CTNF 18/392,205 CTNF 89831 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. DETAILED ACTION Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “multipole antenna” of Claim 8 must be clearly shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).See the details in the 112 rejection below. No new matter should be entered. 06-22 Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim (s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities: (1) The “a space among the housing” of Claims 7 and 9 would be better form if amended to be: “a space within the housing” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim interpretation (1) In regards to the “power supply line” of Claim 1, The applicants’ specification discloses “the power supply line 61 formed by the inner conductor 54”, see the paragraph [0041] of the published instant application. Consequently, the recited “power supply line” will be examined as the inner conductor. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 AIA Claim s 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. (1) The “the antenna from an outer peripheral surface of a base portion to a center surface of the base portion of the antenna” of Claim 7 is not clear. Does it mean “an outer peripheral surface and a center surface of a base portion of the antenna”? (2) The “multipole antenna” of Claim 8 is not clear. The written description fails to clearly link the corresponding disclosures to present how the “multipole” is obtained. Based on the applicants’ Fig. 8, the multipole antenna is formed by single body of a conductor, but it does not provide how different charges of the multipole is locally accumulated on the conductor. The specification is devoid of adequate structure to perform the claimed function, thus the metes and bounds of the “multipole antenna” cannot be clearly determined. For the purpose of examination, the limitation will be examined as “antenna”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20140174660, hereafter ‘660) in view of Geissler (US 4004257, hereafter ‘257) . Regarding to Claim 1, ‘660 teaches: a filtering property of the choke mechanism 40 ([0049]), and a choke mechanism 40 configured to block spatial propagation of the undesired microwave introduced into the line ([0027], the claimed “A filter circuit”); cylindrical external conductor 38 that surrounds the power feeding rod 34 serving as an internal conductor (Fig. 1, [0026], note the inner and outer conductors coupled to the ground potential, the claimed “comprising: a housing made of a conductor and comprising an input port and an output port, each of which comprises an outer conductor and an inner conductor, wherein the housing is configured to have a ground potential together with the outer conductors of the input port and the output port”); the power feeding rod 34 serving as an internal conductor ([0026], note Fig. 2 shows the rod 34 does not contact the external conductor 38 and is separated by a space between the rod 34 and the conductor, thus the space functions as an insulation, the claimed “and a power supply line provided within the housing and insulated from the housing, wherein the power supply line comprises: an input-side conductor which is the inner conductor of the input port; an output-side conductor which is the inner conductor of the output port”); The choke mechanism 40 is formed by attaching two conductor members 100, 102 ([0043], the claimed “and an antenna connected to the input-side conductor and the output-side conductor”). ‘660 does not explicitly teach the other limitations (BOLD and ITALIC letter) of: Claim 1: (1A) a first protrusion made of a conductor and connected to the housing, wherein the first protrusion is configured to protrude into the housing , (1B) and an antenna connected to the input-side conductor and the output-side conductor and formed to surround the first protrusion . In regards to the limitation of 1A, ‘660 further clearly teaches In addition to the configuration of the choke mechanism 40 as described above, various modifications may be made elsewhere within the spirit of the present invention ([0052]). ‘257 is analogous art in the field of a filter (abstract, similar to the filter of ‘660). ‘257 teaches another conductive line 134 is located within the dielectric medium 132 spaced from the inner conductor 128 by a distance d (Fig. 11, lines 42-45 of col. 7), and conductive line 134 is located within the dielectric medium 132 spaced from the inner conductor 128 by a distance d (Fig. 13, lines 61-64 of col. 7). Note the conductive lines are protruded from the housing. Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified one of the conductors 100, 102 of the choke mechanism 40 of ‘660 or to have added additional conductor, so to be protruded from the external conductor 38 of ‘660, for the purpose of providing multiple section filter which filters out more than one frequency. In regards to the limitation of 1B, Emphasized again, ‘660 clearly teaches the choke mechanism 40. Thus, in ‘660, when the one of the conductors is modified or additional conductor is added so to be protruded from the external conductor, Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have positioned the modified or imported conductor, so to be surrounded by the other conductor, for instance, see the illustration below, for the purpose of providing a form of the chock, as required by ‘660, and/or for its suitability as known structure with predictable result. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP 2144.07. PNG media_image1.png 185 401 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding to Claim 2, Fig. 2 of ‘660 shows the rod 34 does not contact the external conductor 38 and is separated by a space between the rod 34 and the conductor, thus the space functions as an insulation, Further the space can be filled with an air by coupling to an atmosphere, can be vacuum status by coupling to a vacuum tool, or can be filled with a known insulation material. All the air, vacuum, or insulation material read into the dielectric material (the claimed “further comprising: a dielectric material provided between the housing and the power supply line”). Regarding to Claim 3, Fig. 2 of ‘660 shows the starting and end points of the rod 34 and the external conductor 38 are in a coaxial structure (the claimed “wherein the input port and the output port have a coaxial structure”). Regarding to Claim 4, As shown in the illustration above, a first distance from a tip of the conductor 102, which is an end of the cylindrical portion 110, to the connection point of the protrusion connected to the housing 38 is less than a second distance from an outer peripheral of a base of the conductor 102, which is the annular portion 108, to the connection point of the protrusion connected to the housing 38 (the claimed “wherein a distance from a tip of the antenna to an inner surface of the housing to which the first protrusion is connected is less than a length from an outer peripheral surface of a base portion of the antenna to the inner surface of the housing”). Regarding to Claim 5, As shown in the illustration above, a third distance from an outer peripheral surface of a base portion of the conductor 102 to an inner surface of the housing 38 can be defined so to be larger a fourth distance from a tip of the protrusion to a center surface of the base portion of the conductor 102, because the third distance can be defined at any point on the inner surface of the housing 38 (the claimed “wherein a distance from a tip of the first protrusion to a center surface of a base portion of the antenna is less than a length from an outer peripheral surface of the base portion of the antenna to an inner surface of the housing”). Regarding to Claim 6, Fig. 2 of ‘660 shows the conductor 100/102 is a cylinder-shaped single body, thus it is monopole when it is electrically coupled (the claimed “wherein the antenna is a cylindrical monopole antenna”). Regarding to Claim 7, ‘660 clearly teaches The choke mechanism according to the present invention includes, as a preferred basic configuration, a first waveguide having a line length of 1/4 wavelength that extends in parallel with an axis direction of the power feeding rod with a gap narrower than a distance between the outer peripheral surface of the power feeding rod and the inner peripheral surface of the external conductor to form a cylindrical shape; and a second waveguide having a line length of 1/4 wavelength that is connected to a terminal end of the first waveguide when viewed from the electrode side, and short-circuited. In this configuration, the start end or entrance of the first waveguide is made in a short-circuited state, that is, in substantially the same state as being blocked by a conductor wall, by using the nature of 1/4 wavelength line, thereby effectively suppressing the propagation of the microwave ([0010]), and further modified ‘660 still forms the choke (the claimed “wherein a space among the housing, the first protrusion, and the antenna from an outer peripheral surface of a base portion to a center surface of the base portion of the antenna forms a choke structure based on a length of a quarter wavelength of electromagnetic waves to be blocked”). Regarding to Claim 8, ‘660 is silent about the “ further comprising: a second protrusion made of a conductor and connected to the housing, wherein the second protrusion is configured to protrude into the housing around the first protrusion in a cylindrical shape, wherein the antenna is a cylindrical multipole antenna that further surrounds the second protrusion ”. However, Fig. 15 of ‘257 further shows multiple conductors protruded from the outer conductor 130 along the longitudinal direction of the outer conductor 130. Consequently, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have duplicated the conductor arrangement in the illustration above, such that the conductors 100/102 and two imported conductors are alternately arranged, for the purpose of providing multiple choke section filter which filters out more than one frequency. Further note, MPEP clearly guides duplication of parts is mere an obvious matter, see MPEP 2144.04. Regarding to Claim 9, Claim 9 is rejected for substantially the same reason as claim 7 rejection above. Regarding to Claim 10, As shown in the illustration above, the imported conductor, which is the protrusion, is formed to be inserted into and pulled out from the conductor (the claimed “wherein the first protrusion and the second protrusion are formed to be inserted into and pulled out from the multipole antenna”). Regarding to Claim 11, As shown in the illustration above, the imported conductor is inserted into the conductor 102 of ‘660, but it is silent about the “ wherein the first protrusion is formed to receive therein a lead screw connected to the housing ”. However, when pushing an object, use of a lead screw is commonly well-known feature. Consequently, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have used a lead screw for the imported conductor, for the purpose of pushing the imported conductor, and/or for its suitability as known method with predictable result. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP 2144.07. Regarding to Claims 12-13, As discussed in the claim 2 rejection above, the space within the housing 38 of ‘660 functions as an insulation, Further the space can be filled with an air by coupling to an atmosphere, can be vacuum status by coupling to a vacuum tool, or can be filled with a known insulation material. All the air, vacuum, or insulation material read into the dielectric material, therefore, when the additional conductors are imported into ‘660, they moves along the dielectric (the claimed “further comprising: a dielectric material provided between the multipole antenna, and the first protrusion and the second protrusion, wherein the first protrusion and the second protrusion move along the dielectric material when being inserted into and pulled out from the multipole antenna”). Regarding to Claim 14, ‘660 teaches: plasma processing apparatus (title, the claimed “A plasma processing apparatus”); cylindrical vacuum chamber (processing chamber) 10 (Fig. 1, [0021], the claimed “comprising: a processing container”); since the high frequency wave for RF bias from the high frequency power supply 30 is fed to the RF electrode 12 through the surface of the power feeding rod 34, its transmission is not affected by the choke mechanism 40. Therefore, the choke mechanism 40 functions as a kind of a low-pass filter that allows high frequency wave for RF bias (for example, 2 MHz) to pass through and blocks microwave (2.45 GHz) ([0048], the claimed “an electrode which is provided in the processing container and to which two or more types of frequencies are applied”); a filtering property of the choke mechanism 40 ([0049]), and a choke mechanism 40 configured to block spatial propagation of the undesired microwave introduced into the line ([0027], the claimed “and a filter circuit”); cylindrical external conductor 38 that surrounds the power feeding rod 34 serving as an internal conductor (Fig. 1, [0026], note the inner and outer conductors coupled to the ground potential, the claimed “wherein the filter circuit comprises: a housing made of a conductor and comprising an input port and an output port, each of which comprises an outer conductor and an inner conductor, wherein the housing is configured to have a ground potential together with the outer conductors of the input port and the output port”); the power feeding rod 34 serving as an internal conductor ([0026], note Fig. 2 shows the rod 34 does not contact the external conductor 38 and is separated by a space between the rod 34 and the conductor, thus the space functions as an insulation, the claimed “and a power supply line provided within the housing and insulated from the housing, wherein the power supply line comprises: an input-side conductor which is the inner conductor of the input port; an output-side conductor which is the inner conductor of the output port”); The choke mechanism 40 is formed by attaching two conductor members 100, 102 ([0043], the claimed “and an antenna connected to the input-side conductor and the output-side conductor”). ‘660 does not explicitly teach the other limitations (BOLD and ITALIC letter) of: Claim 14: (14A) a first protrusion made of a conductor and connected to the housing, wherein the first protrusion is configured to protrude into the housing , (14B) and an antenna connected to the input-side conductor and the output-side conductor and formed to surround the first protrusion . The untaught limitations are the same as the untaught limitations of the claim 1. The teaching was discussed in the claim 1 rejection above, thus they are rejected for substantially the same reason as claim 1 rejection above . Allowable Subject Matter In case the applicants resolve the 112 rejection of Claim 8, 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm 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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 2 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 3 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 4 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 5 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 6 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 7 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 8 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 9 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 10 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 11 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 12 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 13 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/392,205 Page 14 Art Unit: 1718
Prosecution Insights