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 .
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 2-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 2 is construed to be indefinite because the recitation “the operation” lacks a positive antecedent basis. Since claims 3-7 depend upon claim 2, either directly or indirectly, those claims are construed to be indefinite by dependency. Claims 5-7 are further construed to be indefinite because the recitation “the triple point” lacks a positive antecedent basis. Claim 9 is further construed to be indefinite because the recitation “the upper limit” lacks a positive antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Troxler (US 11,035,612). The claims are reasonably and broadly construed, in light of the accompanying specification, to be disclosed by Troxler, as teaching:
a drying method for drying an object to be dried which is placed in a chamber, (see title and abstract) the method comprising:
an initial decompressing and temperature-lowering step of decompressing the chamber and lowering an air temperature inside the chamber by operating a decompression pump (see column 4 line 48 through column 5 line 36); and
a drying cycle step that is repeatedly performed a plurality of times to dry the object, the drying cycle step (see column 6 line 36 through column 7 line 3) including:
a microwave heating step of heating the object in the chamber by microwave irradiation in the chamber (see column 7 lines 4-30); and
a decompressing and temperature-lowering step of decompressing the chamber and lowering the air temperature inside the chamber again after performing the microwave heating step by operating the decompression pump with the microwave irradiation being stopped (see column 8 lines 32-42). Troxler also discloses the claim 2 feature wherein the drying cycle step comprising: a pressure raising step in which the operation of the decompression pump is stopped to thereby raise an air pressure in the chamber which has been decompressed and an air temperature inside which has been lowered; the microwave heating step to be performed after the pressure raising step; and the decompressing and temperature-lowering step to be performed after the microwave heating step (see column 8 lines 51-54), the claim 3 feature wherein in the microwave heating step, the object in the chamber is heated by microwave irradiation in the chamber while the chamber the air pressure in which has been raised in the pressure raising step is decompressed by operating the decompression pump (see column 3 lines 4-16), and the claim 4 feature wherein in a channel between the decompression pump and the chamber in the microwave heating step, a valve is disposed with an opening degree set smaller than those respectively set in the initial decompressing and temperature-lowering and in the decompressing and temperature-lowering step (see column 3 lines 31-58)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troxler. Troxler discloses the claimed invention, as rejected above, except for the recited triple point range. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to recite that feature, since the teachings of Troxler would perform the invention as claimed, regardless of that claim recitation and applicants have not claimed or recited to criticality of that feature as being necessary for patentability
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Other prior art references cited with this action, may teach one or more claim features, but do not rise to a level of anticipation, obviousness, and/or double patenting such that a rejection would be proper or reasonable under current Office practice and procedure. References A, N, O, P, cited with this action, are patent publications from the same inventive entity. References B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, cited with this action teach drying methods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN MICHAEL GRAVINI whose telephone number is (571)272-4875. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30 am to 5:00 (mid day flex) first F 6:00 am t0 11:00 am.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571 272 3607. 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.
Saturday, November 1, 2025
/STEPHEN M GRAVINI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753