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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The action is in response to claims dated 1/30/2026
Claims pending in the case: 1-20
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim(s) 1 in the relevant part read: “a spin-transparent storage ring preserving the quantum coherence time of stored polarized particle bunches by at least 3 hours”. Since quantum coherence time is affected by at least environmental noise, qubit material, architecture and temperature, it is unclear what criteria or conditions is being used to preserve the state. Based on the claim language, it is also unclear what criteria or conditions may be used to achieve spin-transparency. The limitations claim and outcome without specifying what needs to be done to achieve this outcome. Since there is no one standard in the art to achieve these outcomes, these limitations are unclear. As such, a person of reasonable skill in the art would not be apprised of the metes and bounds of the invention.
Claim(s) 1 in the relevant part read: “qubit having a spin degree of freedom and that is free of quantum effects of particle motion and inter-bunch interaction”. Based on the claim language, it is unclear what criteria may be used to achieve the state that is “free of quantum effects of particle motion and inter-bunch interaction”. As such, a person of reasonable skill in the art would not be apprised of the metes and bounds of the invention.
Claim(s) 9 in the relevant part read: “a spin-transparent storage ring….”. Based on the claim language, it is unclear what criteria may be used to achieve the spin-transparent state. Since there is no one standard in the art to achieve this outcome, these limitations are unclear. As such, a person of reasonable skill in the art would not be apprised of the metes and bounds of the invention.
All claims dependent on this/these claim(s) are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to the virtue of their respective direct and indirect dependencies.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment removes the language resulting in the 112(f) interpretations recorded in the last office action. The 112f interpretations are respectfully withdrawn.
Applicant has not responded to the 112b rejections. These rejections are therefore maintained.
Applicants’ prior art arguments have been fully considered and are found to be persuasive. The prior art rejections are respectfully withdrawn.
The limitations claim a spin-transparent ring with the basic components to initialize and measure. However the limitations as claimed provide no specifics on how to achieve spin transparency i.e. the limitations claim an outcome without specifying how to achieve the outcome The limitations need to be more specific to include what is being used in the invention to achieve the spin degree of freedom i.e. how is the inventor achieving spin-transparency in a storage ring.
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 extension fee 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 MANDRITA BRAHMACHARI whose telephone number is (571)272-9735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 11 am to 8 pm EST.
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, Tamara Kyle can be reached at 571 272 4241. 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.
/Mandrita Brahmachari/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2144
Prosecution Insights