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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention lacks patentable utility. Claims 8-12 recite the use of a device without setting forth or positively reciting any method steps. Therefore, the method lacks utility under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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 1-12 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.
Regarding claim 1 – Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein each of the chambers” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the chambers” in the claim. Claim 1 recites “these three components” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 recites “wherein these 3 components are connected to one another gas tight and are closed off in relation to the surroundings by means” in lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the surroundings” in the claim. Also, the term “means” is unclear. It is unclear what structural features are required to meet the term “means” as recited in claim 1. What are the structural features that close the components? Claim 1 recites “these windows” in line 17. The Examiner submits this is unclear as claim 1 recites “entry and exit windows” in lines 2-3; and “two cones in which windows transmissive to electromagnetic radiation are inserted and are arranged” in lines 14-16. Therefore it is unclear as to the windows being referred to by “these windows” in line 17 .
Regarding claim 3 – Claim 3 recites the limitation "the inflow point" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the spectroscopy chamber" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner also notes claim 1 recites “at least 3 spectroscopy chambers”, so it is unclear which of the “at least three” chambers of claim 1 is being referred to in claim 3. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the measuring windows" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 4 – Claim 4 recites the limitation "the cover of the chambers" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In addition, the Examiner also notes that claim 1 recites “at least 3 spectroscopy chambers”, so it is unclear which of the “at least three” chambers of claim 1 is being referred to in claim 4. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the windows" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In addition, the Examiner also notes claim 1 recites “entry and exit windows” in lines 2-3; “two cones in which windows transmissive to electromagnetic radiation are inserted and are arranged” in lines 14-16; and “these windows” in line 17. The Examiner submits it is unclear as to the specific windows in claim 1 that is being referred to by “the windows “ in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5 – Claim 5 recites the limitation "the sample fill” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 6 – Claim 6 recites the limitation "the thermocouple” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the substructure of the chamber” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner also notes claim 1 recites “at least 3 spectroscopy chambers”, so it is unclear which of the “at least three” chambers of claim 1 is being referred to in claim 6.
Regarding claim 7 – Claim 7 recites the limitation "the substructure of the spectroscopy chamber” in lines 2-3 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner also notes claim 1 recites “at least 3 spectroscopy chambers”, so it is unclear which of the “at least three” chambers of claim 1 is being referred to in claim 7.
Regarding claims 8-12 – Claims 8-10 recite use claims that do not set forth any positive steps with respect to reciting a method. Claims 11 and 12 recite a method for studying reaction by means of DRIFT spectroscopy, but does not set forth any positive steps for the method in the body of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roman et al. (US 2020/0354291).
Regarding claims 8, 9 and 10 – Roman teaches a method for performing DRIFT spectroscopy by using a measuring cell connected to an external reactor in Paragraphs 0081-0084.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 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. The Examiner submits the combination of features recited in claim 1 are not taught or suggested by the cited prior art. The Examiner considers Fehlings et al. (DE 19910291) to be the closest prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fehlings et al. (DE 19910291) and Thomson (US 2009/0310124) teach measuring cells.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DWAYNE K HANDY whose telephone number is (571)272-1259. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-7PM.
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, Jill Warden can be reached at 571-272-1267. 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.
/DWAYNE K HANDY/Examiner, Art Unit 1798 December 20, 2025
/JILL A WARDEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights