani teaches it is known in the art to use a bypass route between the mixer and the power amplifier when a conversion is not needed [Hachitani - ¶0055-0056].
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 RISHI R PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4385. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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.
/RISHI R PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896