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 .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-4, drawn to an apparatus, classified in G21B1/15.
II. Claims 5-8, drawn to a method, classified in G21B1/23.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions II and I are related as process and apparatus for its practice. The inventions are distinct if it can be shown that either: (1) the process as claimed can be practiced by another and materially different apparatus or by hand, or (2) the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process. (MPEP § 806.05(e)). In this case the apparatus as claimed can be used for radioisotope production.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; and/or
The inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries);
The prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention;
The inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Mr. Robert O. Hunter on October 27, 2025 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-4. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 5-8 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Priority
The Specification at [0001] states that this application claims priority from provisional application 63/412,172. However, the file does not show any such priority linkage. Additionally, application 63/412,172 appears to be for an electric toothbrush. The present application is therefore treated by the Examiner with a priority date equivalent to its filing date of 10/4/2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention because the instant disclosure does not describe the claimed invention with all its limitations using such descriptive means as words, structures, figures, diagrams, and formulas that fully set forth the claimed invention (MPEP 2163.02), claims 1-4 fails to comply with the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a), which is critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976).
The specification fails to fully identify the structure necessary for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave. Independent claim 1 recites “wherein said inner walls are configured to reradiate said laser pulse energy as x-ray radiation; the plurality of inner walls of the hohlraum are configured to reemit said x-ray radiation toward said drive region; said drive region is configured to propagate said thermal wave; a supersonic wave, having a thermal conductivity rapidly increasing in rate as a function of approximately T4.5-5.5.” These limitations are functional and directed to intended or desired results of the claimed system, yet there is no evidence of record to indicate the claimed system has been constructed and tested. Further, there is no objective, experimental evidence to suggest the claimed system is capable of producing these results. The disclosure offers no description as to what features or steps are required to apply a thermal wave and the Specification merely states, “if the radiation temperature is sufficiently high enough and the optimal material and density is selected for the target, instead of ablating the exterior of drive region, a thermal wave is driven into the material,” ([00033]), without suggesting any specific temperatures or ranges that would be considered “high enough”. Not only does Applicant posit the claimed results as occurring in a hypothetical situation, Applicant further does not provide any disclosure as to the specific structures and/or features that would enable the radiation temperature to be high enough to drive a thermal wave. Although Applicant states that application of a thermal wave to an inertial confinement fusion (ICF) target differentiates the claimed system from the conventional systems which apply ablative waves ([00031]) there is no disclosure of the structural features of a system that applies thermal waves as claimed.
Based on the evidence regarding the below factors (In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737, 8 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1998)), the Specification at the time of the application was filed, would not have taught one skilled in the art how to make the full scope of the claimed invention without under experimentation. (See also MPEP § 2164.01(a) and § 2164.04).
The breadth of the claims: claim 1, directed to “A system for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave, a supersonic heating wave,” is overly broad as evidenced by the lack of structure for producing a thermal wave. The last limitations of the claim are merely a recitation of the intended results – “said inner walls are configured to reradiate said laser pulse energy as x-ray radiation; the plurality of inner walls of the hohlraum are configured to reemit said x-ray radiation toward said drive region; said drive region is configured to propagate said thermal wave, a supersonic heating wave, having a thermal conductivity rapidly increasing in rate as a function of approximately T4.5-5.5, wherein the plurality of distinct materials of said drive region are configured to propagate said thermal wave within said drive region without any significant hydrodynamic motion during the 1 nanosecond that the laser assembly is activated wherein said drive region is heated to a same temperature of said thermal wave, and said drive region is configured to evenly heat as it expands in an inward and outward direction to launch said shell region into said central fuel region to drive said ICF Target” – without any recitation of the structure, materials, or steps necessary to achieve these results.
The nature of the invention and the state of the prior art: The disclosure states that the application is directed to ICF utilizing thermal waves ([0008]). There is no disclosure to suggest that the structure necessary for achieving ICF with thermal waves is well-known in the art and the Specification notes that conventional ICF targets are driven by ablative waves, ([00031]). The nature of the invention and the state of the prior art suggests a complete disclosure as to the distinguishing features for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave would be required to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to achieve the desired results of the claimed invention.
The level of one of ordinary skill in the art: The level of ordinary skill in the art is a skilled artisan who understands the concepts of fusion and inertial confinement.
The level of predictability in the art: To the examiner’s knowledge, there exists no guide readily available listing the structure, materials, or steps necessary for applying thermal waves to an ICF target from which one could construct the system according to claim 1. Rather, the inventors set forth desired results without identifying how one could achieve these results. Further, the persistent issue of stability and symmetry considerations in the ICF target art suggests that one skilled in the art could not readily anticipate the structure for utilizing thermal wave mechanisms ([0004]-[0006]). The level of predictability in the art suggests a complete disclosure as to how to drive an ICF target using thermal waves and produce the results as recited in claim 1 would be required to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to achieve the desired outcomes of the claimed invention.
The amount of direction provided by the inventor: The amount of guidance or direction needed to enable the invention is inversely related to the amount of knowledge in the state of the art well as the predictability in the art. In re Fisher, 427 F.2d 833, 839, 166 USPQ 18, 24 (CCPA 1970). Applicant states that “Another effect of a long laser pulse is that although the hohlraum walls are fairly reflective to radiation, a significant portion of the laser energy is lost to the heating of the hohlraum walls. This means NIF targets are unable to efficiently use the energy from the laser” ([0004]), suggesting that a complete disclosure of the structure, materials, and steps for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave is required to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to carry out the claimed invention.
The existence of working examples: No working examples are provided by the disclosure.
The quantity of experimentation needed: Undue experimentation would be required to carry out the claimed invention. According to claim 1, in the system for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave 1) the inner walls of the hohlraum reradiate the laser pulse as x-ray radiation, 2) the x-ray radiation penetrates the drive region forming a thermal wave, propagating as a supersonic heating wave, and without any significant hydrodynamic motion during the 1 nanosecond that the laser assembly is activated, 3) the drive region is heated to the temperature of said thermal wave, 4) the drive region evenly heats to expand in an inward and outward direction, and 5) the shell region launches into the central fuel region to drive the ICF target. The range of performable structures that could produce these results is virtually limitless and it would be unreasonable to expect a skilled artisan to complete the experimentation to identify steps for varying the parameters in the desired way.
Any claim not explicitly addressed above is rejected because it is dependent on a rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “A system for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave, a supersonic heating wave, comprising.” This limitation is unclear. Does the system drive an ICF target with a thermal wave and a supersonic heating wave? Or is the claim intended to recite “A system for driving an ICF target with a supersonic heating wave”? It is unclear the relation between the supersonic heating wave, the system, and the thermal wave as recited in the preamble and in lines 15-16 of claim 1.
Claim 1 recites “a supersonic heating wave” in line 15 and it is unclear if this is the same as the supersonic heating wave recited in line 1 of the preamble of claim 1 or a different wave.
Claim 1 recites “wherein said inner walls are configured to reradiate said laser pulse energy as x-ray radiation; the plurality of inner walls of the hohlraum are configured to reemit said x-ray radiation toward said drive region; and said drive region is configured to propagate said thermal wave, a supersonic heating wave, having a thermal conductivity rapidly increasing in rate as a function of approximately T4.5-5.5, wherein the plurality of distinct materials of said drive region are configured to propagate said thermal wave with said drive region without any significant hydrodynamic motion during the 1 nanosecond that the laser assembly is activated; wherein said drive region is heated to a same temperature of said thermal wave; and said drive region is configured to evenly heat as it expands in an inward and outward direction to launch said shell region into said central fuel region to drive said ICF target,” but does not clearly define the scope of the structure. It is unclear from the claims what structural feature of the hohlraum enables these functions to occur and a skilled artisan would be unable to determine the structure necessary to achieve these results. What structural features of the system allow for driving the ICF target with a thermal wave over conventional ablative waves? The limitations again merely recite a description of a function or result achieved by the invention without reciting the particular structure, materials, or steps that accomplish the function or achieve the result. See MPEP 2173.05(g).
Claim 1, recites "…wherein the plurality of distinct materials of said drive region are configured to propagate said thermal wave within said drive region without any significant hydrodynamic motion…" It is unclear what is considered "significant" vs. "insignificant" hydrodynamic motion as the applicant's definition of "significant" was not provided in the specification and is considered relative terminology. Some objective standard must be provided in order to allow the public to determine the scope of the claim. (MPEP 2173.05(b)(IV))
Claim 1 recites in lines 23-24, the drive region “expands in an inward and outward direction.” It is unclear how the drive region can expand in an inward direction. Additionally, the use of “direction” as a singular descriptor is confusing, as it suggests that the inward and outward directions are the same direction when clearly they are opposite directions.
Claim 3 recites, "the densities of the plurality of distinct materials of the drive region are arranged in a smooth transition from a higher density material on the outside to a less dense material on the inside.” This language is unclear because it the claim does not provide which direction, or refer to an axis, is to be considered to be the outside as compared to the inside of the drive region.
Any claim not explicitly addressed above is rejected because it is dependent on a rejected base claim.
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 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Cornell (US 20200027571 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Cornell discloses a system for driving an ICF target with a thermal wave [0009], a supersonic heating wave, comprising: a hohlraum (300) (Figure 3); the ICF target (200)(Figure 3) located inside said hohlraum [0009] comprising: a drive region (206)(Figure 2), a shell region (204), and a central fuel region (202); wherein said drive region further comprises a plurality of distinct materials arranged in a layered fashion [0021]; one or more laser entrance (302)(Figure 3) apertures located within said hohlraum; a laser assembly to irradiate a laser pulse energy through said one or more laser entrance apertures [0017] for a duration of a 1 nanosecond activation time [0018]; a plurality of inner walls (304)(Figure 4) to define the shape of the hohlraum, wherein said inner walls are configured to reradiate said laser pulse energy as x-ray radiation [0017]; the plurality of inner walls of the hohlraum are configured to reemit said x-ray radiation toward said drive region [0017]; said drive region is configured to propagate said thermal wave [0017], a supersonic heating wave, having a thermal conductivity rapidly increasing [0015] in rate as a function of approximately T4.5-5.5. wherein the plurality of distinct materials of said drive region are configured to propagate said thermal wave within said drive region without any significant hydrodynamic motion [0017] during the 1 nanosecond that the laser assembly is activated; wherein said drive region is heated to a same temperature of said thermal wave [0017]; and said drive region is configured to evenly heat as it expands in an inward and outward [0017] direction to launch said shell region into said central fuel region to drive said ICF target [0009].
Regarding claim 2, Cornwell clearly anticipates all the elements of the parent claim. Cornell further discloses wherein the plurality of distinct materials of the drive region are materials each having different densities [0021].
Regarding claim 3, Cornwell clearly anticipates all the elements of the parent claim. Cornell further discloses wherein the densities of the plurality of distinct materials of the drive region are arranged in a smooth transition from a higher density material on the outside to a less dense material on the inside [0021].
Regarding claim 4, Cornwell clearly anticipates all the elements of the parent claim. Cornell further discloses wherein said hohlraum is selected from one of the following shapes: spherical, cylindrical or rugby shaped [0017].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY D GAMBONE RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5108. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5pm.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at (571) 272-6878. 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.
/K.D.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3646 /JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646