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 § 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sandkuijl et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 202103331373, from hereinafter “Sand”).
In regards to claims 1 and 20, Sand teaches an apparatus and method for analyzing a sample (see abstract), the apparatus and method comprising a laser section comprising a laser arranged to direct a laser in a first direction towards the sample, for ablating an ionizing at least a portion of the sample to generate ions (paragraphs 0048-0049, 0058-0066, 0225, etc.), an ion source section comprising a sample holder for holding the sample (FIG. 2, sample 207), at least one component arranged to apply an electric field for extracting at least a portion of the ions to form an ion beam traveling in a second direction (paragraphs 0414-0415) and a time-of-flight section comprising a detector arranged to receive the ion beam (see, i.e., paragraphs 0414-0415).
In regards to claims 2-3, Sand teaches that the second direction is generally orthogonal to the first direction (paragraph 0225).
In regards to claim 4, Sand teaches that the ToF section is arranged so that the detector receives the ion beam while the ion beam travels in the second direction (see FIG. 11).
In regards to claims 5-6, Sand teaches that the at least one component comprises an extraction plate that is arranged in the ion source section adjacent to the sample holder and at an opposing side from the repeller plate, and is configured to receive a positive voltage to generate the electric field (paragraphs 0413-0417).
In regards to claim 7, Sand teaches that the extraction plate comprises a central hole that is arranged for the ion beam to pass through while the ion beam travels in the second direction (paragraphs 0413-0417).
In regards to claim 11, Sand teaches that the detector is configured to be biased with a negative voltage (paragraphs 0414-0417).
In regards to claim 12, Sand teaches that the laser consists of a pulsed laser (see, i.e., paragraph 0011).
In regards to claim 13, Sand teaches that the detector consists of a ToF detector that is configured to record the arrival of an ion bunch generated by a laser pulse (FIGS. 7, 8 and 9A-9B illustrate ion bunches).
In regards to claim 14, Sand teaches that the laser is arranged to fire the laser directly onto a surface of the sample (see FIG. 12 and associated text).
In regards to claims 15-16, Sand teaches that the laser is mounted on a movable platform, wherein the platform is configured for motorized pitch and yaw adjustment (paragraphs 0225-0227).
In regards to claim 17, Sand teaches a camera for monitoring the laser beam on the sample (see at least paragraph 0095).
In regards to claim 18, Sand teaches that the ion source section is housed in a vacuum chamber, the ToF section is housed inside a vacuum pipe, and the vacuum chamber and the vacuum pipe are connected to form a single vacuum containment unit (paragraphs 0408-0412).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE M IPPOLITO whose telephone number is (571)270-7449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:00am-4:00pm Mountain Time.
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 H 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.
/NICOLE M IPPOLITO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881