DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
The request for continued examination (RCE) filed 18 May 2026 has been entered. All amendments therein have been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 4 and 10-20 are withdrawn. Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are further examined herein.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
Claims 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by Harney (US 4,517,069) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Harney in combination with Magladry (US 3,803,043).
Harney discloses a porous metal hydride (e.g., titanium hydride) which has manufactured open-cell pores. Titanium hydride is a neutron moderator, as evidenced by Magladry (e.g., col. 1, lines 9-10 and 47-51; claim 1). If necessary, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have employed Harney’s titanium hydride as a neutron moderator.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harney in combination with Magladry as applied to claim 1 above.
The skilled artisan would understand that minimizing empty space (porosity) creates a denser metal hydride neutron moderator that retains more hydrogen at high temperatures. Thus, modification of Harney to have employed the metal hydride neutron moderator with a low porosity (e.g., 0.01% to 20% by volume), to enhance hydrogen retention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. The result of the modification would have been predictable to the skilled artisan.
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barringer (US 2022/0115149) in combination with Harney and Magladry.
Claims 6-7
Barringer discloses a nuclear reactor comprising a neutron moderator region (210), a fuel region (200), a heat transfer region (structure adjacent/exterior of core), control drums (330), and a control rod [0098]. Note Figure 6. The neutron moderator region (210) comprises a porous metal hydride article [0066] comprising pores (235, 215). A cladding (340, 320, 325) surrounds the article.
The skilled artisan would understand that Barringer can be modified for employment with other metal hydride neutron moderators. One of ordinary skill in the art would realize that a metal hydride neutron moderator can be chosen from various metal materials, necessarily amounting to certain design characteristics (e.g., cost, availability, neutron moderation factor, required heat transfer properties, etc.) obviously more favorable to use of a certain metal materials in light of the specific reactor design.
As discussed above, Harney (in combination with Magladry) shows that it is well known in the art to employ titanium hydride as a neutron moderator. In forming the metal hydride, Harney employs a porous network scaffold (open cell foam). Substitution of one metal hydride neutron moderator for another substantially equivalent metal hydride neutron moderator is within the skill of the artisan. In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Barringer to have employed titanium hydride as a neutron moderator, as suggested by Harney. The result of the modification would have been predictable to the skilled artisan.
Claim 8
The skilled artisan would understand that Barringer can be modified for employment with other metal hydride neutron moderators. One of ordinary skill in the art would realize that a metal hydride neutron moderator can be chosen from various metal materials, necessarily amounting to certain design characteristics (e.g., cost, availability, neutron moderation factor, required heat transfer properties, etc.) obviously more favorable to use of a certain metal materials in light of the specific reactor design.
Magladry shows that it is well known in the art that yttrium hydride is one of many metal hydrides (titanium hydride, yttrium hydride, etc.) that can be used as a neutron moderator (e.g., col. 1, lines 9-10 and 47-51; claim 1). Substitution of one metal hydride neutron moderator for another substantially equivalent metal hydride neutron moderator is within the skill of the artisan. In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929). Barringer [0066] can also be used with yttrium hydride. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Barringer to have employed yttrium hydride as a neutron moderator, as suggested by Magladry. The result of the modification would have been predictable to the skilled artisan.
Claim 9
Initial operation of Barringer’s nuclear reactor would generate a power output within 1 - 20 MW.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered. However, they are moot because they do not apply to the current combination of prior art references being used in the current rejections.
Citation of Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered related to Applicant's disclosure with regard to porous metal hydrides and/or neutron moderators.
The Applied References
For Applicant’s benefit, portions of the applied reference(s) have been cited (as examples) to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection, it is noted that the prior art must be considered in its entirety by Applicant, including any disclosures that may teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 (VI).
Contact Information
Examiner Daniel Wasil can be reached at (571) 272-4654, on Monday-Thursday from 10:00-4:00 EST. Supervisor Jack Keith (SPE) can be reached at (571) 272-6878.
/DANIEL WASIL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Reg. No. 45,303
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights