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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 07/24/2023. The preliminary amendment submitted on 07/24/2023 is acknowledged. Claims 1-22 are canceled. Claims 23-42 are new. Claims 23-42 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 29-42 are objected to because of the following informalities:
A) claims 29-40 and 42 should read as “[[A]]The composite CVDD focus as claimed in claim …” .
B) claims 25 and 26 should read as “[[an]]the outlet end” since the outlet end was previously claimed.
C) claim 41, the limitation “said protective element comprising a preformed body of superhard material extending radially outwardly across an outlet face of the composite CVDD focus tube” should read as “said protective element comprising a preformed body of the superhard material extending radially outwardly across an outlet face of the composite CVDD focus tube”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The Office interprets the term “superhard material” in light of the Applicant’s disclosure to be a material that has a “hardness greater than 40 GPa”.
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 23-42 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.
Regarding claims 23 (New) and 41 (New), the following limitations are indefinite:
A) the limitation “said elongate CVDD tube being provided adjacent its outlet end with a protective element comprising a superhard material” is indefinite because the term “its” is unclear as to which structure is being exactly referred back to in the claim. For purposes of examination the Office will interpret the limitation to read as “said elongate CVDD tube being provided adjacent [[its]]to the outlet end of the elongate CVDD tube with a protective element comprising a superhard material”
B) the limitation “the composite CVDD focus tube further comprises a body of reinforcing material extending around the CVDD tube and contacting at least a part of its external surface so as to support the CVDD tube” is indefinite because the term “its” is unclear as to which structure is being exactly referred back to in the claim. For purposes of examination the Office will interpret the limitation to read as “the composite CVDD focus tube further comprises a body of reinforcing material extending around the CVDD tube and contacting at least a part of [[its]]the CVDD tube external surface so as to support the CVDD tube”.
Claims 24-40 are rejected as being dependent on claim 23.
Claim 42 is rejected as being dependent on claim 41.
Regarding claim 26 (New), the limitation “wherein said central aperture has the same diameter as or a slightly greater diameter than an outlet end of the bore of the elongate CVDD tube” is indefinite because the term “slightly” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slightly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Where does infringement being and end with the term “slightly”? How would one of ordinary skill in the art know where “slightly” begins and ends? For purposes of examination the Office will interpret the limitation to read as wherein said central aperture has the same diameter as or a
Regarding claim 36 (New), the limitation “wherein the protective element is attached to the elongate CVDD tube by plated metal” is indefinite because the term “attached” appears to be inconsistent with the claim limitation in claim 23 of “said protective element comprising an integral part of the elongate CVDD tube”. How is the protective element integral and then later claimed to then be “attached”? The term “attached” is inconsistent with the term “attached” and is therefore unclear.
Regarding claim 38 (New), the limitation “wherein a cage or other construct is located around the elongate CVDD tube” is indefinite because the term “or other construct”, renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "or other construct"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 40 (New), the limitation “wherein a protective element comprising a superhard material is mounted adjacent the inlet end of the elongate CVDD tube” is indefinite for two reasons, first being that the protective element is already claimed in claim 23; and second how is the protective element integral and then later claimed to then be “attached”? The term “attached” is inconsistent with the term “attached” and is therefore unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 23-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hashish et al (US PGPUB No. 2019/0184523), hereinafter referred to as Hashish.
