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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
1. Claims 1-26 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
2. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: NPL 2 (“Nuclear Rocket Engine” and NPL 3 (“Thermal-Hydraulic Simulations of Single Pun and Assembly Sector for IVG1M Reactor”) are considered the closest prior art. With respect to claim 1, these references disclose the fuel assembly outer structure, a plurality of fuel bundles each having a casing, and a fuel bundle support structure. Additional references cited on the PTO-892 teach faceted and tapered fuel assembly outer structures and conformal mating of fuel bundle casings with a fuel assembly outer structure. However, although many of the structural limitations of the independent claims may be found separately in the prior art, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the separately taught limitations to arrive at the claimed invention without the hindsight of utilizing the present disclosure as a blueprint. Additionally, none of the prior art makes obvious the recitation of “the circumferential side surface of the fuel bundle support structure is conformally mated with the tapered section of the inner surface of the fuel assembly outer structure.”
3. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Election/Restrictions and Claim Status
4. Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 09/02/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search and examination burden. This is not found persuasive. As explained in the office action dated 07/02/25, searches for the combination fuel assembly and the subcombination support structure would be divergent, at least because the inventions are classified separately. Additionally, the subcombination support structure includes limitations directed to a shape of its openings that are not present in the combination fuel assembly, so prior art applicable to the combination fuel assembly would not necessarily be applicable to the subcombination support structure. Furthermore, the combination fuel assembly requires a particular structural relationship between the support structure and the fuel assembly outer structure, such that prior art applicable to the subcombination support structure would not necessarily also be applicable to the The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
5. Claim 1 is allowable. The restriction requirement among species (see paras 10-12) , as set forth in the Office action mailed on 07/02/25, has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn as to any claim that requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. Specifically, the restriction requirement of 07/02/25 is partially withdrawn. Claims 8-11 and 19-20, directed to non-elected species are no longer withdrawn from consideration because the claim(s) requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. However, claims 27-39, directed to a non-elected invention remain withdrawn from consideration because they do not require all the limitations of an allowable claim.
6. In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
7. Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
8. The originally presented, examined, and allowable fuel assembly is the species depicted in Fig. 34A-C, which includes a fuel assembly outer structure that “includes a plurality of facets” employs includes the non-circular support structures depicted in Figs. 29-31. The allowable fuel assembly examined herein is distinct from the fuel assembly embodiment depicted at Figs. 26A-C and Fig. 27, which has a cylindrical outer structure not including a plurality of facets..
9. Accordingly, claims 1-39 are pending. Claims 27-39 are withdrawn. Claims 1-26 are examined herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
10. 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.
11. Claims 1-26 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
12. Claim 1 introduces “a plurality of fuel bundles having a casing” and subsequently recites “the casing of each of the plurality of fuel bundles.” Thus is it unclear whether claim 1 requires a single associated with the plurality of fuel bundles or a plurality of fuel bundles, each comprising a casing. Claim 2 is indefinite because it recites “the casing of the plurality of fuel bundles.” The disclosure does not describe a single casing associated with a plurality of fuel bundles (see at least Fig. 34C). Thus, claim 1 is inconsistent with the specification, and therefore indefinite. See MPEP 2173.03.
13. Regarding claim 3, there is no antecedent basis for the recitation “the plurality of twisted ribbon fuel rodlets” because this term was introduced in claim 2, on which claim 3 does not depend.
14. Regarding claim 5, it is unclear how the “first section” and “second section” od the fuel assembly outer structure relate to the “tapered section” and the “plurality of facets” of the fuel assembly outer structure introduced in claim 1. Are the first section and second sections corresponding to Fig. 34A 1010 and 1012? If so, then claims 6, 8, 11 are not consistent with the specification. If the first section corresponds to 1010/12 and the second section refers to 1004, then claim 12 is inconsistent with the specification, because there are no fuel bundles in section 1004. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to ascertain the metes and bounds of claim 5, because different dependent claims necessitate different interpretations and because the different interpretations are inconsistent with the specification. MPEP 2173.03.
15. Any claim not specifically addressed above is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112 because it depends on a rejected claim.
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.
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, 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