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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues:
At p. 6 para 6 that “the shield is not a copper sheet”.
Examiner response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The copper content of the shield is more than 99.95% (p. 3 col 2 last para lines 1-5), which is considered pure copper.
Applicant argues:
At p. 8 para 4 that “However, in present claim 1, a vacuum degree in the vacuum cavity is 10-3Pa. The vacuum degrees are significantly different”.
Examiner response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The vacuum cavity represents the vacuum chamber in Wang as shown in fig. 1c, which can have a pressure as low as 10-3 Pa (p. 4 col 1 last para). Also, Wang teaches the limitation of S400 in claim 1, lines 13–20 (p. 4 col 1 last para to col 2 para 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, X. H., et al. "A pilot study on the vacuum degree online detection of vacuum interrupter using laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy." Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 49.44 (2016): 44LT01 (hereinafter Wang), in view of Qayyum, H., et al. "Synthesis of silver and gold nanoparticles by pulsed laser ablation for nanoparticle enhanced laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy." Journal of Laser Applications 31.2 (2019) (hereinafter Qayyum), CN 105699363 B (Jiang), Pan, S. et al., CN 108526485 A (hereinafter Pan), and further in view of CN 114965440 A (hereinafter Yao).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a method for improving sensitivity of vacuum testing of a vacuum switch, comprising: S 100: obtaining a copper sheet as a target material of a to-be-tested vacuum switch (fig. 1c, the shield is the target material of a to-be-tested vacuum switch; the copper is pure, p. 3 col 2 last para lines 2-5), S200: bombarding, by using laser pulse of a laser emitter with a convex lens having a focal length of 20 cm to focus the laser pulse (p. 4 col 1 para 1 lines 9-12), the surface of the target material, so as to generate plasma on the surface of the target material (fig. 1c; p. 4 col 1 lines 6-12); S300: obtaining a plasma image by collecting the plasma, and obtaining a plasma spectrum by performing spectroscopic analysis on the plasma image (this is shown in fig. 1(c), p. 4 col 1 last sentence); and S400: obtaining a vacuum degree of the to-be-tested vacuum switch based on the plasma spectrum (the vacuum degree is shown in fig. 2); the target material that is the copper sheet is placed in a vacuum cavity of 10-3 Pa (fig. 2(a)) with a quartz window (this is shown in fig. 1(c), p. 4 col 1 para 1 lines 12-14), and a spectrum signal of the plasma is analyzed by a spectrometer and an ICCD camera (this is shown in fig. 1c); and the spectrometer transmits the light signal to a computer displaying a waveform of the spectrum (this is shown in fig. 2); and the plasma image captured by the ICCD camera is analyzed to obtain corresponding intensity data (this is shown in fig. 2).
Wang fails to teach dropping a golden nanoparticle reagent with a concentration of 0.01 mg/ml and a particle radius of 10 nm on the target material; smearing the golden nanoparticle reagent evenly on a surface of the target material of the to-be-tested vacuum switch, performing standing and forming a golden nanoparticle coating on the surface of the target material; and a focal length of 150 nm.
Qayyum, from the same field of endeavor as Wang, teaches “dropping a golden nanoparticle reagent; smearing the golden nanoparticle reagent evenly on a surface of the target material of the to-be-tested vacuum switch, performing standing and forming a golden nanoparticle coating on the surface of the target material” (this entire limitation is shown in fig. 1(b), p. 3 col 1 last para to col 2 para 1)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Qayyum to Wang to have “dropping a golden nanoparticle reagent; smearing the golden nanoparticle reagent evenly on a surface of the target material of the to-be-tested vacuum switch, performing standing and forming a golden nanoparticle coating on the surface of the target material” in order to obtain a higher spectral enhancement (Abstract lines 6-7).
Wang, when modified by Qayyum, does not teach using a gold nanoparticle with a concentration of 0.01 mg/ml and a particle radius of 10 nm and a focal length of 150 nm.
Jiang, from the same field of endeavor as Wang, teaches a gold nanoparticle with a particle radius of 10 nm (p. 5 para 1, fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Jiang to Wang, when modified by Qayyum, to have a gold nanoparticle with a particle radius of 10 nm in order to increase the spectral signal (Abstract lines 9-10).
Wang, when modified by Qayyum and Jiang, does not teach using a gold nanoparticle with a concentration of 0.01 mg/ml and a focal length of 150 mm.
Pan, from the same field of endeavor as Wang, teaches “gold nanoparticles with a concentration of 0.01 mg/ml” (p. 5 para 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Pan to Wang, when modified by Qayum, to have “gold nanoparticles with a concentration of 0.01 mg/ml” in order to avoid aggregation and oxidation of the copper (p. 2 para 4 lines 8-10).
Wang, when modified by Qayyum, Jian, and Pan, does not teach a focal length of 150 nm (note that this convex lens 2 from fig. 3 acts as a collimating lens, having a focal length of 150 nanometers is equivalent the convex lens has no focal point at all, as shown in fig. 3 of the instant application).
Yao, from the same field of endeavor as Wang, teaches a focal length of 150 nm (fig. 2 element 121 is a collimator, p. 5 para 7 lines 5-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Yao to Wang, when modified by Qayum, Jiang, and Pan, to have a focal length of 150 mm in order to maximize the light from the laser in reaching the sample.
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 ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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, KARA GEISEL can be reached at (571)272-2416. 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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877