DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claim language of claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
The applicant argues that the prior art “does not satisfy the "plurality of strip-shaped circumferential cooling sheets "and" plurality of strip-shaped axial cooling sheets" as recited in previous claim 1.”” This argument is not persuasive because Overweg clearly teaches parallel and perpendicular strip shaped cooling sheets, as shown in figure 2, that meet the claim limitations of axial and circumferential cooling sheets of claim 1.
The applicant further argues that “Overweg does not disclose or suggest that one of the conductor layer 101 and the isolator layer 201 is arrayed each with an interval along a circumferential direction of a superconducting coil, and the other of the conductor layer 101 and the isolator layer 201 is arrayed each with an interval along an axial direction of the superconducting coil, as recited in claim 1.” This argument is not persuasive because Overweg was not used on its own, but in combination with existing prior art discussed in the application. Overweg teaches two perpendicularly extending layers that, in combination with AAPA, meet the claim limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA (conventional device discussed in paragraphs 3-4 of the disclosure) in view of Overweg (US 10794973) and Huang et al. (US 8903465).
In re claim 1, paragraphs 3-4 (AAPA) disclose a superconducting electromagnet device comprising: a superconducting coil for generating a magnetic field; a cooling mechanism for cooling the superconducting coil; a radiation shield housing the superconducting coil thereinside to prevent heat intrusion from the outside; and a vacuum vessel for vacuum insulation which houses the radiation shield. AAPA does not disclose the claimed details of the circumferential and axial cooling units, or the cooling units being adhered directly to the coil. Overweg however, in figures 1-4, discloses a cooling mechanism having a circumferential cooling unit having a plurality of strip-shaped circumferential cooling sheets (one of 101 or 201; see figure 2 for best detail) arrayed each with an interval along a circumferential direction of the superconducting coil; and an axial cooling unit having a plurality of strip-shaped axial cooling sheets (another one of 101 or 201; see figure 2 for best detail) arrayed each with an interval along an axial direction of the superconducting coil. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have adapted strip shaped structure of the cooling unit as taught by Overweg to the device of AAPA in order to provide cooling while improving eddy current resistance (as discussed by Overweg throughout the disclosure, including the abstract). Huang teaches a similar device having a cooling unit (22) that can be made of strip shaped cooling sheets and is directly adhered to the coil (with epoxy, see column 5, lines 6-7). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have adhered one of the cooling units of AAPA/Overweg directly to the superconducting coil as taught by Huang to provide a more secure connection between the cooling units and the superconducting coil.
In re claim 7, AAPA modified by Overweg discloses that the circumferential cooling unit is disposed at a position nearer to the superconducting coil than the axial cooling unit (any configuration of the cooling unit positioning would have been an obvious matter of design choice).
In re claim 8, AAPA modified by Overweg discloses that an insulating sheet (103 in Overweg) is disposed between the circumferential cooling sheet and the axial cooling sheet.
Conclusion
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 Alexander Talpalatski whose telephone number is (571)270-3908. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM PT.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 5712723985. 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.
/Alexander Talpalatski/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights