Detailed Correspondence
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 Amendment
Applicants’ amendment of the claim, filed on 04/06/2026, in response to the rejection of claims 1-20 from the non-final office action (01/07/2026), by amending claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-12, 15-16, 18, and 20 is entered and will be addressed below.
The examiner notices Applicants did not cite support for the amendment.
Claim Interpretation
The newly added limitation “a direction that crosses the interior of the second pipe relative to the direction in which the gas flows …“ of claim 11, the gas flows in a vertical direction, and any direction except a vertical direction reads into this portion of claim 11.
The “wherein a gas supplied from the gas supplier and a gas supplied from the additional gas supplier are different from each other” of claim 17 and the “wherein the gas supplier is configured to supply a source gas, and the additional gas supplier is configured to supply a reactant gas” of claim 18, these are considered an intended use of the apparatus. An apparatus that is capable of using different gas is considered read into these limitations.
It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2111.02). When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01).
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The newly added claim 9 portion “so that the coupler does not protrude beyond the tangents of the first pipe and the second pipe“, there is no support of this limitation in Applicants’ Specification nor in drawing.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 9 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The newly added claim 9 portion “so that the coupler does not protrude beyond the tangents of the first pipe and the second pipe“ is not clear for many reasons.
First, it is not clear what condition precedes “so that” that results in the rest of the claim limitation.
Second, there is no antecedent basis of “the tangents”.
Third, as there are infinite number of tangents of each of the circular first pipe and circular second pipe, it is not clear whether the claim require the coupler does not protrude beyond each and every one of the tangents of the first pipe and the second pipe (but this is impossible). Or this portion of claim requires a tangent from the first pipe and a tangent from the second pipe and the “the coupler does not protrude beyond a tangent of the first pipe and a tangent of the second pipe”, as there are numerous tangents to choose from, it is not clear which tangent is this requirement refer to. Of course, one can pick a tangent from the first pipe and a tangent from the second pipe to fit this condition.
Claim 9 will be examined inclusive all the above interpretations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAIDO et al. (WO 2018008088, from IDS, hereafter ‘088), in view of HIRANO (US 20120076936, from IDS, hereafter ‘936).
‘088 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 1: a treatment chamber for treating a plurality of substrates; and a nozzle for supplying the inside of the treatment chamber with a gas (examiner provided English translation, abstract, includes the claimed “A gas supplier”), As shown in FIG. 9, the nozzle 44a is installed obliquely in the supply buffer chamber 10A so that the slit 45a faces the center of the wafer W. That is, the nozzle 44a is installed so that the center of the upstream portion 74 and the center of the downstream portion 72 are positioned on a virtual circle R having a radius r as a line connecting the center of the adjacent nozzle 44b and the center of the wafer W (P8, 1st complete paragraph), As shown in FIG. 8, the nozzle 44 a is formed in an inverted U-shape that rises upward and is folded downward by the folding portion 70. A slit 45 a as a gas supply port is formed in the downstream portion 72 on the downstream side of the folded portion 70 (P7, 2nd last complete paragraph), A base 78 connected to the gas supply pipe is formed below the upstream portion 74 (Fig. 8, P7, last complete paragraph, includes the claimed “comprising a first pipe extending vertically, into which a gas is introduced, and a second pipe that extends in the vertical direction and includes an opening from which the gas is released”),
Slit 45a in plan view, is preferably formed in a region of the wafer W side than the line L1. In other words, the slits 45a in plan view, relative to the line L1, are preferably formed in a range of 0 degrees to 180 degrees counterclockwise (semicircle). That is, not on the center line C3 of the downstream portion 72 in the front view it may be formed by offset upstream portion 74 side (inside) or outside the center line C3 (P8, 2nd complete paragraph, when the slits 45a is outside of the center line C3, it would have an obtuse angle in the claimed “when viewed from the vertical direction, an angle formed between a direction in which the gas is released from the opening and a direction from a center of the first pipe toward a center of the second pipe is an obtuse angle”, see Fig. 8).
Claim 12: a treatment chamber for treating a plurality of substrates; and a nozzle for supplying the inside of the treatment chamber with a gas (abstract, includes the claimed “A processing apparatus, comprising a gas supplier”), As shown in FIG. 9, the nozzle 44a is installed obliquely in the supply buffer chamber 10A so that the slit 45a faces the center of the wafer W. That is, the nozzle 44a is installed so that the center of the upstream portion 74 and the center of the downstream portion 72 are positioned on a virtual circle R having a radius r as a line connecting the center of the adjacent nozzle 44b and the center of the wafer W (P8, 1st complete paragraph), As shown in FIG. 8, the nozzle 44 a is formed in an inverted U-shape that rises upward and is folded downward by the folding portion 70. A slit 45 a as a gas supply port is formed in the downstream portion 72 on the downstream side of the folded portion 70 (P7, 2nd last complete paragraph), A base 78 connected to the gas supply pipe is formed below the upstream portion 74 (Fig. 8, P7, last complete paragraph, includes the claimed “that includes a first pipe extending vertically, into which a gas is introduced, and a second pipe that extends in the vertical direction and includes an opening from which the gas is released, wherein”),
Slit 45a in plan view, is preferably formed in a region of the wafer W side than the line L1. In other words, the slits 45a in plan view, relative to the line L1, are preferably formed in a range of 0 degrees to 180 degrees counterclockwise (semicircle). That is, not on the center line C3 of the downstream portion 72 in the front view it may be formed by offset upstream portion 74 side (inside) or outside the center line C3 (P8, 2nd complete paragraph, when the slits 45a is outside of the center line C3, it would have an obtuse angle in the claimed “and when viewed from the vertical direction, an angle formed between a direction in which the gas is released from the opening and a direction from a center of the first pipe toward a center of the second pipe is an obtuse angle”, see Fig. 8).
Claim 20: SUBSTRATE TREATMENT APPARATUS, GAS NOZZLE, AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD (title), a treatment chamber for treating a plurality of substrates; and a nozzle for supplying the inside of the treatment chamber with a gas (abstract, includes the claimed “A method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, the method comprising supplying a gas to process an object to be processed by using a gas supplier”), As shown in FIG. 9, the nozzle 44a is installed obliquely in the supply buffer chamber 10A so that the slit 45a faces the center of the wafer W. That is, the nozzle 44a is installed so that the center of the upstream portion 74 and the center of the downstream portion 72 are positioned on a virtual circle R having a radius r as a line connecting the center of the adjacent nozzle 44b and the center of the wafer W (P8, 1st complete paragraph), As shown in FIG. 8, the nozzle 44 a is formed in an inverted U-shape that rises upward and is folded downward by the folding portion 70. A slit 45 a as a gas supply port is formed in the downstream portion 72 on the downstream side of the folded portion 70 (P7, 2nd last complete paragraph), A base 78 connected to the gas supply pipe is formed below the upstream portion 74 (Fig. 8, P7, last complete paragraph, includes the claimed “that includes: a first pipe extending vertically, into which the gas is introduced, and a second pipe that extends in the vertical direction and includes an opening from which the gas is released”),
Slit 45a in plan view, is preferably formed in a region of the wafer W side than the line L1. In other words, the slits 45a in plan view, relative to the line L1, are preferably formed in a range of 0 degrees to 180 degrees counterclockwise (semicircle). That is, not on the center line C3 of the downstream portion 72 in the front view it may be formed by offset upstream portion 74 side (inside) or outside the center line C3 (P8, 2nd complete paragraph, when the slits 45a is outside of the center line C3, it would have an obtuse angle in the claimed “when viewed from the vertical direction, an angle formed between a direction in which the gas is released from the opening and a direction from a center of the first pipe toward a center of the second pipe is an obtuse angle” and as shown in Fig. 9).
‘088 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claims 1, 12, and 20: when viewed from the vertical direction, a flow path cross-sectional area of the second pipe is larger than a flow path cross-sectional area of the first pipe.
‘936 is analogous art in the field of SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS, GAS NOZZLE AND METHOD OF PROCESSING SUBSTRATE (title), a vertical substrate processing apparatus ([0045]). ‘936 teaches that As shown in FIGS. 12 and 13, the coiled pipe unit 320 includes a first extension part (or a sixth pipe) 321, a second extension part (or a fifth pipe) 322, a third extension part (or a fourth pipe) 323, a fourth extension part (or a third pipe) 324, a fifth extension part (or a first pipe) 325, and a sixth extension part (or a second pipe) 326 from the base end 312 of an L-shaped pipe unit 310 ([0115], Fig. 12 shows the cross-sectional area of the sixth extension pipe 326 is much larger than corresponding vertical extension pipes 322 and 324, Fig. 19 shows many more vertical extension pipes), As can be seen from the crossed line part of FIG. 12, the second channel area adjusting unit 327 increases the channel area of the sixth extension part 326 from S2 to S3 … Thus, a gas pressure in the sixth extension part 326 may be easily uniformized, thus uniformizing a flow velocity of a gas supplied (emitted) from a plurality of gas supply holes 328 installed in the sixth extension part 326 toward the wafer 200 ([0123], 3rd-4th sentence), when the number (including count, figure, amount, and range) of components is mentioned, the number of the components is not limited to a specific number and may be greater than, less than or equal to the specific number, unless clearly specified otherwise and definitely limited to the specific number in principle ([0041]), for the purpose of heating efficiency of a gas in a nozzle without increasing the size of a reaction container ([0013]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted a larger cross-sectional area of the downstream portion 72 than the upstream portion 74 in ‘088, as taught by ‘936, for the purpose of heating efficiency of a gas in a nozzle without increasing the size of a reaction container, as taught by ‘936 ([0013]).
The combination of ‘088 and ‘936 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 2: As shown in FIG. 8, the nozzle 44 a is formed in an inverted U-shape that rises upward and is folded downward by the folding portion 70. A slit 45 a as a gas supply port is formed in the downstream portion 72 on the downstream side of the folded portion 70 (‘088, P7, 2nd last complete paragraph), As shown in FIG. 12, a second channel area adjusting unit 327 for slowly increasing the channel area of a pipe is installed at one end (or a lower end of FIG. 12) of the sixth extension part 326 from a lower end of the sixth extension part 326 toward an upper end thereof … the first extension part 321, the second extension part 322, the third extension part 323, the fourth extension part 324, and the fifth extension part 325 are set to have substantially the same channel area S2 (‘936, [0123], 1st and last sentence, includes the claimed “further comprising a bend that connects the first pipe and the second pipe, wherein with a vertex as a boundary, the flow path cross-sectional area of the bend is configured to change starting from the vertex”, ‘936 also teaches this limitation),
Claim 3: the first extension part 321, the second extension part 322, the third extension part 323, the fourth extension part 324, and the fifth extension part 325 are set to have substantially the same channel area S2 (‘936, [0123], last sentence, includes the claimed “wherein the vertex of the bend includes the same flow path cross-sectional area as the flow path cross-sectional area of the first pipe”).
Claim 6: by adopting a larger cross-sectional area of the downstream portion 72 than the upstream portion 74 in ‘088, as taught by ‘936, it would have the claimed “when viewed in the vertical direction, a diameter of the second pipe is configured larger than the diameter of the first pipe“.
Claim 10: Slit 45a in plan view, is preferably formed in a region of the wafer W side than the line L1. In other words, the slits 45a in plan view, relative to the line L1, are preferably formed in a range of 0 degrees to 180 degrees counterclockwise (semicircle). That is, not on the center line C3 of the downstream portion 72 in the front view it may be formed by offset upstream portion 74 side (inside) or outside the center line C3 (P8, 2nd complete paragraph, Fig. 8 is showing an angle between slit 45a and the lines between the centers of two tubes at 90 degree, slightly outside of the center line C3 reads into the claimed “wherein the obtuse angle is an angle of 90o to 120o“).
Claim 11: Fig. 7(D) or Fig. 8 of ‘088 shows the claimed “wherein the opening is a slit or a hole, and the slit or the hole is provided partway along a flow path formed inside the second pipe, in a direction that crosses the interior of the second pipe relative to the direction in which the gas flows, and the slit or the hole includes a plurality of slits or a plurality of holes formed along a longitudinal direction of the second pipe” (Note Fig. 12 of ‘936 teaches a plurality of holes).
Claims 13-15: Fig. 17 of ‘936 shows two gas supply nozzles with identical nozzle 300 of Fig. 12, reads into the claimed “further comprising a second gas supplier with a same configuration as a configuration of the gas supplier, wherein the gas supplier and the second gas supplier are disposed adjacent to each other, and the gas is supplied from both the gas supplier and the second gas supplier” of claim 13, “wherein in a plan view, at least one of a distance between the center of the first pipe and the center of the second pipe in the gas supplier and a distance between a center of a first pipe and a center of a second pipe in the second gas supplier is shorter than a distance between the center of the first pipe of the gas supplier and the center of the first pipe of the second gas supplier or a distance between the center of the second pipe of the gas supplier and the center of the second pipe of the second gas supplier’ of claim 14, and “wherein when viewed in the vertical direction, a distance between the center of the first pipe and the center of the second pipe in the gas supplier is equal to a distance between the center of the second pipe of the gas supplier and a center of a first pipe of the second gas supplier” of claim 15.
