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 Status
1. Claims 1, 3, 11-15, 17, 19 and 34-38 are pending. Claims 13-15, 17, 19, and 34-37 are withdrawn. Accordingly, claims 1, 11, 12 and 38 are examined herein.
Drawings
2. Replacement drawings were received on 07/23/26. These drawings are unacceptable. Not only do they not illustrate the claimed subject matter, but they also fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) (“Lead lines are required for each reference character except for those which indicate the surface or cross section on which they are placed.” Replacement Fig. 5 includes ref. 7, which is not associated with a lead line. Again, the replacement drawing also fails to illustrate the claimed tab.
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “removal tab” (claim 38) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 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.
6. For applicant's benefit, the portions of the reference(s) relied upon in the below rejections have been cited to aid in the review of the rejections. While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection, it is noted that prior art must be considered in its entirety, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1, 3, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henriksen et al., US 2019/0311819 in view of Ylimaki, US 2020/0029420.
9. Regarding claim 1, Henriksen discloses a cyclotron target ([0001]; Figs. 2, 4, 6, 7), comprising: a target backing (30), comprising an inner surface and an outer surface, the inner surface defining a target material depression (32) sized to receive a target material pellet (50) the inner surface defining an annular groove (Fig. 4, Fig. 7, [0043]) sized to receive a seal element (34); a target material pellet (50) disposed within said target material depression ([0045]); a seal element (34) disposed within the annular groove (Fig. 4, Fig. 6, Fig. 7, [0043]), a target cover (10+52) removably fixed to the target backing ([0043], [0049]) and defining an inner volume said target cover (Figs. 6 and 7).
Henricksen discloses that its seal element is a rubber o-ring ([0044]). Ylimaki teaches a cyclotron radioisotope production target (Fig. 12) comprising wire seal element consisting of indium ([0111]), noting that such wire seals are preferable to rubber O-rings because they do not degrade under ionizing radiation. Accordingly, a skilled artisan would have been motivated to apply the indium wire seal to the target of Henriksen.
10. Regarding claim 3, Henricksen as modified by Ylimaki makes claim 1 obvious. Henricksen further discloses a cyclotron target, wherein said target backing comprises silver, copper, or gold ([0041]).
11. Regarding claim 12, Henricksen as modified by Ylimaki makes claim 1 obvious. Henricksen further discloses a cyclotron target wherein the target cover has a diameter of 25 mm and a thickness of 0.01 mm ([0058]). However, the cyclotron target of Henriksen would function no differently if the thickness of the target cover was changed, so changing its size is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions and the device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform different than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
12. Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henriksen et al., US 2019/0311819 in view of Ylimaki, US 2020/0029420 in further view of Marstellar et al., US 2020/0171323.
13. Regarding claim 38, Henricksen as modified by Ylimaki makes claim 1 obvious. Henriksen does not disclose a tab on its cover. Marsteller (see Fig. 7) teaches a cover (225) for a radioisotope material (130) disposed on a backing plate (124), wherein the cover comprises a removal tab for removing the cover from the plate ([0159-60]). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention/filing
Would have found it obvious to apply the tab taught by Marsteller to the target of Henriksen for the predictable purpose of “quick release” of the target material pellet from the target assembly of Henricksen (see Marstellar at [0160]).
Interviews
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARON M DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6882. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:00 - 5:00 pm ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jack Keith can be reached at 571-272-6878. 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.
/SHARON M DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights