DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 November 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 20 November 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The remarks take the position that Lane Bartock and Kim teach an electrode is inserted in a sliding manner and then attached to the base and therefore fails to disclose the electrode is slidably attached to the bobbin. This has not been found persuasive because the claim does not require any mechanism to provide attachment and mechanism to facilitate sliding. Therefore, inserting into the base of the bobbin is sufficient to meet the requirement for slidably attached because the electrode is attached by sliding the electrode into the bobbin. In otherwords, slidably attached is interpreted to mean attached by sliding. Even interpreting slidably attached to mean attached while sliding, Lane teaches barbs 25 provide for force fit securement of the terminal within a recess 17, thus by insertion of the terminal 15 into 17 the barbs attach the terminal 15 to bobbin 11 and further insertion (i.e. sliding) by force improves the securement, thus slidably attached.
The remarks continue by taking the position that the references are silent with regards to “a position of the electrode varies depending on a mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electrical heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin”. This does not distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art because there is claimed no structure to provide the mechanical tension to the connection portion between the electrical heating wire and the electrode. Therefore, a user applying a force to the connection portion between the wire and the electrode, the electrode varies position while it is attached, for instance by grasping the electrode to provide tension by the connection portion and jiggling the electrode (in Lane). In Bartock, the position may be varied by bending the tab 52 where the wire 60 is connected while the terminal 42 is attached to the bobbin. Therefore, even as amended the claims fails to distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art. Additionally, upon further search and consideration, Schwing was found to make obvious claim 1 as discussed herein below.
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.
Claims 1-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode” is vague and indefinite because the claim does not provide a discernable boundary on what performs the function. The recited function does not follow from the structure recited in the claim i.e. the electrode, bobbin or wire, so it is unclear whether the function requires some other structure or is simply a result of operating the electrode, bobbin or wire, in a certain manner. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to draw a clear boundary between what is and is not covered by the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(g) for more information.
Claims 2-7 are vague and indefinite by virtue of their dependencies on rejected claim 1.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirza et al. (Mirza et al., “Heat-Induced Conformational Changes in Proteins Studied by Electrospray Ionization Mass spectrometry”, Analytical Chemistry, 1993) in view of Schwing (USPN 2,817,068)
Regarding claim 1, Mirza et al. teach a heater for ionization that is used for ionization of a sample (fig. 1), having:
a bobbin (ceramic rod) that extends in one direction (as seen in figure 1, direction interpreted to be the diameter of the rod);
an electric heating wire (heating wire) that is wound around the bobbin (heating wire wound around ceramic rod).
Mirza fails to disclose an electrode welded to the electric heating wire, wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin, and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion, the electrode is slidably attached to the bobbin
and a position of the electrode varies depending on mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin.
However, Schwing teaches an electrode (clamp bar 22 forms a circuit, thus acts as an electrode see col. 2, lines 39-44) welded to the electric heating wire (col. 4, lines 44-45), wherein a groove portion (slot 13 see col. 1, lines 58-60) extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin (as seen in figure 4), and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion (22 fitted into groove 13 as seen in figure 4), the electrode is slidably attached to the bobbin (col. 2, lines 4-11 teach a clamping pressure to resist removal in a axial direction and col. 1, lines 58-60 teaches receiving clamp in slot, thus slidably attached. While the clamp resists removal, it is inherently slidable in order for the clamp to be received by slot)
and a position of the electrode varies depending on mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin (by clasping or bending welded portion of coil to clip (i.e. welding at 25 see col. 2, lines 44-47 and figure 5) the position of the clip (i.e. electrode) may be varied along the direction of the slot while being attached to the tubular core 10).
Schwing modifies Mirza by teaching how to connect a terminal to the coil so as to provide power to the coil of Mirza.
Since both inventions are directed towards coil assemblies where electric current is provided, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mirza to include the terminal connection described in Lane because it would resolve the problem as to how to provide power to the coils for the heating of Mirza. Moreover, the clip of Schwing properly anchors the ends of the coil to secure them to wire leads and resist high temperatures and corrosion to minimize core breakage (col. 1, lines 28-40).
Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirza et al. (Mirza et al., “Heat-Induced Conformational Changes in Proteins Studied by Electrospray Ionization Mass spectrometry”, Analytical Chemistry, 1993) in view of Lane (USPN 3,663,914).
Regarding claim 1, Mirza et al. teach a heater for ionization that is used for ionization of a sample (fig. 1), having:
a bobbin (ceramic rod) that extends in one direction (as seen in figure 1, direction interpreted to be the diameter of the rod);
an electric heating wire (heating wire) that is wound around the bobbin (heating wire wound around ceramic rod).
Mirza fails to disclose an electrode welded to the electric heating wire, wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin, and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion, the electrode is slidably attached to the bobbin
and a position of the electrode varies depending on mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin.
However, Lane teaches an electrode (terminal 15 as seen in figure 1) welded to the electric heating wire (figure 3 shows the permanent welding of lead 13a of wire coil 13 to terminal see col. 4, lines 3-17), wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin (groove 17 formed in 19 of bobbin 11), and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion (fig. 4 shows terminal 15 inserted into groove 17)
the terminal 15 (i.e. electrode) is slideable attached to the bobbin (during the force-fit securement of the terminal 15 within a given pre-formed recess 17 of the bobbin 11(col. 3, lines 48-50), the terminal slides in a direction that the bobbin extends (see annotated figure below), while being attached to the bobbin)
and a position of the electrode varies depending on mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin (position of terminal 15 (i.e. electrode) may vary depending on mechanical tension applied by user grasping a connection portion between terminating end of wire 13a and terminal 15 and jiggling the terminal while the terminal 15 is attached to the bobbin 11).
PNG
media_image1.png
427
1032
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Lane modifies Mirza by teaching how to connect a terminal to the coil so as to provide power to the coil of Mirza.
Since both inventions are directed towards coil assemblies where electric current is provided, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mirza to include the terminal connection described in Lane because it would resolve the problem as to how to provide power to the coils for the heating of Mirza. Moreover, the slot described in Mirza protects the lead terminal connection from deleterious stress therefore mitigating the risk of damage to the connection point between the terminal and the coil.
Regarding claim 2, Mirza in view of Lane teach wherein the electrode includes a leaf spring attached to the bobbin (Lane V-shaped terminal is spring biased thus acts as a leaf spring (col. 2, lines 45-49)).
Regarding claim 3, Mirza in view of Lane teach wherein the leaf spring includes a holding portion that holds the bobbin (barbs 25, col. 3, lines 46-52 of Lane), and a projecting portion that projects in the one direction from the holding portion and is fitted into the groove portion (15a/b forming V-shaped is inserted into the groove 17).
Regarding claim 5, Mirza in view of Lane teach wherein the electric heating wire is in contact with the bobbin without floating in air except for a portion that is in contact with the electrode (as seen in figure 4 of Lane 13 in contact with bobbin 11a except at portion where 13a contacts 15).
Regarding claim 6, Mirza in view of Lane teach wherein a first flange is formed at an end portion of the bobbin (Lane, fig. 4, first flange 19), and the groove portion is formed in the first flange (17 is formed in 19).
Regarding claim 7, Mirza in view of Lane teach wherein a second flange is formed at a portion that is spaced apart from the end portion of the bobbin by a predetermined distance in the one direction (second flange 35 is spaced apparat from the end portion of bobbin 11), and the electrode is attached to an area between the first flange and the second flange while being fitted into the groove portion of the first flange (15 is attached to an area between 19 and 35 while being fitted into groove 17 via lead 23).
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirza et al. (Mirza et al., “Heat-Induced Conformational Changes in Proteins Studied by Electrospray Ionization Mass spectrometry”, Analytical Chemistry, 1993) in view of Bartock (USPN 3,710,309) alone or in view of Lane
Regarding claim 1, Mirza et al. teach a heater for ionization that is used for ionization of a sample (fig. 1), having:
a bobbin (ceramic rod) that extends in one direction (as seen in figure 1, diameter is interpreted to be the extending direction);
an electric heating wire (heating wire) that is wound around the bobbin (heating wire wound around ceramic rod).
Mirza fails to disclose an electrode welded to the electric heating wire, wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin, and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion.
However, Bartock teaches an electrode (terminal clip 42 as seen in figure 1) welded to the electric heating wire (tab 52 of 42 is soldered to the wire 60 from coil 14 see figures 2 and 5, col. 4, lines 43-46. Note: welded is a product by process. MPEP 2113 recites “"[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." Therefore, since all the limitations of the electrode and heating wire are taught, the method of joining by welding does not distinguish the claim from that of Bartock), wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin (groove 38 in figure 2 extends in an up and down direction is formed in 12 which is part of the bobbin) and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion (fig. 2 shows terminal 42 inserted into groove 38)
the terminal 42 (i.e. electrode) is slideable attached to the bobbin (sliding clip in diameter direction of bobbin towards aperture 38, during sliding procedure clamp is in contact with 30 which is part of bobbin 12)
and a position of the electrode varies depending on mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin (terminal 42 includes a tab 52 for attachment of wires 60 from the coil 14 (see col. 4, liens 43-44),the user could grasp tab 52 where wires 60 are connected to apply a tension to vary the position of the terminal by bending the tab 52 while the terminal 42 is attached to the bobbin).
