DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3, 6, 9, 10, and 11 have been amended.
Claims 1-7 and 9-13 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 4, filed 07/31/2025, with respect to claims 1, 3, 6, 9, 10, and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of 06/18/2025 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues prior art Vukotic does not teach:
the first side is coupled to a flange of the X-ray diffractometer, wherein the X-ray diffractometer comprises a goniometer; and
the second side is supporting a specimen in a measurement position for the X-ray diffractometer, wherein a rotation axis of the goniometer passes through a surface of the specimen.
Specifically, Applicant argues the mounting bracket 22 is not mounted to the X-ray diffractometer and that the diffractometer is shown as being below the sample holder.
However, the mounting bracket (22) of Vukotic is mountable to the X-ray diffraction apparatus (Abstract: “The mounting bracket is mountable to the XRD apparatus and is rotatable about a rotation axis”; [0004]: “a mounting bracket rotatably mountable onto the X-ray diffraction apparatus”; [0123]: “The mounting bracket 22 is rotatably mountable onto the X-ray diffraction apparatus”; [0146]: “Furthermore, the mounting system 20 can be configured to be “universal”, meaning that it could be mounted onto an existing XRD apparatus (i.e. XRD apparatus known in the art).”; [0122]: “Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, a mounting system 20 for an X-ray diffraction apparatus is shown. In some implementations, the XRD apparatus may include a shaft mounted onto the X-ray diffraction apparatus near or at the center of rotation of the goniometer.”).
Further, as shown in figures 11 and 20, the channels (124 and 126) created by flange members 117 to provide an unobstructed path which can allow an X-ray beam to be directed towards and reflected off the sample (106) at low reflection angles ([0147], [0174], [0184], [0189], [0196]).
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 10, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vukotic (US 20190178823 A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Vukotic discloses a specimen holder for an X-ray diffractometer (Abstract), comprising:
an angle plate (Fig. 8; shown below), wherein:
the angle plate comprises a first side and a second side, wherein the first side is in direct contact with the second side (Fig. 8);
the first side and the second side are joining each other at an angle (Fig. 8);
the first side is coupling to a flange of the X-ray diffractometer (Fig. 8), wherein the X-ray diffractometer comprises a goniometer ([0016]: “In some embodiments, the rotation axis passes through a center of rotation of a goniometer.”); and
PNG
media_image1.png
633
741
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the second side is positioning a specimen in a measurement position for the X-ray diffractometer, wherein a rotation axis of the goniometer passes through a surface of the specimen ([0016]: “In some embodiments, the rotation axis passes through a center of rotation of a goniometer.”).
Regarding Claim 2: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the first side has a first plurality of holes, and the first plurality of holes are coupling the first side to the flange of the X- ray diffractometer using a first plurality of screws (Fig. 8, above, circled in red).
Regarding Claim 3: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 2, wherein the first side is coupling to the flange of the X-ray diffractometer through a plate (Fig. 8, 22), and the plate has a second plurality of holes coupling the first side to the flange of the X-ray diffractometer through one or more of the second plurality of holes and using the first plurality of screws (Fig. 2, 25).
Regarding Claim 10: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the first side of the specimen holder is coupling to a lead screw, and the lead screw is positioned through a threaded hole on the specimen holder and changing a height of the specimen holder through a rotation of the lead screw (Fig. 3, 40; [0140]: “…the adjustment mount 40 has a bottom portion 42 and comprises a screw 44 mechanically connected with the bottom portion. The screw 44 may be a micrometer screw or a differential screw. Alternatively, the screw 44 may be replaced by any other component(s) or mechanism allowing to make small and precise adjustment to the attaching position 30.”).
Regarding Claim 11: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the specimen holder is coupling to a micrometer positioner, and the micrometer positioner is changing a height of the specimen holder (Fig. 3, 40; [0140]: “…the adjustment mount 40 has a bottom portion 42 and comprises a screw 44 mechanically connected with the bottom portion. The screw 44 may be a micrometer screw or a differential screw. Alternatively, the screw 44 may be replaced by any other component(s) or mechanism allowing to make small and precise adjustment to the attaching position 30.”).
Regarding Claim 13: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the angle is 90 degrees (Fig. 8).
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.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vukotic.
Regarding Claim 4: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the second side has a third plurality of holes (Fig. 8, screws under sample holder 41).
Vukotic fails to teach wherein the third plurality of holes are coupling the specimen to the second side.
Vukotic teaches the sample holder (41) is connected to the second side but is silent with respect to how they are connected, thereby allowing for that which is known in the art for connecting mechanical parts. It is well known to connect two parts with screws through threaded holes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Vukotic and couple the sample holder to the second side with bolts or screws. One would have been motivated to use bolts or screws to provide simple, reliable, and removable fastening to secure the attachment of components while allowing for ease of maintenance, replacement, or adjustment.
Regarding Claim 5: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 4, wherein the third plurality of holes are threaded holes (Fig. 8, screws under sample holder 41).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vukotic in view of Gaddum (US 20140053656 A1).
Regarding Claim 6: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the second side of the specimen holder is coupling to a specimen mount (Fig. 8, sample holder 41).
Vukotic fails to teach wherein the second side of the specimen holder comprises a fork with two prongs, and the two prongs of the fork are positioning the specimen mount (Gaddum: Fig. 4/5).
Gaddum teaches a specimen holder wherein the second side of the specimen holder comprises a fork with two prongs, and the two prongs of the fork are positioning the specimen mount (Figs. 6 and 7).
Vukotic and Gaddum are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of specimen holders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Vukotic to incorporate the teachings of Gaddum and provide a specimen holder wherein the second side of the specimen holder comprises a fork with two prongs for positioning the specimen mount. One would be motivated to make such a modification on the basis of simplifying the mounting process.
Regarding Claim 7: Vukotic in view of Gaddum discloses the specimen holder according to claim 6, but both fail to teach wherein the two prongs of the fork form a tapering angle. However, adjusting the shape only involves routine skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Vukotic in view of Gaddum to provide the specimen holder according to claim 6, wherein the two prongs of the fork form a tapering angle. Doing so would provide improved grip and stability, while also providing more adaptability to the specimen’s shape.
Claim 9-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vukotic in view of Hesch (US 5127039 A).
Regarding Claim 9: Vukotic discloses the specimen holder according to claim 1, wherein the second side of the specimen holder is coupling to a stage (Fig. 8, sample holder 41).
Vukotic fails to teach coupling to a stage through a threaded hole on the second side, and the stage is positioning the specimen and to change a height of the specimen relative to the second side through a rotation of the stage.
Hesch discloses a specimen holder wherein the second side of the specimen holder is coupling to a stage (Fig. 2, 22) through a threaded hole on the second side (Hesch: Fig. 4, 45), and the stage is positioning the specimen and to change a height of the specimen relative to the second side through a rotation of the stage (Hesch: Col. 3, lines 29-35).
Vukotic and Hesch are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of specimen holders for X-ray diffraction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Vukotic to incorporate the teachings of Hesch and couple the sample stage through a threaded hole for positioning the specimen. Doing so would allow for precise and repeatable vertical positioning of the sample stage.
Conclusion
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 MIYA DOWNING whose telephone number is (703)756-1840. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM ET.
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, David Makiya can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
/MIYA DOWNING/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/DAVID J MAKIYA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884