DETAILED ACTION
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 . Claims 1-18 are presented for examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Species of Figure 2a-2e, species 1 and claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 03/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “HALO”, Aspect Ratio”, “High and Low Entropy”, a revolution around the torus grid when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement approximately that is 120 degrees apart from a prior revolution. “ as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 2 are persuasive and claim 2 is found allowable when joined with claim 1.
For arguments regarding claim 1, please see details in USC 101 and USC 103 rejection. Clarification is needed to specification regarding some of the language in the description and disclosure.
Furthermore, rejection regarding claim 1 with Seward, Seward does not teach away, since the path is found to be linear, at least linear at some portions, since the path is shown to have linear portion and non-linear portion which is shows in by Seward. The claim requires only “portion” of the path to be linear, and a “Portion” to be non-linear, and a portion is any part of the whole, therefore, portions of the path shown in Seward, and also in Yang are portions that are linear and non-linear which teach a path that is shown as claimed. Examiner found claim 2 to be allowable which adds more structure to the claim for redirecting the paths. Examiner called attorney of record to schedule an interview but no answer from the applicant attorney to discuss possible way to amend the claims, and specifications to further the case forward.
Additional rejection using another reference Claims 1 as best understood, is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkawa in view of Stix (US Patent 3015618 hereinafter “Stix”) is provided below as well.
Regarding applicant’s arguments: regarding the 101 rejection and indicates that “ the present continuation … refines and clarifies the claimed subject matter.. eliminating any “supernatural” language.. and that the principles are directly analogous to those in prior art references such as Adams….the specification and claims are explicitly tied to tangible physical structure and do not encompass perpetual motion, time travel or supernatural phenomena”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out that the specification, and the claimed subject matter which is understood by the specification still recite and disclose that the system “ The disclosure relies on “see P[115], Space-time implosion field generator coils to product the Torus pattern and unlock the toroidal portal, utilize the zero-space, zero-space, hole of doughnut, using teleporters use zero-space access the singularity of travel, traveling through zero-space passes through will make it through the other side, more re-organized than before, whatever is loosely through into-the zero-space field is gone forever, therefore, disposing of high toxic radio waste will be gone, no trace left”, How is the traces gone, where is it gone to. It relies on “teleporters, singularity of travel, travel through zero space, and gone forever, the language is speculative, and refers to space time travel and blackholes and vortexes. Furthermore, this is found incredible that “P[0032], life only happens around charged axis.” Also P[032], indicates that “Life only happens around a charged axis”, this is a general statement which is unclear. Also P[0007] states “device for expanding and contracting “space, time and gravity”, how does it work. It is very incredible. Also description of HALO is Unclear and is not presented in the drawings or shown. Furthermore, the Infinity Screw details and Aspect Ratio is not clear, and is not shown in the drawings p[111-114 ARE UNCLEAR. Furthermore, P[108, states that IG runs constantly< providing power to initiated the driver producing space-time thinning force field, what is that field, where is the thinning force field shown. P[118-119 are not clear/or are not complete. More clarification is needed. Examiner suggests removing any “incredible, or “theoretical” language from the specifications. Or language that is not clear and concise, and or that refer to time travel theory or other theories that have not been proven.
The USC 101, 112 and USC 103 rejections are still sustained. Additional References have been added to reject claim 1 under USC 103.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the disclosed invention is inoperative and therefore lacks utility and is considered an “incredible utility”. The invention does not operate to produce the results claimed by the patent application. The disclosure relies on “see P[115], Space-time implosion field generator coils to product the Torus pattern and unlock the toroidal portal, utilize the zero-space, zero-space, hole of doughnut, using teleporters use zero-space access the singularity of travel, traveling through zero-space passes through will make it through the other side, more re-organized than before, whatever is loosely through into-the zero-space field is gone forever, therefore, disposing of high toxic radio waste will be gone, no trace left”, How is the traces gone, where is it gone to.
The disclosure models a supernatural phenomenal of a Torus which is still unproven scientifically, also it uses in P[0027, an endless “infinity” loop when spheres, interties travel, they are a perpetual machine that travels, in endless loop, with no energy input, Also P[032], indicates that “Life only happens around a charged axis”, this is a general statement which is unclear. Also P[0007] states “device for expanding and contracting “space, time and gravity”, how does it work. It is very incredible. Also description of HALO is Unclear and is not presented in the drawings or shown. Furthermore, the Infinity Screw details and Aspect Ratio is not clear, and is not shown in the drawings p[111-114 ARE UNCLEAR. Furthermore, P[108, states that IG runs constantly< providing power to initiated the driver producing space-time thinning force field, what is that field, where is the thinning force field shown. P[118-119 are not clear/or are not complete. More clarification is needed.
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.
Claims 1-18 are 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. .
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The specification discloses a method of moving an item in a torus-like infinity pattern. The disclosure discloses a Torus as The invention does not operate to produce the results claimed by the patent application. The disclosure relies on “see P[115], Space-time implosion field generator coils to product the Torus pattern and unlock the toroidal portal, utilize the zero-space, zero-space, hole of doughnut, using teleporters use zero-space access the singularity of travel, traveling through zero-space passes through will make it through the other side, more re-organized than before, whatever is loosely through into-the zero-space field is gone forever, therefore, disposing of high toxic radio waste will be gone, no trace left”.
The disclosure models a supernatural phenomenal of a Torus which is still unproven scientifically, also it uses in P[0027, an endless “infinity” loop when spheres, interties travel, they are a perpetual machine that travels, in endless loop, with no energy input, Also P[032], indicates that “Life only happens around a charged axis”, this is a general statement which is unclear. Also P[0007] states “device for expanding and contracting “space, time and gravity”, how does it work. It is very incredible. Also description of HALO is Unclear and is not presented in the drawings or shown. Furthermore, the Infinity Screw details and Aspect Ratio is not clear, and is not shown in the drawings p[111-114 ARE UNCLEAR. Furthermore, P[108, states that IG runs constantly< providing power to initiated the driver producing space-time thinning force field, what is that field, where is the thinning force field shown. P[118-119 are not clear/or are not complete. More clarification is needed.
The subject specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not supported by either asserted utility or a well-established utility.
Claims 1-18 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Specifically, because the claimed invention is not supported by either an asserted utility or a well-established utility for the reasons set forth above, one skilled in the art clearly would not know how to use the claimed invention.
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 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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-11, 12 and 15-18 as best understood are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkawa (US Patent 4302284 hereinafter “Ohkawa”) in view of reference Seward (US 6617775B hereinafter “Seward”).
Re-claim 1 as best understood, Ohkawa discloses a method (claim 34, L.1, method of operating a toroidal plasma device) of moving an item in a torus-like pattern (toroidal plasma device 10, col.5, L.810), the method comprising:5 moving an item poloidally (central passage 42 is for the circulation of coolant and is contained within the conductor 40 which is around the torus shape in Fig.1, col.5, L.57, col.6 L.15, coolant will move round the torus shaped pipe inside the passages 42 and will have 2 components for the direction of movement, a poloidal component going around the pipe as shown in annotated Fig.1 and another Toroidal component moving around the circumference of the Torus shape in Fig.1, also could consider poloidal magnetic field elements traveling with coil forming poloidal and toroidal magnetic flux paths) along a path (path of 40 is a channel which directs coolant or charges) with reference to a torus grid (shape of the device 10 is torus shape) ; and at least partially moving the item toroidally (see arrow of toroidal component in annotated Fig.1,the coil is toroidal around 10, the coolant inside 42 moves around the Torus shape and at least partially moves toroidal, around the circumference of the pipe therefore the coolant will flow in toroidal direction as well) along the path with reference to the torus grid (torus grid of the pipe 10) such that when the item (coolant inside 40) substantially moves around a revolution (winding 40 are around 10, Fig.1) around the torus grid (grid of device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement ), the item also moves poloidal (central passages for the circulation of coolant are contained within the conductors 40, col.5, L57 – Col.6,-15, such that coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus flowing poloidal to get from all around the torus shaped device 10), [examiner takes official notice that the movement of the object around the torus shaped structure is moving poloidally and also toroidally as the structure of the torus shaped pipe 10 is torus shaped same as the invention claims and the movement of the electrons, wire, electrical current in the wire around 10, the movement of the coolant inside the pipe 42 is both toroidal and poloidal as shown in the drawings and annotated in the drawings below in the Ohkawa reference, and also as suggested by Seward showing the movement of the current in F?Ig.3, or electron movement poloidal around the torus shape and toroidal around the torus shape structure, see Fig.1 and Fig.3”, therefore, it would be obvious to call the movement of the coolant and electric flux/field, current in Ohkawa to be Poloidal and Toroidal movement.], a portion of the poloidal movement (movement of electrical current in the wires 34 or coolant in passages 42) with reference to the torus grid (grid of the device pipe 10) is non-linear (it is circular around the torus shaped device 10).
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein another portion is linear.
However, Seward teaches wherein another portion is linear (shape of generator is fixed geometry, could be toroid, elongated toroid, figure eight shape of any desirable shape, fig.14 shows portions of the coil having linear lines above the body of the toroid sections, therefore, the 110 or coils will follow after the structure of the shape of the generator body therefore having linear and non-linear portions).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify another portion of the poloidal movement with reference to the torus grid disclosed by Ohkawa wherein another portion is linear as shown by Seward to diversify the design and structure of the generator of any desirable shape or structure therefore diversify manufacturing, use, location/space with various shaped designs (Seward, Col.2, L.1-35).
PNG
media_image1.png
561
388
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
433
821
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
347
866
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
749
958
media_image4.png
Greyscale
\
Re-claim 3, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa further teaches wherein the path (42) of movement of the item (the coolant inside 42) does 15 not cross another path of movement when viewed from a cross-section cut across the toroidal direction (annotated Fig.3) of movement (path of movement of the coolant inside 42 moves within 42 around the device 10 and paths 42 do not cross each other).
Re-claim 6, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is at least one electron (winding 34, 38 induced conductors 40 and are regarded as helically wound upon the cylinders col.5.ln 57-col.6-l.15, electrons flow as current flow through the conductor 40 around the device 10).25
Re-claim 7, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is fluid (coolant is fluid inside 42, col.6, L.1-2).
Re-claim 8, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa further teaches , wherein multiple items (coolant inside multiple channels 40 shown in Fig.3) are simultaneously moved along the path both toroidally and poloidally (they move along the coil which has toroidal and poloidal shape around the pipe 10) such that when the items substantially move 30around a revolution around the torus grid when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement, the items also move poloidally (the coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus, flowing poloidally, the coolant passage comprises more than 1 passage as seen in Fig.3, having multiple particles).35 SUBSTITUTE SPECIFICATION CLEAN ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. NON-PROVISIONAL TORU01-00006US PATENT APPLICATION95
Re-claim 9, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa further discloses wherein the item (coolant inside 42) follows a continuous path (the path inside the coil passages 40) repeating a revolution around the torus grid (torus grid of the torus shaped device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction (from the top) of movement approximately that is 120 degrees (annotated Fig.1, the coil runs around the whole torus shaped device 10, therefore any part of the coolant would be moved since connections of coolant pipes could be anywhere in the coil and it runs around 360 degrees, therefore, 3 portions of the cooling pipe would be considered a revolution of a continues path and is 120 degrees apart from the path that is after the 120 degrees) apart from a prior revolution (Fig.1).5
Re-claim 10, as best understood, Ohkawa discloses a system (10, toroidal plasma device) of moving an item in a torus-like infinity pattern (toroidal plasma device 10, col.5, L.810), the system comprising:5 a channel (42) for moving an item poloidally (central passage 42 is for the circulation of coolant and is contained within 40, col.5, L.57, col.6 L.15, also could consider poloidal magnetic field elements traveling with coil forming poloidal and toroidal magnetic flux paths) along a path (path of 40) with reference to a torus grid (shape of the device 10 is torus shape) ; wherein the channel (42, or channel for coils) in at least partially the item toroidally (annotated Fig.1,the coil is toroidal around 10, therefore the coolant will flow in toroidal direction as well) along the path with reference to the torus grid (torus grid of the pipe 10) such that when the item (coolant inside 40) substantially moves around a revolution (winding 40 are around 10, Fig.1) around the torus grid (grid of device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement ), the channel (channel of coil or coolant) also moves the item (coolant, or electric charge) poloidally (central passages for the circulation of coolant are contained within the conductors 40, col.5, L57 – Col.6,-15, such that coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus flowing poloidal to get from all around the torus shaped device 10, ), [examiner takes official notice that the movement of the object around the torus shaped structure is moving poloidally an also toroidally as the structure of the rotors shaped pipe 10 is torus shaped same as the invention claims and the movement of the electrons, wire, electrical current in the wire around 10, the movement of the coolant inside the pipe 42 is both toroidal and poloidal as shown in the drawings and annotated in the drawings below in the Ohkawa reference, and also as suggested by Seward showing the movement of the current in F?Ig.3, or electron movement poloidal around the torus shape and toroidal around the torus shape structure, see Fig.1 and Fig.3”, therefore, it would be obvious to call the movement of the coolant and electric flux/field, current in Ohkawa to be Poloidal and Toroidal movement]
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein another portion is linear.
However, Seward teaches wherein another portion is linear (shape of generator is fixed geometry, could be toroid, elongated toroid, figure eight shape of any desirable shape, fig.14 shows portions of the coil having linear lines above the body of the toroid sections, therefore, the 110 or coils will follow after the structure of the shape of the generator body therefore having linear and non-linear portions).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify another portion of the poloidal movement with reference to the torus grid disclosed by Ohkawa wherein another portion is linear as shown by Seward to diversify the design and structure of the generator of any desirable shape or structure therefore diversify manufacturing, use, location/space with various shaped designs (Seward, Col.2, L.1-35).
Re-claim 12, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa further teaches wherein the channel (42) does not cross another channel 42, see Fig.1 and fig.3, channels are along the coils) of movement (the coolant inside 42) 15when viewed from a cross-section cut across the toroidal direction (annotated Fig.3) of movement (path of movement of the coolant inside 42 moves within 42 around the device 10 and paths 42 do not cross each other).
Re-claim 15, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is at least one electron (winding 34, 38 induced conductors 40 and are regarded as helically wound upon the cylinders col.5.ln 57-col.6-l.15, electrons flow as current flow through the conductor 40 around the device 10).25
Re-claim 16, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is fluid (coolant is fluid inside 42, col.6, L.1-2).
Re-claim 17, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa further teaches , wherein multiple items (coolant inside multiple channels 40 shown in Fig.3) are simultaneously moved along the path both toroidally and poloidally (they move along the coil which has toroidal and poloidal shape around the pipe 10) such that when the items substantially move 30around a revolution around the torus grid when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement, the items also move poloidally (the coolant flows toroidally as it revolves around the torus, flowing poloidally, the coolant passage comprises more than 1 passage as seen in Fig.3, having multiple particles).35 SUBSTITUTE SPECIFICATION CLEAN ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. NON-PROVISIONAL TORU01-00006US PATENT APPLICATION95
Re-claim 18, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa further discloses wherein the channel (coolant inside 42) follows a continuous path (the path inside the coil passages 40) repeating a revolution around the torus grid (torus grid of the torus shaped device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction (from the top) of movement approximately that is 120 degrees (annotated Fig.1, the coil runs around the whole torus shaped device 10, therefore any part of the coolant would be moved and it runs around 360 degrees, therefore, 3 portions of the cooling pipe would be considered a revolution of a continues path and is 120 degrees apart from the path that is after the 120 degrees) apart from a prior revolution (Fig.1).5
Claims 4, 5, 11, 13, 14 as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkawa in view of Seward and in further of view of Adams (US Patent 5139217 hereinafter “Adams”).
Re-claim 4, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is at least one sphere (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
PNG
media_image5.png
540
608
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 5, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is a plurality of spheres (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
Re-claim 13 as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is at least one sphere (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
Re-claim 14, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is a plurality of spheres (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-11, 12 and 15-18 as best understood are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkawa (US Patent 4302284 hereinafter “Ohkawa”) in view of reference Yang (US Patent 4774048 hereinafter “Yang””).
Re-claim 1 as best understood, Ohkawa discloses a method (claim 34, L.1, method of operating a toroidal plasma device) of moving an item in a torus-like pattern (toroidal plasma device 10, col.5, L.810), the method comprising:5 moving an item poloidally (central passage 42 is for the circulation of coolant and is contained within the conductor 40 which is around the torus shape in Fig.1, col.5, L.57, col.6 L.15, coolant will move round the torus shaped pipe inside the passages 42 and will have 2 components for the direction of movement, a poloidal component going around the pipe as shown in annotated Fig.1 and another Toroidal component moving around the circumference of the Torus shape in Fig.1, also could consider poloidal magnetic field elements traveling with coil forming poloidal and toroidal magnetic flux paths) along a path (path of 40 is a channel which directs coolant or charges) with reference to a torus grid (shape of the device 10 is torus shape) ; and at least partially moving the item toroidally (see arrow of toroidal component in annotated Fig.1,the coil is toroidal around 10, the coolant inside 42 moves around the Torus shape and at least partially moves toroidal, around the circumference of the pipe therefore the coolant will flow in toroidal direction as well) along the path with reference to the torus grid (torus grid of the pipe 10) such that when the item (coolant inside 40) substantially moves around a revolution (winding 40 are around 10, Fig.1) around the torus grid (grid of device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement ), the item also moves poloidal (central passages for the circulation of coolant are contained within the conductors 40, col.5, L57 – Col.6,-15, such that coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus flowing poloidal to get from all around the torus shaped device 10), [examiner takes official notice that the movement of the object around the torus shaped structure is moving poloidally an also toroidally as the structure of the rotors shaped pipe 10 is torus shaped same as the invention claims and the movement of the electrons, wire, electrical current in the wire around 10, the movement of the coolant inside the pipe 42 is both toroidal and poloidal as shown in the drawings and annotated in the drawings below in the Ohkawa reference, and also as suggested by Yang showing the movement of the current in F3, or electron movement poloidal around the torus shape and toroidal around the torus shape structure, see Fig.1 and Fig.3”, therefore, it would be obvious to call the movement of the coolant and electric flux/field, current in Ohkawa to be Poloidal and Toroidal movement], a portion of the poloidal movement (movement of electrical current in the wires 34 or coolant in passages 42) with reference to the torus grid (grid of the device pipe 10) is non-linear (it is circular around the torus shaped device 10).
PNG
media_image2.png
433
821
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
347
866
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
749
958
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein another portion is linear.
However, However, Yang teaches wherein another portion is linear (annotated Fig.4, shows device is D shaped, so it has a linear portion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify another portion of the poloidal movement with reference to the torus grid disclosed by Ohkawa wherein another portion is linear as shown by Yang to provide more space in the central part of the torus shape allowing for more parts to be confined (Yang, Col.3, L.45-63),furthermore, , change is shape is a typical structure change, see also prior art Seward above.
PNG
media_image6.png
786
757
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 3, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa further teaches wherein the path (42) of movement of the item (the coolant inside 42) does 15 not cross another path of movement when viewed from a cross-section cut across the toroidal direction (annotated Fig.3) of movement (path of movement of the coolant inside 42 moves within 42 around the device 10 and paths 42 do not cross each other).
Re-claim 6, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is at least one electron (winding 34, 38 induced conductors 40 and are regarded as helically wound upon the cylinders col.5.ln 57-col.6-l.15, electrons flow as current flow through the conductor 40 around the device 10).25
Re-claim 7, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is fluid (coolant is fluid inside 42, col.6, L.1-2).
Re-claim 8, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa further teaches , wherein multiple items (coolant inside multiple channels 40 shown in Fig.3) are simultaneously moved along the path both toroidally and poloidally (they move along the coil which has toroidal and poloidal shape around the pipe 10) such that when the items substantially move 30around a revolution around the torus grid when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement, the items also move poloidally (the coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus, flowing poloidally, the coolant passage comprises more than 1 passage as seen in Fig.3, having multiple particles).35 SUBSTITUTE SPECIFICATION CLEAN ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. NON-PROVISIONAL TORU01-00006US PATENT APPLICATION95
Re-claim 9, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa further discloses wherein the item (coolant inside 42) follows a continuous path (the path inside the coil passages 40) repeating a revolution around the torus grid (torus grid of the torus shaped device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction (from the top) of movement approximately that is 120 degrees (annotated Fig.1, the coil runs around the whole torus shaped device 10, therefore any part of the coolant would be moved since connections of coolant pipes could be anywhere in the coil and it runs around 360 degrees, therefore, 3 portions of the cooling pipe would be considered a revolution of a continues path and is 120 degrees apart from the path that is after the 120 degrees) apart from a prior revolution (Fig.1).5
Re-claim 10, as best understood, Ohkawa discloses a system (10, toroidal plasma device) of moving an item in a torus-like infinity pattern (toroidal plasma device 10, col.5, L.810), the system comprising:5 a channel (42) for moving an item poloidally (central passage 42 is for the circulation of coolant and is contained within 40, col.5, L.57, col.6 L.15, also could consider poloidal magnetic field elements traveling with coil forming poloidal and toroidal magnetic flux paths) along a path (path of 40) with reference to a torus grid (shape of the device 10 is torus shape) ; wherein the channel (42, or channel for coils) in at least partially the item toroidally (annotated Fig.1,the coil is toroidal around 10, therefore the coolant will flow in toroidal direction as well) along the path with reference to the torus grid (torus grid of the pipe 10) such that when the item (coolant inside 40) substantially moves around a revolution (winding 40 are around 10, Fig.1) around the torus grid (grid of device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement ), the channel (channel of coil or coolant) also moves the item (coolant, or electric charge) poloidally (central passages for the circulation of coolant are contained within the conductors 40, col.5, L57 – Col.6,-15, such that coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus flowing poloidal to get from all around the torus shaped device 10, ), [examiner takes official notice that the movement of the object around the torus shaped structure is moving poloidally an also toroidally as the structure of the rotors shaped pipe 10 is torus shaped same as the invention claims and the movement of the electrons, wire, electrical current in the wire around 10, the movement of the coolant inside the pipe 42 is both toroidal and poloidal as shown in the drawings and annotated in the drawings below in the Ohkawa reference, and also as suggested by Seward showing the movement of the current in F?Ig.3, or electron movement poloidal around the torus shape and toroidal around the torus shape structure, see Fig.1 and Fig.3”, therefore, it would be obvious to call the movement of the coolant and electric flux/field, current in Ohkawa to be Poloidal and Toroidal movement], wherein portion of the poloidal movement (movement of electrical current in the wires 34 or coolant in passages 42) with reference to the torus grid (grid of the device pipe 10) is non-linear (it is circular around the torus shaped device 10).
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein another portion is linear.
However, However, Yang teaches wherein another portion is linear (annotated Fig.4, shows device is D shaped, so it has a linear portion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify another portion of the poloidal movement with reference to the torus grid disclosed by Ohkawa wherein another portion is linear as shown by Yang to provide more space in the central part of the torus shape allowing for more parts to be confined (Yang, Col.3, L.45-63),furthermore, , change is shape is a typical structure change, see also prior art Seward above.
PNG
media_image6.png
786
757
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 12, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa further teaches wherein the channel (42) does not cross another channel 42, see Fig.1 and fig.3, channels are along the coils) of movement (the coolant inside 42) 15when viewed from a cross-section cut across the toroidal direction (annotated Fig.3) of movement (path of movement of the coolant inside 42 moves within 42 around the device 10 and paths 42 do not cross each other).
Re-claim 15, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is at least one electron (winding 34, 38 induced conductors 40 and are regarded as helically wound upon the cylinders col.5.ln 57-col.6-l.15, electrons flow as current flow through the conductor 40 around the device 10).25
Re-claim 16, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa discloses wherein the item is fluid (coolant is fluid inside 42, col.6, L.1-2).
Re-claim 17, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa further teaches , wherein multiple items (coolant inside multiple channels 40 shown in Fig.3) are simultaneously moved along the path both toroidally and poloidally (they move along the coil which has toroidal and poloidal shape around the pipe 10) such that when the items substantially move 30around a revolution around the torus grid when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement, the items also move poloidally (the coolant flows toroidally as it revolves around the torus, flowing poloidally, the coolant passage comprises more than 1 passage as seen in Fig.3, having multiple particles).35 SUBSTITUTE SPECIFICATION CLEAN ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. NON-PROVISIONAL TORU01-00006US PATENT APPLICATION95
Re-claim 18, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa further discloses wherein the channel (coolant inside 42) follows a continuous path (the path inside the coil passages 40) repeating a revolution around the torus grid (torus grid of the torus shaped device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction (from the top) of movement approximately that is 120 degrees (annotated Fig.1, the coil runs around the whole torus shaped device 10, therefore any part of the coolant would be moved and it runs around 360 degrees, therefore, 3 portions of the cooling pipe would be considered a revolution of a continues path and is 120 degrees apart from the path that is after the 120 degrees) apart from a prior revolution (Fig.1).5
Claims 4, 5, 11, 13, 14 as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkawa in view of Yang and in further view of Adams (US Patent 5139217 hereinafter “Adams”).
Re-claim 4, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is at least one sphere (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
PNG
media_image5.png
540
608
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 5, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the method of Claim 1 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is a plurality of spheres (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
Re-claim 13 as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is at least one sphere (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at least one sphere flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
Re-claim 14, as best understood, Ohkawa as modified discloses the system of Claim 10 above.
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein the item is a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path.20
Adams teaches wherein the item is a plurality of spheres (22, col.2, ln 50-60, Fig.1, spheres) flowing through tubes (12, 14) that follow the path (path inside 10).
20 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify device disclosed by Ohkawa wherein the item is at a plurality of spheres flowing through tubes that follow the path20 as suggested by Adams to increase viscosity and mass of the fluid in the tube as desired for application (Adams, Col.2 L.50-60).
Claims 1 as best understood, is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkawa in view of Stix (US Patent 3015618 hereinafter “Stix”).
Re-claim 1 as best understood, Ohkawa discloses a method (claim 34, L.1, method of operating a toroidal plasma device) of moving an item in a torus-like pattern (toroidal plasma device 10, col.5, L.810), the method comprising:5 moving an item poloidally (central passage 42 is for the circulation of coolant and is contained within the conductor 40 which is around the torus shape in Fig.1, col.5, L.57, col.6 L.15, coolant will move round the torus shaped pipe inside the passages 42 and will have 2 components for the direction of movement, a poloidal component going around the pipe as shown in annotated Fig.1 and another Toroidal component moving around the circumference of the Torus shape in Fig.1, also could consider poloidal magnetic field elements traveling with coil forming poloidal and toroidal magnetic flux paths) along a path (path of 40 is a channel which directs coolant or charges) with reference to a torus grid (shape of the device 10 is torus shape) ; and at least partially moving the item toroidally (see arrow of toroidal component in annotated Fig.1,the coil is toroidal around 10, the coolant inside 42 moves around the Torus shape and at least partially moves toroidal, around the circumference of the pipe therefore the coolant will flow in toroidal direction as well) along the path with reference to the torus grid (torus grid of the pipe 10) such that when the item (coolant inside 40) substantially moves around a revolution (winding 40 are around 10, Fig.1) around the torus grid (grid of device 10) when viewed from a cross section cut across the poloidal direction of movement ), the item also moves poloidal (central passages for the circulation of coolant are contained within the conductors 40, col.5, L57 – Col.6,-15, such that coolant flows toroidal as it revolves around the torus flowing poloidal to get from all around the torus shaped device 10), [examiner takes official notice that the movement of the object around the torus shaped structure is moving poloidally and also toroidally as the structure of the torus shaped pipe 10 is torus shaped same as the invention claims and the movement of the electrons, wire, electrical current in the wire around 10, the movement of the coolant inside the pipe 42 is both toroidal and poloidal as shown in the drawings and annotated in the drawings below in the Ohkawa reference, and also as suggested by Seward showing the movement of the current in F?Ig.3, or electron movement poloidal around the torus shape and toroidal around the torus shape structure, see Fig.1 and Fig.3”, therefore, it would be obvious to call the movement of the coolant and electric flux/field, current in Ohkawa to be Poloidal and Toroidal movement.], a portion of the poloidal movement (movement of electrical current in the wires 34 or coolant in passages 42) with reference to the torus grid (grid of the device pipe 10) is non-linear (it is circular around the torus shaped device 10).
Ohkawa fails to explicitly teach wherein another portion is linear.
However, Stix teaches wherein another portion is linear (shape of the wire structure shown in Figure from Stix below, of item 34 where winding 36 is located specially at portion connecting to terminals 3, 40, see fig. from Stix ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to modify another portion of the poloidal movement with reference to the torus grid disclosed by Ohkawa wherein another portion is linear as shown by Stix to diversify the designed and wind winding around ring about straight section of the tube 14, and provide energization and connection to terminal of winding as indicated in (Stix, Col.8 L.67-73).
PNG
media_image7.png
716
511
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 11 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.
Re-claim 2, as best understood, recites The method of Claim 1, wherein a portion of the poloidal movement with reference to the torus grid is non-linear and another portion is linear further comprising: redirecting the item from the non-liner portion of the channel to the linear portion of the channel.”
The combination is not taught by the prior art of record and is found allowable when combined with claim 1.
PNG
media_image8.png
476
553
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 11 reasons of allowance are same as claim 2 since they contain the same subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO-892.
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.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Maged Almawri whose telephone number is 313-446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday –Thursday 8-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Benitez can be reached on 571-27-1435. 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.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834