Bartock modifies Mirza by teaching how to connect a terminal to the coil so as to provide power to the coil of Mirza.
Since both inventions are directed towards coil assemblies where electric current is provided, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mirza to include the terminal connection described in Bartok because it would resolve the problem as to how to provide power to the coils for the heating of Mirza. Moreover, “the clip-on form of these terminals 42 by means of the flange 58 insures quick and easy assembly as of the combination of the armature, bobbin, and shim” (col. 10, lines 59-61).
Alternatively, considering the welding limitation, the combination of reference fails to disclose the wire welded to the electrode.
However, Lane teaches the wire welded to the terminal (see discussion above).
Lane modifies Mirza in view of Bartock by suggesting substitution of soldering for welding.
Since both inventions are directed towards connecting a wire to a terminal, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the soldering as suggested by Mirza in view of Bartock for the welding as suggested by lane because “the terminals advantageously being constructed so as to facilitate the making of welded connections thereto, neither the terminating ends of the coils nor of the associated external leads need be stripped of any non-solderable coatings or insulation prior to effecting such weldments” (col. 3, liens 28-32). Therefore obviating the time consuming process of wire stripping (col. 1, lines 34-36)
Regarding claim 2, Mirza in view of Bartock teach wherein the electrode includes a leaf spring attached to the bobbin (42 clips are U-shaped members spring retained on arms see abstract of Bartock).
Regarding claim 3, Mirza in view of Bartock teach wherein the leaf spring includes a holding portion that holds the bobbin (44 holds bobbin portion 12), and a projecting portion that projects in the one direction from the holding portion and is fitted into the groove portion (Bartock tab 58 fits in groove 38).
Regarding claim 4, Mirza in view of Bartock wherein the bobbin has a cylindrical shape (Mirza see figure 1), and a cross section of the holding portion has a C-shape that abuts against an outer peripheral surface of the bobbin (Bartock 42 is C-shaped and abuts the outer peripheral surface of 12).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirza et al. (second interpretation) in view of Kim (US pgPub 20210296038).
Regarding claim 1, Mirza et al. teach a heater for ionization that is used for ionization of a sample (fig. 1), having:
a bobbin (ceramic rod) that extends in one direction (as seen in figure 1, direction interpreted to be the length of the rod);
an electric heating wire (heating wire) that is wound around the bobbin (heating wire wound around ceramic rod).
Mirza fails to disclose an electrode welded to the electric heating wire, wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin, and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion, the electrode is slidable in the one direction with respect to the bobbin while being attached to the bobbin.
However, Kim teaches an electrode (50a, see figures 4-6) welded to the electric heating wire ([0046] teaches coil connected to lead pin. Note: while welding is not disclosed, this is a product by process, therefore does not provide a patentable distinction because the end product (wire connected to the electrode) is still the same, see the discussion above with respect to Bartock), wherein a groove portion extending in the one direction is formed in the bobbin (coupling port 121a forms a groove in 120a extending in the axis of bobbin 10 best seen in figure 4, which receive 50a), and
the electrode is fitted into the groove portion ([0040]), the electrode is slidably attached to the bobbin (fig. 4 shows port 121a-122d without lead pins and figure 6 shows pins 50a inserted into a coupling port, in order to place the pin, thus will slide into the port in the axial direction of the bobbin while being in contact with the bobbin)
and a position of the electrode varies depending on mechanical tension applied to a connection portion between the electric heating wire and the electrode with the electrode being attached to the bobbin (lead pin 50a is attached to coil as seen in figure 2 (see coil coupled to 50b), therefore grasping the coupling portion between coil and pin 50, tension can be applied to move the position of the electrode while being attached to the bobbin).
Kim modifies Mirza by teaching how to connect a terminal to the coil so as to provide power to the coil of Mirza.
Since both inventions are directed towards coil assemblies where electric current is provided, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mirza to include the terminal connection described in Kim because it would resolve the problem as to how to provide power to the coils for the heating of Mirza. Moreover, the multiple ports provide a high degree of freedom in selecting a lead-pin coupling position ([0008]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Julie (USPN 3,104,311) teaches a C-clip for retaining a terminal on a bobbin wound in wire.
Chowdhury et al. (USPN 4,977,320), Chait et al. (USPN 5,245,186) and US 2021/0151305 each teach a coil wound about a ESI source.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J LOGIE whose telephone number is (571)270-1616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00AM-3:00PM.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at (571)272-2293. 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.
/MICHAEL J LOGIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881