18229DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/6/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1–2, 4–8, and 10–12 are under examination.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the prior art rejections of record; an updated search has been conducted.
Applicant’s amendments overcome the claim and Specification objections and 112 rejections of record, which are withdrawn.
The amendment 5/6/2026 recites that “all” fuel tubes of the assembly of cylinders of equal diameter. This corresponds to Applicant’s species shown in Figure 7.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Applicant has narrowed the invention to the species shown in Figure 7, as explained above. However, this figure does not show the relationship between the fuel tubes and the control rods. Because the fuel tubes and the control rods are both recited in claim, 1 they must be shown as a single embodiment of the invention or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
This becomes more of an issue for claim 2, which explicitly recites that some adjacent interior fuel tubes are adjacent to control rods, and others are not adjacent to control rods. This is clearly not shown in Figure 7. It is entirely unclear where the control rods are adjacent to some fuel tubes and where they are not.
Similarly, claims 5-6 specify the relative arrangement between “all of the control rod channels” and a geometric grid. Where are the control rod channels relative to the equal diameter but differently pitched fuel tubes of Figure 7?
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1–2, 4–8, and 10–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the fuel tubes having channels receiving nuclear fuel of vertically oriented control rod passageways.” It is assumed this limitation was written in error. Fuel tubes receive fuel, not control rods.
Any claim not specifically addressed in this section that depends from a rejected claim is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for its dependency upon an above–rejected claim and for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 102 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1–2, 4–8, and 10–11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Robbins (US 4,255,236).
Regarding claim 1, Robbins discloses a nuclear reactor comprising: a fuel assembly (20, final fuel assembly configuration, Fig. 7) having: vertically oriented and horizontally spaced fuel tubes (22) providing water passage therebetween, the fuel tubes including outermost fuel tubes (radially outermost fuel rods 22) and interior fuel tubes (fuel rods 22 radially interior to the outermost rods) being fuel tubes other than the outermost fuel tubes, the fuel tubes having channels receiving nuclear fuel; vertically oriented control rod passageways (24) separating groups of the fuel tubes, the control rod passageways having channels receiving control rods (24); a pressure vessel (“pwr fuel assembly example,” Fig. 7) surrounding the fuel assembly (in pressurized water reactors, all the fuel assemblies are within a pressure vessel); a control rod mechanism communicating through the pressure vessel to move control rods into and out of the control rod passageways (all PWR [pressurized water reactor] control rods necessarily have CDRMs [control rod drive mechanisms]); and wherein the fuel tubes further include adjacent fuel tubes not separated by control rod passageways (as shown in Fig. 7, there are adjacent fuel tubes 22 that are not separated by control rods 24) and wherein the pitch of some adjacent interior fuel tubes is different from the pitch of some other adjacent interior fuel tubes (as shown in Figure 7, some adjacent interior fuel rods 22 that are diagonal from each other have a larger pitch and some other adjacent interior fuel rods 22 that are horizontally side-by-side); and wherein all fuel tubes (22) of the fuel assembly (20) are cylinders of equal diameter (as shown in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 2, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein the some adjacent interior fuel tubes (interior 22, 22) are adjacent to control rod passageways (24) and the some other adjacent interior fuel tubes (other interior 22, 22) are not adjacent to control rod passageways (34) (as shown in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein the nuclear reactor is a pressurized water reactor (“pwr fuel assembly example,” Fig. 7) maintaining circulating water through the water passage and further providing a water circulation system for maintaining a water pressure and temperature preventing a boiling of cooling water (this is how all PWRs operate).
Regarding claim 5, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein all of the control rod channels (24) are positioned at intersections of a regular geometric grid having equal spacing in perpendicular directions (as shown in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 6, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein the regular geometric grid provides 17 intersections along each of the perpendicular directions (in Fig. 7, there are at least 17 perpendicular intersections; note that Fig. 7 is only 1/4 of an assembly).
Regarding claim 7, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein a subset of the fuel tubes have a triangular packing of fuel tubes providing three adjacent fuel tubes with equal pitch along non-perpendicular axes: in Fig. 7, the following fuel tubes 22 fulfill this limitation: the fuel tube directly above the label for control rod 24, the fuel tube in the upper left diagonal direction from 24, and the fuel tube directly to the left of 24.
Regarding claim 8, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein a number of fuel tubes is greater than 300 (PWRs have tens of thousands of fuel rods).
Regarding claim 10, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein the fuel tubes (22) have a diameter of greater than 6 mm (table 4 Fuel Rod O.D. is 0.422 inches which is 10.7 mm).
Regarding claim 11, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim and additionally discloses wherein the fuel tubes (22) are cylinders (see Figure 7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 103 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robbins in view of AAPA (Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Figure 6).
Regarding claim 12, Robbins anticipates all the elements of the parent claim. The Figure 7 cited above for claim 1 is a pressurized water reactor. However, Robbins also teaches all the limitations of claim 1 for a boiling water reactor, as shown in the bottom figure of Figure 6, except for the control rod location. The primary difference between a PWR and a BWR, as is known in the art, is the location and design of the control rods.
AAPA (Figure 6) teaches a boiling water reactor fuel assembly (40) maintaining circulating water through the water passage (including 44, 44) and further providing a water circulation system for maintaining a water pressure and temperature permitting heating of cooling water and wherein the fuel assembly (40) provides water circulation through a center of the fuel assembly (44, 44) only within a volume surrounding and in contact with fuel tubes (16). The skilled artisan would have been motivated, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have utilized the water rod 44 design of AAPA for water circulation for Robbins if they wanted a BWR instead of a PWR. These are different types of light water reactors, and the choice between them is merely a design choice made by the skilled artisan.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LILY C GARNER whose telephone number is (571)272-9587. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 CT.
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.
Please be aware that, as of October 1, 2025, the PTO has implemented a policy of one interview per round of examination. Additional interviews require managerial approval.
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.
LILY CRABTREE GARNER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3646
/LILY C GARNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights