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 .
This action in response to remarks and amendments filed 11/10/2025.
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 1-15, 17, 20-21 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the cryogenic cleaning device comprises, separate from the surface and the single-stage refrigeration system, a cold stage and/or a cold trap, wherein the cold stage and/or the cold trap is retractable such that, in a retracted position, the cold stage and/or cold trap is at least partially housed within the body of the cryogenic cleaning device and, in an extended position, the cold stage and/or cold trap extends beyond the body of the cryogenic cleaning device”. The claims already require a surface which condenses and/or absorbs gas molecules and then separately claim a cold stage and/or a cold trap which would result in up to three separate cold surfaces which provides the function as claimed which is not supported by the specification. Further the claims recite that the “cold stage and/or cold trap” is at least partially housed within the body of the cryogenic cleaning device in the retracted position and has an extended position in which it extends beyond the cryogenic cleaning device; however, there is not support for this limitation. The specification provides a “detachable connector” which is retractable and insertable into the vacuum chamber which shows a separate component from the cold stage or cold trap. As such, it does not appear that there is support for the cold stage and/or cold trap to be extended beyond the body of the cryogenic cleaning device, but that there is a detachable connector extended as such.
Claim 17 recites “detachably connecting a cold trap and/or cold stage to the vacuum chamber during cooling of the surface, the cold trap and/or the cold stage being separate from the surface and the single-stage refrigeration system, wherein when connected, the cold trap and/or cold stage extends beyond the body of the cryogenic cleaning device and into the vacuum chamber”. The claims already require a surface which condenses and/or absorbs gas molecules and then separately claim a cold stage and/or a cold trap which would result in up to three separate cold surfaces which provides the function as claimed which is not supported by the specification. Further the claims recite that the “cold stage and/or cold trap” is at least partially housed within the body of the cryogenic cleaning device in the retracted position and has an extended position in which it extends beyond the cryogenic cleaning device; however, there is not support for this limitation. The specification provides a “detachable connector” which is retractable and insertable into the vacuum chamber which shows a separate component from the cold stage or cold trap. As such, it does not appear that there is support for the cold stage and/or cold trap to be extended beyond the body of the cryogenic cleaning device, but that there is a detachable connector extended as such.
Claims 2-15, 20-21 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected 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.
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.
Claims 1-15, 17, 20-21 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the cryogenic cleaning device comprises, separate from the surface and the single-stage refrigeration system, a cold stage and/or a cold trap, wherein the cold stage and/or the cold trap is retractable such that, in a retracted position, the cold stage and/or cold trap is at least partially housed within the body of the cryogenic cleaning device and, in an extended position, the cold stage and/or cold trap extends beyond the body of the cryogenic cleaning device” which is considered indefinite. The claim already requires “a surface configured to accumulate gas molecules received into the body via the fluid path by condensing and/or absorbing the gas molecules on the surface” but then later claims separately a cold stage and/or a cold trap. A surface which accumulates gas molecules as claimed is by definition a cold trap. The claims and the specification do not clearly point out anywhere that differentiates the two components and as can be seen on page 9, lines 23-27, the surface appears to be part of the cold stage or cold trap. As such, it is unclear what is required by the claims or how the cold stage and/or cold trap differentiates from the surface. While it does appear there may be a configuration with two separate cold traps (519/526), see specification page 19, lines 29-33, this is not clear what is happening in the claims and the use of “and/or” provides a possible configuration in which there are three cold traps and cold stages, of which there is not support.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the cryogenic cleaning device is a cold stage, a cold trap, a cryogenic storage device and/or a cryogenic transfer system” which is considered indefinite. Claim 1 recites that the invention is a cryogenic cleaning device which comprises a cold stage and/or cold trap, so it unclear how the cryogenic cleaning device can both comprise a cold stage/and or a cold trap and simultaneously be a cold stage and cold trap. Further, the invention as claimed is also clearly not a cold storage device or cryogenic transfer system so it is unclear how the claim further is limited as the only storage or transfer in the specification as components that work with the cleaning device, not that the cleaning device is part of them. For the purpose of examination, claim 5 is not considered to further limit the claims.
Claim 17 recites “detachably connecting a cold trap and/or cold stage to the vacuum chamber during cooling of the surface, the cold trap and/or the cold stage being separate from the surface and the single-stage refrigeration system, wherein when connected, the cold trap and/or cold stage extends beyond the body of the cryogenic cleaning device and into the vacuum chamber” which is considered indefinite. The claim already requires “a surface in a body… to accumulate gas molecules received into the body via the fluid path on the cooled surface via condensation and/or adsorption” but then later claims separately a cold stage and/or a cold trap. A surface which accumulates gas molecules as claimed is by definition a cold trap. The claims and the specification do not clearly point out anywhere that differentiates the two components and as can be seen on page 9, lines 23-27, the surface appears to be part of the cold stage or cold trap. As such, it is unclear what is required by the claims or how the cold stage and/or cold trap differentiates from the surface. While it does appear there may be a configuration with two separate cold traps (519/526), see specification page 19, lines 29-33, this is not clear what is happening in the claims and the use of “and/or” provides a possible configuration in which there are three cold traps and cold stages, of which there is not support.
Claims 2-4, 6-15, 20-21 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 2/10/2026, with respect to all of the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of all of the claims has been withdrawn; however, in view of the amendments, new rejections have been provided above in view of 35 USC 112(a) and 35 USC 112(b). The claims as best understood in view of those rejections appears to overcome the prior art, the closest of which was provided in the previous rejection; however, no determination of whether the claims contain allowable subject matter can be made until the issues regarding the new matter and indefiniteness are resolved.
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 BRIAN M KING whose telephone number is (571)272-2816. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 0800-1700.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 5712726681. 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.
/BRIAN M KING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763