DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Election/Restrictions
Claims 21-32 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/19/2026.
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 that are applied 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, 14, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shindo et al. (U.S.6,210,458 B1), hereinafter “Shindo” in view of Randolph (U.S. 2018/0193785 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
294
541
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As for claim 1, Shindo teaches a high pressure1 filter apparatus comprising a welded housing body having a welded seam 22 between a fluid inlet 23 and a fluid outlet 24 and a filter 26 contained within a filter chamber.
Shindo doesn’t specify a sleeve that surrounds and applies pressure to the housing body. But such is taught by Randolph.
PNG
media_image2.png
358
480
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Randolph teaches a sleeve (a threaded compression collar 115) that applies pressure to the housing body [as in claim 1]. It is considered that it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the sleeve of Randolph in the invention of Shindo since Randolph teaches the benefit of providing a leak-proof seal between the first and second housings [0010] and that is suitable for removing impurities, contaminants, and particulaltes that may be present in molten metals or gases used in semiconductor manufacturing operations—the same field as Shindo [0002].
As for claim 2, upon modification, the sleeve would surround the welded seam.
As for claim 3, the first housing piece 211 of Shindo comprises the inlet 23 and the second house piece 212 comprising the outlet 24, each welded at the weld seam 22.
As for claim 5, Randolph teaches molybdenum which is a refractory metal. It is considered that it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the housing of Shindo to comprise refractory metal since Randolph teaches the benefit of filtering at high temperatures for semiconductor manufacture.
As for claim 6, the housing of Shindo is molybdenum [0006].
As for claims 7-8, Randolph teaches his sleeve to be a nickel or nickel alloy and includes a threaded metal band [0028].
As for claim 9, the metal band 115 can be molybdenum which has a higher modulus of elasticity than a housing made of stainless steel [0006].
As for claim 10, the filter of Randolph teaches his filter to be made of e.g. Titanium Oxide. It is considered that it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the filter of Randolph in the invention of Shindo, since Randolph teaches the benefit of not corroding in the presence of metal or gas to be filtered [0036] used in the manufacture of semiconductors.
As for claim 11, as shown in fig. 1A of Randolph, has an inner diameter (e.g. the portion about the inlet 130) that is less than an outer diameter of the housing body (e.g. at the threaded region).
As for claim 12, the sleeve 115 has an inner diameter that varies along a length of the sleeve (as shown above) including an minimum inner diameter at a location between the ends of the sleeve (e.g. at the end of the leader for reference no. 155).
As for claim 14, the filter has an average pore size in a range from 0.1 to 5 microns [0036].
As for claim 18, both references teach passing a fluid through the filter to remove impurities.
As for claim 20, Randolph teaches filtering at temperatures about 200°C to 400°C [0002, 0007].
Claims 4, 13 and 15-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shindo as modified above, and in further view of Goodwyn (U.S. 0,100,222).
As for claims 4, the modified Randolph doesn’t specify the additional welds claimed, but such is taught by Goodwyn. As shown in his figures, Goodwynn teaches a pressure vessel comprising first, second, and third housing pieces (A, B and B) joined together by welded seams. It is considered that it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the welded structure of Goodwyn in the invention of the modified Shindo, since both references teach vessels or housings having ports at opposite ends and both are for gases under pressure and would provide the benefit of creating a desired shape for the environment of use.
As for claim 13, Goodwyn also teaches a housing body having an outer diameter that varies along a length of the sleeve, including maximum inner diameter at a location (A) between the ends of the sleeve (B) (the layers C form a reinforcing shell). It is considered that it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the shell C of Goodwyn over the varying outer diameter of the modified Shindo since Goodwyn teaches the benefit of “a combined strength which the vessel would not otherwise have” (col. 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
136
546
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As for claims 15-17 and 19, Randolph teaches filtering at temperatures greater that 200°C but doesn’t specify pressures of at least 40,000 or 45,000 psig. However, Goodwyn teaches repeated layers of cylinders (the sleeve C) “from two to six or any number of thicknesses which may be required” such that having the capability to operate at such pressure would have been obvious to match the materials used in the semiconductor manufacture and having the step of passing fluid through the filter chamber at the claimed pressures would have been obvious depending upon the materials being filtered and the specify semiconductor component created.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mr. TERRY K CECIL whose telephone number is (571)272-1138. The examiner can normally be reached Normally 7:30-4:00p M-F.
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 repeated attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful (including leaving a voice message), the examiner’s supervisor, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached on (571) 270-3240. 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.
/TERRY K CECIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
1 “high pressure” is a relative term that fails to further define the invention beyond the elements listed in the body of the claim.