CTFR 18/291,842 CTFR 78501 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-2 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a1 as being anticipated by Yun et al. (US 20190011379) . Regarding claim 1, Yun teaches an X-ray analyzer comprising: an excitation source 80 configured to irradiate a sample with an excitation ray; an analyzing crystal 3710 configured to spectrally disperse characteristic X-rays for each wavelength, the characteristic X-rays being generated by the sample irradiated with the excitation ray; and a plurality of detection elements 290 arranged to each detect intensity of a characteristic X-ray for each wavelength, the characteristic X-ray being spectrally dispersed by the analyzing crystal, wherein the characteristic X-ray spectrally dispersed at a middle point of an effective surface of the analyzing crystal reaches a middle point of a detection surface of the plurality of detection elements, and wherein an angle between a direction of the characteristic X-ray spectrally dispersed at the middle point of an effective surface of the analyzing crystal and an array direction of the plurality of detection elements is either less than 80 degrees or more than 100 degrees (figure 10). Regarding claim 2, Yun teaches the angle is less than 70 degrees or 120 degrees or more (figure 10). Regarding claim 7, Yun teaches a control device configured to analyze the sample based on an X-ray spectrum generated from the wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by each of the plurality of detection elements and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements, wherein the plurality of detection elements are configured so that the range of wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by the entire plurality of detection elements is narrower and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements are lower than when the angle is 90 degrees (para 88+). Regarding claim 8 Yun teaches the control device is configured to analyze the sample based on an X-ray spectrum generated from the wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by each of the plurality of detection elements and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements, wherein the plurality of detection elements are configured so that the range of wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by the entire plurality of detection elements is narrower and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements are lower than when the angle is 90 degrees (para 88+). Regarding claim 9 Yun teaches the effective surface of the analyzing crystal is a surface onto which the characteristic X-rays incident on effective areas of the plurality of detection elements are dispersed, among the characteristic X-rays dispersed by the analyzing crystal (figure 10) . 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-2 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a1 as being anticipated by Sato et al. (US 20170160213) . Regarding claim 1, Sato teaches an X-ray analyzer comprising: an excitation source 12 configured to irradiate a sample with an excitation ray; an analyzing crystal 14 configured to spectrally disperse characteristic X-rays for each wavelength, the characteristic X-rays being generated by the sample irradiated with the excitation ray; and a plurality of detection elements 15 arranged to each detect intensity of a characteristic X-ray for each wavelength, the characteristic X-ray being spectrally dispersed by the analyzing crystal, wherein the characteristic X-ray spectrally dispersed at a middle point of an effective surface of the analyzing crystal reaches a middle point of a detection surface of the plurality of detection elements, and wherein an angle between a direction of the characteristic X-ray spectrally dispersed at the middle point of an effective surface of the analyzing crystal and an array direction of the plurality of detection elements is either less than 80 degrees or more than 100 degrees (figures 1 and 6b). Regarding claim 2, Sato teaches the angle is less than 70 degrees or 120 degrees or more (figure 6b). Regarding claim 7, Sato teaches a control device configured to analyze the sample based on an X-ray spectrum generated from the wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by each of the plurality of detection elements and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements, wherein the plurality of detection elements are configured so that the range of wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by the entire plurality of detection elements is narrower and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements are lower than when the angle is 90 degrees (para 75+). Regarding claim 8 Sato teaches the control device is configured to analyze the sample based on an X-ray spectrum generated from the wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by each of the plurality of detection elements and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements, wherein the plurality of detection elements are configured so that the range of wavelengths of characteristic X-rays detected by the entire plurality of detection elements is narrower and the intensities detected by each of the plurality of detection elements are lower than when the angle is 90 degrees (para 75+). Regarding claim 9 Sato teaches the effective surface of the analyzing crystal is a surface onto which the characteristic X-rays incident on effective areas of the plurality of detection elements are dispersed, among the characteristic X-rays dispersed by the analyzing crystal (para 75+) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (WO 2019064868) in view Yun et al. (US 20190011379) . Regarding claim 1, Sato teaches an X-ray analyzer comprising: an excitation source 11 configured to irradiate a sample with an excitation ray; an analyzing crystal 13 configured to spectrally disperse characteristic X-rays for each wavelength, the characteristic X-rays being generated by the sample irradiated with the excitation ray; and a plurality of detection elements 141 arranged to each detect intensity of a characteristic X-ray for each wavelength, the characteristic X-ray being spectrally dispersed by the analyzing crystal, wherein the characteristic X-ray spectrally dispersed at a middle point of an effective surface of the analyzing crystal reaches a middle point of a detection surface of the plurality of detection elements, and wherein an angle between a direction of the characteristic X-ray spectrally dispersed at the middle point of an effective surface of the analyzing crystal and an array direction of the plurality of detection elements (figure 1). However Sato fails to teach direction is either less than 80 degrees or more than 100 degrees. Yun teaches direction is either less than 80 degrees or more than 100 degrees (figure 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the direction of Sato with the direction as taught by Yun, since it would provide higher collection efficiency (para 113). Regarding claim 2, Yun teaches the angle is less than 70 degrees or 120 degrees or more (figure 10). Regarding claim 3, Sato fails to teach the angle is 30 degrees. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adapt the angle, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Thus, one would be motivated to adapt the claimed angle to provide better results. Regarding claim 4, Sato teaches a drive unit 16 configured to move the plurality of detection elements to change the angle. Regarding claim 5, Sato teaches a signal processor 162 configured to analyze the sample based on the intensity of the characteristic X-ray for each wavelength and control the drive unit, the intensity being detected by the plurality of detection elements, and wherein the signal processor is configured to accept an input for a wavelength range for analyzing the sample from a user, analyze the sample based on the intensity for each wavelength included within the input wavelength range out of the intensities for each wavelength detected by the plurality of detection elements, and control the drive unit such that the angle becomes a value corresponding to a width in the wavelength range input by the user to move the plurality of detection elements . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim 6 is allowed. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 6, the prior art fails to teach the controller configured to set a first mode and a second mode, wherein the drive unit is configured to move the plurality of detection elements such that the angle belongs to a range of 80 degrees or more and less than 100 degrees in a case where the first mode is set, and move the plurality of detection elements such that the angle belongs to a range of less than 80 degrees and 100 degrees or more in a case where the second mode is set as claimed in independent claim 6 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOON K SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2494. The examiner can normally be reached M to Th 10am to 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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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. /HOON K SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/291,842 Page 2 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/291,842 Page 3 Art Unit: 2884
Prosecution Insights