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 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 1, 3-4, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kelley (US 9,097,609 B1) (hereinafter Kelley).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Kelley teaches a leak tester comprising a chamber used in the leak tester [testing chamber for hermetic seal leak detection] (see Abstract), the chamber comprising:
a main chamber [at least one variable size gas space test chamber enclosed in flexible housing 22] for housing a workpiece [object under test 10 placed into the flexible housing 22] (Col 6, lines 53-58, Col 7, lines 16-18, see Claim 1, Fig. 4a);
a sub-chamber [interior gas space of bellows 73 or 76] that communicates with the main chamber [operatively coupled with said variable size gas space test chamber] (see Claim 1, Fig. 4a); and
a volume changing mechanism for changing a volume of the sub-chamber [expandable and contractible bellows 73 and 76] (see Claim 1, Fig. 4a),
wherein the volume changing mechanism changes the volume of the sub-chamber such that a total volume of a space on the outside of the workpiece in the main chamber and the volume of the sub-chamber remains constant with respect to workpieces of different sizes [bellows control size of said variable size gas space chamber by movement of said bellows; structure taught by Kelley inherently capable of keeping the total volume on the outside of the workpiece in the main chamber and the volume of the sub-chamber (37a or 37b) constant with respect to devices under test of different sizes through adjustment of bellows 73 and/or 76] (see Claim 1, Figs. 4a-4d).
Regarding claim 3, Kelley as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the volume changing mechanism controls the volume of the sub-chamber on the basis of size data about the workpiece [bellows control size of said variable size gas space chamber by movement of said bellows; structure taught by Kelley inherently capable of controlling the volume of the sub-chamber on the basis of size data about the device under test] (see Claim 1, Figs. 4a-4d).
Regarding claim 4, Kelley as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the volume changing mechanism includes a piston that advances and retreats within the sub-chamber to adjust the volume of the sub-chamber [bellows may further include plungers, pistons] (Col 3, lines 55-56).
Regarding claim 8, Kelley as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to further comprising a positioning mechanism for positioning the workpiece within the main chamber [chamber cap 88] (see Fig. 4a).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelley as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 2, Kelley as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to further comprising an opening that communicates with a leak detector [pressure sensing instrument 50 having an opening in communication with gas space 37a and 37b] (see Fig. 4a). Kelley fails to teach wherein the opening is included in the sub-chamber. Kelley teaches wherein the leak detector [pressure sensing instrument] comprises an opening that opens into gas space 37a and/or 37b for sensing the pressure in that space for detecting a leak, wherein gas space 37a also includes the gas space in the bellows [sub-chamber] (see Fig. 4a). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Kelley such that the sub-chamber comprises the opening that communicates with a leak detector, for the predictable result of sensing the pressure of the gas space for leak testing.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelley as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Webler et al. (US 2007/0142818 A1) (hereinafter Webler).
Regarding claim 5, Kelley as applied to claim 4 above teaches the claimed invention, except for wherein the volume changing mechanism includes a numerical value control actuator for controlling a position of the piston. Webler teaches a volume changing mechanism comprising a plunger, wherein a numerical value control actuator is utilized for controlling a position of the plunger (Para [0051]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Kelley with Webler such that the volume changing mechanism includes a numerical value control actuator for controlling a position of the piston, in order to precisely control the volume.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelley as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of Kanematsu et al. (US 2007/0119237 A1) (hereinafter Kanematsu).
Regarding claim 6, Kelley as applied to claim 4 above teaches the claimed invention, except for wherein the sub-chamber includes a tubular part, and wherein the piston is disposed in an airtight manner with respect to an inner peripheral surface of the tubular part, and advances and retreats in an axial direction of the tubular part. Kelley additionally teaches wherein the volume changing mechanism can include a piston (Col 3, lines 55-56). Kanematsu teaches a leak inspection device comprising a variable volume chamber having a volume changing mechanism that include a chamber having a tubular part with a piston disposed in an airtight manner with respect to an inner peripheral surface of the tubular part, and advances and retreats in an axial direction of the tubular part, in order to change the volume of the chamber (Para [0034], see Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Kelley with Kanematsu such that wherein the sub-chamber includes a tubular part, and wherein the piston is disposed in an airtight manner with respect to an inner peripheral surface of the tubular part, and advances and retreats in an axial direction of the tubular part, in order to adjust the volume of the variable size gas space.
Regarding claim 7, Kelley as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the sub-chamber includes one or more chambers that communicate with the main chamber (see Kelley Fig. 4a). Kelley fails to wherein the volume changing mechanism includes one or more valves that control entry of a fluid into each of the one or more chambers, respectively. Kanematsu teaches a leak inspection device comprising a variable volume chamber comprising one or more valves that control entry of a fluid into the chamber (see Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Kelley with Kanematsu such that the volume changing mechanism includes one or more valves that control entry of a fluid into each of the one or more chambers, in order to fill the vacuum once a leak test has been completed.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelley.
Regarding claim 10, Kelley teaches a leak tester (see Abstract) comprising:
a chamber [testing chamber for hermetic seal leak detection] (see Abstract), the chamber including:
a main chamber [at least one variable size gas space test chamber enclosed in flexible housing 22] for housing a workpiece [object under test 10 placed into the flexible housing 22] (Col 6, lines 53-58, Col 7, lines 16-18, see Claim 1, Fig. 4a);
a sub-chamber [interior gas space of bellows 73 or 76] that communicates with the main chamber [operatively coupled with said variable size gas space test chamber] (see Claim 1, Fig. 4a); and
a volume changing mechanism for changing a volume of the sub-chamber [expandable and contractible bellows 73 and 76] (see Claim 1, Fig. 4a),
wherein the volume changing mechanism changes the volume of the sub-chamber such that a total volume of a space on the outside of the workpiece in the main chamber and the volume of the sub-chamber remains constant with respect to workpieces of different sizes [bellows control size of said variable size gas space chamber by movement of said bellows; structure taught by Kelley inherently capable of keeping the total volume on the outside of the workpiece in the main chamber and the volume of the sub-chamber (37a or 37b) constant with respect to devices under test of different sizes through adjustment of bellows 73 and/or 76] (see Claim 1, Figs. 4a-4d); and
a leak detector that communicates with the sub-chamber via an opening [pressure sensing instrument 50 having an opening in communication with gas space 37a and 37b] (see Fig. 4a).
Kelley fails to teach wherein the opening is in the sub-chamber. Kelley teaches wherein the leak detector [pressure sensing instrument] comprises an opening that opens into gas space 37a and/or 37b for sensing the pressure in that space for detecting a leak, wherein gas space 37a also includes the gas space in the bellows [sub-chamber] (see Fig. 4a). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Kelley such that the sub-chamber comprises the opening that communicates with a leak detector, for the predictable result of sensing the pressure of the gas space for leak testing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID Z HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/DAVID Z HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855