Claim 16: the reaction gas is supplied to the wafer W from the reaction gas supply unit through the supply pipe 36b, the MFC 38b, the valve 40b, the nozzle 44b, and the slit 10D with the same configuration. In the nozzle 44b, a plurality of gas supply holes 45b that open toward the wafer W held by the boat 26 are formed. From the inert gas supply unit, the inert gas is supplied to the wafer W through the supply pipes 36c and 36d, the MFCs 38c and 38d, the valves 40c and 40d, the nozzles 44a and 44b, and the slit 10D (‘088, P3, 3rd complete paragraph, includes the claimed “further comprising an additional gas supplier formed with an opening in a side surface, wherein the gas is supplied from both the gas supplier and the additional gas supplier”, also taught by ‘936).
Claims 17-18: The HCDS gas is controlled to have a desired flow rate by the MFC 38a, and is supplied into the processing chamber 14 through the gas supply pipe 36a, the nozzle 44a, and the slit 10D (‘088, middle of P4, includes the claimed “wherein a gas supplied from the gas supplier and a gas supplied from the additional gas supplier are different from each other”, NOTE NH3 is reaction gas. Note also this is an intended use of the apparatus and “wherein the gas supplier is configured to supply a source gas, and the additional gas supplier is configured to supply a reactant gas” of claim 18, note which gas is considered as source and which as reactant is just a naming convention).
Claim 19: As shown in FIG. 9, the nozzle 44a is installed obliquely in the supply buffer chamber 10A so that the slit 45a faces the center of the wafer W. That is, the nozzle 44a is installed so that the center of the upstream portion 74 and the center of the downstream portion 72 are positioned on a virtual circle R having a radius r as a line connecting the center of the adjacent nozzle 44b and the center of the wafer W (P8, 1st complete paragraph, includes the claimed “wherein the opening of the gas supplier is formed in a slit shape”),
the reaction gas is supplied to the wafer W from the reaction gas supply unit through the supply pipe 36b, the MFC 38b, the valve 40b, the nozzle 44b, and the slit 10D with the same configuration. In the nozzle 44b, a plurality of gas supply holes 45b that open toward the wafer W held by the boat 26 are formed. From the inert gas supply unit, the inert gas is supplied to the wafer W through the supply pipes 36c and 36d, the MFCs 38c and 38d, the valves 40c and 40d, the nozzles 44a and 44b, and the slit 10D (‘088, P3, 3rd complete paragraph, includes the claimed “and the opening of the additional gas supplier is formed in a hole shape”).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘088 and ‘936, as being applied to claim 2 rejection above, further in view of Takeshita et al. (US D937385, hereafter ‘385).
The combination of ‘088 and ‘936 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 4: further comprising the bend includes a varying section that changes the path cross-sectional area, wherein the varying section is configured to be capable of changing from the flow path cross-sectional area of the first pipe to the flow path cross-sectional area of the second pipe.
‘385 is analogous art in the field of Return Nozzle (title). Fig. 1 of ‘385 shows a varying section that change cross-sectional area of the first pipe to the flow path cross-sectional area of the second pipe.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the bend area at the top of Fig. 8 of ‘088 to Fig. 1 of ‘385, for its suitability with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Claims 5, 7-9, and alternatively claims 13-15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘088 and ‘936, as being applied to claims 2 and 12 rejection above, further in view of Hasebe et al. (US 20030186560, from IDS, hereafter ‘560).
The combination of ‘088 and ‘936 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 5: further comprising a coupler that connects the side wall of the first pipe and the side wall of the second pipe, which face each other, without passing through the bend.
Claim 7: wherein the cross-sectional area of the coupler is configured to be smaller than the cross-sectional area of the first pipe.
Claim 8: wherein the coupler includes a plurality of couplers provided at a predetermined interval in a longitudinal direction of each of the first pipe and the second pipe.
Claim 9: so that the coupler does not protrude beyond the tangents of the first pipe and the second pipe, wherein a cross-sectional area of the coupler is formed to be smaller than a cross- sectional area of the first pipe.
