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 .
In the amendment filed on 07/21/26, applicants have amended claims 10-11 and cancelled claims 13 and 19. The 102 rejections of claims 10-13, 18-19 and 22-23 over the reference to JPH 06299146A alone and/or in view of KR 100795440 and Marsh et al; and Marsh et al (US 8,225,745 B2) in view of JP-2009-147356A have been withdrawn in view of the amendment. However, claims 10-12, 14-18 and 20-23 have been found rejectable over the reference to JPH 06299146A in view of CN 106467317A and others as described below).
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.
Claim(s) 10-12, 18 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JPH 06299146A in view of CN 106467317A.
Regarding claim 10, JP'146 teaches (see Fig 1 and English Translation pages 1-
7) a raw material supply device (see Fig 1) that generates a reactive gas from a solution
obtained by dissolving solid raw material in a solvent or a dispersion obtained by
dispersing the solid raw material in a dispersion medium (see English Translation on
page 4 for a solid or liquid raw material), the raw material supply device (see Fig 1)
comprising: a container (2) configured to store the solution or the dispersion; an injector
(supply pipe 51) configured to inject the solution or the dispersion into the container; an
exhaust port (21) configured to evacuate an interior of the container; and a filter (22)
provided in the container and configured to partition the interior of the container into a
plurality of regions including a first region in which the injector is provided and a second
region in which the exhaust port is provided (see Fig 1 for the areas above and below
the filter, the 2ⁿᵈ region being above the filter), wherein the second region is located above the first region. JP’146 lacks teaching a tip portion of the injector inserted into the container, although it would have been an obvious matter of design choice, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/arrangement of a component. In any event, CN’317 for instance teaches (see Figure) feed pipe 3 with a tip inserted/extending in the reaction container (chamber 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to insert the tip portion of the injector or supply pipe into the container to supply the medium at the desired location within the container/chamber.
As to claim 11, in JP'146 the filter (22) is provided substantially horizontally within
the container (see Fig 1).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, in JP'146 the filter is capable of being made of a
porous material (since the gas is let through and the powder is held on top of the filter)
Regarding claim 22, in JP'146 the dispersion is a slurry or colloidal solution
(thetramethylsilane with phosphor powder).
As to claim 23, JP'146 teaches a heater (8) configured to heat the container.
Claim(s) 14-17 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over JPH 06299146A in view of CN 106467317A as applied to claim 10 and further in view of KR 100795440 and Marsh et al (8,225,745).
As to claims 14 and 20, JP'146 lacks teaching an exhaust port (21) connected to
a processing apparatus. However, KR'440 teaches a processing apparatus (vacuum
pump 84). Marsh et al also teaches a line (21, 51) connected to a process apparatus
(reaction chamber 20 and a waste storage 50). It would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect
the exhaust port to a processing station in JP'146 to deposit the fluorescent material
onto a substrate or collect the solvent used in the reaction tube.
As to claims 15 and 21, the exhaust port of JP'146 as modified by the exhaust
The KR'440 can evacuate the interior of the container (2).
Regarding claim 16, in JP'146 the dispersion is a slurry or colloidal solution
(thetramethylsilane with a phosphor powder).
As to claim 17, JP'146 teaches (see Fig 1) a heater (8) configured to heat the
container.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
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 YEWEBDAR T TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1238. The examiner can normally be reached 7.00-3:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
YEWEBDAR T. TADESSE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
/YEWEBDAR T TADESSE/
Prosecution Insights