Regarding claim 23 (New), Hashish discloses a composite chemical vapour deposition diamond (CVDD) focus tube [Hashish, fig 3, 40 and page 6, pp 0060, 40 can be made of diamond and formed by CVD and page 7, pp 0068, 40 can be a composite material, thus making 40 a composite CVD diamond focus tube] for a cutting head [Hashish, fig 3, 12] of an abrasive waterjet cutting machine [Hashish, fig 1, 10],
said composite CVDD focus tube comprising:
an elongate CVDD tube having a through bore extending longitudinally between an inlet end of the elongate CVDD tube and an outlet end of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 3, 54 which has an inlet at the top, near 110 and an outlet at 52],
said elongate CVDD tube being provided adjacent its outlet end with a protective element comprising a superhard material [Hashish, fig 3, the end of 54 is adjacent the outlet 52 and is made of the same material as 54, and page 5, pp 0057, 54 is made of diamond which meets the definition of a super hard material],
said protective element comprising an integral part of the elongate CVDD tube extending radially outwardly across an outlet face of the composite CVDD focus tube [Hashish, fig 3, the end of 54 is integral to 54 as the end of 54 and 54 are made of the same material, and the end of 54 extends radially across the outlet 52 and comprises the whole of the outlet 52 such that the end of 54 is interpreted to also extend radially outward and does not narrow. The outer casing 56 tapers towards the bottom of 54 such that at the bottom outlet of 54, 54 becomes the only portion that has significant structure. The Office notes that the term “across” is interpreted to means that there is at least some structure in claimed direction but that across does not limit the length and consequently does not need to cover the entire face. The Office also notes that the applicant has not claimed that an outer diameter of the protective element is greater than an outer diameter of the elongate CVDD tube portion]; and
the composite CVDD focus tube further comprises a body of reinforcing material extending around the CVDD tube [Hashsih, fig 3, 56, and page 8, pp 0078, 56 may be made from a variety of reinforcing materials] and contacting at least a part of its external surface so as to support the CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 4, the inner surface area of 56 contacts at least a part of the external surface area of 54].
Regarding claims 24 (New), 25 (New) and 26 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the protective element comprises a protective ring or annulus of superhard material [Hashish, fig 3B, 54 is circular and as such the bottom of 54 is also circular and is made of the same material as 54] (clm 24); wherein the protective ring comprises a central aperture aligned with an outlet end of the bore of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, the bottom of 54 is aligned with the bore 52] (clm 25); and wherein said central aperture has the same diameter as or a slightly greater diameter than an outlet end of the bore of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 3, the bore at the end of 54 is the same diameter as the bore 52] (clm 26).
Regarding claims 27 (New) and 28 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the protective element extends transversely to a longitudinal axis of the bore of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 3, since the end of 54 has a thickness Td as shown in fig 3b, the office interprets the end of 54 to also extend outward traversal to 52] (clm 27); and wherein the protective element extends perpendicularly to a longitudinal axis of the bore of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 3, since the end of 54 has a thickness Td as shown in fig 3b, the office interprets the end of 54 to also extend perpendicular to the axis of 52] (clm 28).
Regarding claim 29 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the protective element extends to cover an entire outlet face of the composite CVDD focus tube [Hashish, fig 3, the end of 54 is shown to cover the entire surface area of the end of 40].
Regarding claim 30 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in claim 23 wherein the superhard material of the protective element comprises diamond [Hashish, page 6, pp 0060, 40 can be made of diamond].
Regarding claim 31 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 30, wherein the superhard material of the protective element comprises polycrystalline diamond having intergrown crystals [Hashish, page 6, pp 0060, 40 can be made of diamond and formed by CVD. The recitation " intergrown" is considered to be a product by process limitation. MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even 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 processes." In this instance, the product taught by Hashish is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting the limitation of the claim].
Regarding claim 32 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 30, wherein the superhard material of the protective element comprises chemical vapour deposition diamond [Hashish, page 6, pp 0060, 40 can be made of diamond and formed by CVD].
Regarding claim 33 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the body of reinforcing material contacts and supports both the external surface of the elongate CVDD tube and the protective element [Hashish, fig 3, 56 contacts the external surface of 54].
Regarding claim 34 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the body of reinforcing material comprises a metal or metal alloy [Hashish, page 8, pp 0078, 56 may be made from a variety of reinforcing materials of metal or metal alloy].
Regarding claim 35 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 34, wherein the exterior surface of the elongate CVDD tube is activated to receive a coating of metal or alloy by plating [Hashish, page 8, pp 0077 external surface of 54 can be electroplating which involves activating the surface of 54].
Regarding claim 36 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 34, wherein the protective element is attached to the elongate CVDD tube by plated metal [Hashish, page 8, pp 0077 external surface of 54 can be electroplated which involves a metal and page 8, pp 0078 made of steel].
Regarding claim 37 (New), Hashish further discloses the A composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the reinforcing material comprises a fluid material that sets by chemical reaction [Hashish, page 8, pp’s 0077 to 0078 made of plastic and/or adhesives or epoxies].
Regarding claim 38 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein a cage or other construct is located around the elongate CVDD tube and is joined by plating to a part or all of a faceted growth surface of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 3, 56 and page 8, pp’s 0077-0078].
Regarding claim 39 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein an external surface of the reinforcing material is machined with reference to a centreline of the bore of the elongate CVDD tube to allow the composite CVDD focus tube to be mounted to a cutting head with the centreline of the focus tube bore aligned with a centreline of a water jet orifice or nozzle [Hashish, fig 3, 40 is mounted into 12 and page 2, pp 0013 40 can be machined].
Regarding claim 40 (New), Hashish further discloses the composite CVDD focus tube as claimed in Claim 23, wherein a protective element comprising a superhard material is mounted adjacent the inlet end of the elongate CVDD tube, extending across an inlet face of the composite CVDD focus tube [Hashish, fig 3, the end of 54 is integral to 54 as the end of 54 and 54 are made of the same material, and the end of 54 extends radially across the outlet 52 and comprises the whole of the outlet 52 such that the end of 54 is interpreted to also extend radially outward and does not narrow. The outer casing 56 tapers towards the bottom of 54 such that at the bottom outlet of 54, 54 becomes the only portion that has significant structure. The recitation "mounted" is considered to be a product by process limitation. MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even 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 processes." In this instance, the product taught by Hashish is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting the limitation of the claim].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 41-42 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 41 (New), Hashish et al (US PGPUB No. 2019/0184523) teaches a composite chemical vapour deposition diamond (CVDD) focus tube [Hashish, fig 3, 40 and page 6, pp 0060, 40 can be made of diamond and formed by CVD and page 7, pp 0068, 40 can be a composite material, thus making 40 a composite CVD diamond focus tube] for a cutting head [Hashish, fig 3, 12] of an abrasive waterjet cutting machine [Hashish, fig 1, 10],
said composite CVDD focus tube comprising:
an elongate CVDD tube having a through bore extending longitudinally between an inlet end of the elongate CVDD tube and an outlet end of the elongate CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 3, 54 which has an inlet at the top, near 110 and an outlet at 52],
said elongate CVDD tube being provided adjacent its outlet end with a protective element comprising a superhard material [Hashish, fig 3, the end of 54 is adjacent the outlet 52 and is made of the same material as 54, and page 5, pp 0057, 54 is made of diamond which meets the definition of a super hard material],
said protective element comprising a preformed body of superhard material extending radially outwardly across an outlet face of the composite CVDD focus tube [Hashish, fig 3, the end of 54 is preformed with 54 as the end of 54 and 54 are made of the same material, and the end of 54 extends radially across the outlet 52 and comprises the whole of the outlet 52 such that the end of 54 is interpreted to also extend radially outward and does not narrow. The outer casing 56 tapers towards the bottom of 54 such that at the bottom outlet of 54, 54 becomes the only portion that has significant structure. The Office notes that the applicant has not claimed that an outer diameter of the protective element is greater than an outer diameter of the elongate CVDD tube portion]; and
the composite CVDD focus tube further comprises a body of reinforcing material extending around the CVDD tube [Hashsih, fig 3, 56, and page 8, pp 0078, 56 may be made from a variety of reinforcing materials] and contacting at least a part of its external surface so as to support the CVDD tube [Hashish, fig 4, the inner surface area of 56 contacts at least a part of the external surface area of 54].
However, the prior art considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious “said preformed body comprising part of a former about which the elongate CVDD tube was then grown” together in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim and in the independent claim.
Claim 42 would be allowed as being dependent on claim 41.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liu et al (US PGPUB No. 2012/0085211) teaches a nozzle for a cutting head comprising a focus tube made of a superhard material. Massa et al (US PGPUB No. 2002/0142709) teaches a focus tube made of a superhard material and a surrounding body.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT NEIBAUR whose telephone number is (571)270-7979. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/ROBERT F NEIBAUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723