‘560 is analogous art in the field of Gaseous Phase Growing Device (title), first gas-introducing tube and second gas-introducing tube (abstract), This vapor-phase growing unit 10 is a batch-type of vertical vapor-phase growing unit, and is provided with a cylindrical reaction container 12 extending vertically (Fig. 1, [0044]). ‘560 teaches that As shown in FIG. 2, the first gas-introducing tube 32 includes an introducing tube portion 32A extending upward in the cylindrical void in the reaction container 12, and a spouting tube portion 32B curving in a U-shape and extending downward from an upper end of the introducing tube portion 32A. The introducing tube portion 32A and the spouting tube portion 32B extend in parallel to each other. The spouting tube portion 32B and the introducing tube portion 32A are connected to each other by means of reinforcing bridge members 33 at appropriate positions ([0055], Fig. 2 shows the reinforcing bridge member 33 has a smaller cross-section than the introducing tube portion 32A). ‘560 also teaches that as for a tube for the second gas-introducing tube 42, the same as the above described tube for the first gas-introducing tube 32 may be used ([0065]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added reinforcing bridge members 33 of ‘560, to bridge the downstream portion 72 than the upstream portion 74 in ‘088, for the purpose of reinforcing the nozzle, as taught by ‘560 ([0055]). Furthermore, to have replacing the nozzle of 44b with nozzle 44a in Fig. 9 of ‘088 (the limitations of claims 13-15 again), as taught by ‘560, for its suitability with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
By replacing/duplicating the nozzle of 44b with nozzle 44a in Fig. 9 of ‘088 in the same location as shown in Fig. 9, one can see that the distance between the downstream portion 72 and upstream portion 74 is smaller than these two nozzles 44, it reads into the limitations of:
Claim 13: further comprising a second gas supplier with a same configuration as a configuration of the gas supplier, wherein
the gas supplier and the second gas supplier are disposed adjacent to each other, and the gas is supplied from both the gas supplier and the second gas supplier.
Claim 14: wherein in a plan view, at least one of a distance between the center of the first pipe and the center of the second pipe in the gas supplier and a distance between a center of a first pipe and a center of a second pipe in the second gas supplier is shorter than a distance between the center of the first pipe of the gas supplier and the center of the first pipe of the second gas supplier or a distance between the center of the second pipe of the gas supplier and the center of the second pipe of the second gas supplier.
Claim 15: wherein when viewed in the vertical direction, a distance between the center of the first pipe and the center of the second pipe in the gas supplier is equal to a distance between the center of the second pipe of the gas supplier and a center of a first pipe of the second gas supplier.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regarding 112(b) rejection of claim 6, see the bottom of page 8, Applicants’ amendment overcomes the rejection. However, Applicants amendment also introduces 112(a) and 112(b) issue for claim 9.
In regarding to 35 USC 103 rejections, Applicants argue that Saido ‘088 does not teach “when viewed from the vertical direction, an angle formed between a direction in which the gas is released from the opening and a direction from a center of the first pipe toward a center of the second pipe is an obtuse angle” (bottom of page 11), because “the angle between a line connecting the center of the upstream portion 74 and the center of the downstream portion 72, and a line connecting the center of the base 78 and the center of the wafer W, is preferably 0 degrees to 90 degrees, more preferably a right angle. (See Saido, paragraph [0049])”, see the last complete paragraph of page 13 to the top of page 15.
This argument is found not persuasive.
The examiner cannot find English translation citing paragraph [0049]. If [0049] is important, Applicants please kindly provide an English translation of ‘088 so that the accuracy of the translation and relevancy to the claim language can be fully analyzed.
However, from the English copy provided by the Examiner to the record, this portion of the description ([0049]) refers to the arrangement of the nozzle 44a, a side-by-side pipe, relative to the center of the wafer W as shown in Fig. 9.
The OC is relied upon the description referring to Fig. 8 for the rejection.
The OC has clearly set forth that
Slit 45a in plan view, is preferably formed in a region of the wafer W side than the line L1. In other words, the slits 45a in plan view, relative to the line L1, are preferably formed in a range of 0 degrees to 180 degrees counterclockwise (semicircle). That is, not on the center line C3 of the downstream portion 72 in the front view it may be formed by offset upstream portion 74 side (inside) or outside the center line C3 (P8, 2nd complete paragraph).
In other words, the slits 45a is outside of the center line C3, it would have an obtuse angle.
On the other hand, the slits 45a is formed on the center line C3, the angle is 90 degree. When the slits 45a is form inside and toward the upstream portion 74 side, it has an acute angle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20070240644 is cited for gas discharge slit (Fig. 5) or holes (Fig. 4). JP 2022118629, applicants’ submitted IDS, is cited for “a flow path cross-sectional area of the second pipe is larger than a flow path cross-sectional area of the first pipe” (Fig. 7).
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 KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 pm.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights