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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 10-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516).
Regarding claim 1, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) a thermally packaged atomic device (see pars. [0036]-[0037]), the atomic device comprising:
an atomic vapor cell 21 [0040];
at least one heater 23 [0040] configured to heat the atomic vapor cell 21 [0042]; and
an enclosure 60/26 (container/package: [0078]; Fig. 6) filled with a gas selected for having a thermal conductivity less than that of air at the same pressure (i.e. a second gas G2, which can be krypton or argon, which have a thermal conductivity that is less than that of air at the same pressure, and are further recited in dependent claims 3 and 4 as examples of such a gas, see pars. [0073] and [0078]-[0079]) that surrounds the atomic vapor cell 21 with the gas (as shown in Fig. 6; [0077]-[0079]).
Regarding claim 3, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) the gas comprises krypton (see pars. [0073] and [0078]-[0079]).
Regarding claim 4, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) the gas comprises argon (see pars. [0073] and [0078]-[0079]).
Regarding claim 5, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) a vapor cell mount (as shown in Fig. 8; the walls of the cell 21 are mounted to the package 26 and thereby to the container 60) to couple the atomic vapor cell 21 to the enclosure 60/26 (as shown in Figs. 3-8).
Regarding claim 10, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) electrical feedthroughs (to the heater 23: [0043]); and wherein:
the electrical feedthroughs are embedded into the surface of the enclosure 60/26 and provide power to the at least one heater 23 (implicit, the heater requires power which must come from outside the package/container; [0043]).
Regarding claim 11, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) a temperature sensor 24 [0040] coupled to the atomic vapor cell 21 [0042]; and wherein:
the temperature sensor 24 is configured to sense a temperature of the atomic vapor cell 21 [0042].
Regarding claim 12, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) the atomic vapor cell 21 comprises alkali atoms (see pars. [0036] and [0042]).
Regarding claim 13, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) the atomic device comprises a magnetic field sensor (i.e. can be used in a magnetocardiograph: [0122]).
Regarding claim 14, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) the atomic device comprises an atomic frequency reference [0035]-[0036].
Regarding claim 16, Chindo discloses (Figs. 1-8) the atomic device comprises an electrometry sensor (i.e. can be used in an electrocardiographic, etc.: [0122]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Rasche (U.S. Pub. 2011/0185812).
Regarding claim 17, Chindo discloses a method of manufacturing a thermally packaged atomic device (see pars. [0036]-[0037]; Figs. 1-8), the method of manufacturing comprising:
mounting an atomic vapor cell 21 to an enclosure base 60/26 (container/package: [0078]; Fig. 6);
placing enclosure walls on the enclosure base to surround the atomic vapor cell 21 (as shown in Fig. 6);
backfilling a surrounding environment of the atomic vapor cell 21 with a gas selected for having a thermal conductivity less than that of air at the same pressure (i.e. a second gas G2, which can be krypton or argon, which have a thermal conductivity that is less than that of air at the same pressure, and are further recited in dependent claims 3 and 4 as examples of such a gas, see pars. [0073] and [0078]-[0079]) and placing an enclosure top on the enclosure walls (as shown in Fig. 6) to create an enclosed volume that surrounds the atomic vapor cell 21 with the gas (as shown in Fig. 6; [0077]-[0079]).
Chindo does not disclose clamping the enclosure walls to the enclosure base; bonding the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at an interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base; clamping the enclosure top to the enclosure walls; and bonding the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at an interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls.
Raschke discloses (Figs. 1-3) clamping the enclosure walls to the enclosure base (see pars. [0029] and [0036]; Figs. 1-3); bonding the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at an interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base (see pars. [0029] and [0036]); clamping the enclosure top to the enclosure walls (see pars. [0029] and [0036]; Figs. 1-3); and bonding the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at an interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls (see pars. [0029] and [0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s method of manufacturing to include clamping the enclosure walls to the enclosure base; bonding the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at an interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base; clamping the enclosure top to the enclosure walls; and bonding the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at an interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls, as taught by Raschke.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding claim 19, Chindo discloses backfilling the surrounding environment with the gas having a thermal conductivity less than air comprises backfilling the surrounding environment with krypton (see pars. [0073] and [0078]-[0079]).
Regarding claim 20, Chindo discloses embedding electrical feedthroughs onto an upper surface of the enclosure base 60/26 (to the heater 23: [0043]); and wiring the electrical feedthroughs to a heater 23 mounted to the atomic vapor cell 21 [0043].
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516).
Also, claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Rasche (U.S. Pub. 2011/0185812).
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Chindo is applied as above, but does not disclose the gas comprises xenon (re. claim 18: backfilling the gas).
However, since Chindo discloses that the gas can be one of the Noble gases: [0073], [0078]-[0079]), and since Xenon is also a noble gas with an established low thermal conductivity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s device so that the gas comprises xenon; and to modify Chindo’s method of manufacturing to include backfilling the surrounding environment with xenon.
Such a modification would be to merely rely on scientific theory and knowledge that would be well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention – see MPEP 2144.02.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Thompson et al. (U.S. Pub. 2018/0090726).
Regarding claim 6, Chindo is applied as above, but does not disclose the enclosure is sealed with an adhesive.
Thompson discloses (Fig. 5) the enclosure is sealed with an adhesive [0159].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s device so that the enclosure is sealed with an adhesive, as taught by Thompson.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Zheng et al. (CN 111060088 – translation attached).
Also, claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Rasche (U.S. Pub. 2011/0185812), and further in view of Zheng et al. (CN 111060088).
Regarding claims 7 and 21, Chindo is applied as above, but does not disclose the enclosure is sealed with a laser bond; and laser welding the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at the interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base; and laser welding the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at the interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls.
Zheng discloses (Fig. 5) the enclosure is sealed with a laser bond (bottom p. 5); and laser welding the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at the interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base (bottom p. 5, when combined with Chindo and Rasche); and laser welding the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at the interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls (bottom p. 5, when combined with Chindo and Rasche).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s device so that the enclosure is sealed with a laser bond; and to modify Chindo’s method of manufacturing to include laser welding the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at the interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base; and laser welding the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at the interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls, as taught by Zheng.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding claim 15, Chindo is applied as above, but does not disclose the atomic device comprises a gyroscope
Zheng discloses (Fig. 5) the atomic device comprises a gyroscope (top p. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s device so that the atomic device comprises a gyroscope, as taught by Zheng.
Such a modification would be a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Nagasaka et al. (CN 104188626 – translation attached).
Also, claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Rasche (U.S. Pub. 2011/0185812), and further in view of Nagasaka et al. (CN 104188626).
Regarding claims 8 and 22, Chindo is applied as above, but does not disclose the enclosure is sealed with solder; and soldering the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at the interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base; and soldering the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at the interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls.
Nagasaka discloses (Fig. 5) the enclosure is sealed with solder [0141]; and soldering the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at the interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base ([0141], when combined with Chindo and Rasche); and soldering the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at the interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls ([0141], when combined with Chindo and Rasche).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s device so that the enclosure is sealed with solder; and to modify Chindo’s method of manufacturing to include soldering the enclosure walls to the enclosure base at the interface between the enclosure walls and the enclosure base; and soldering the enclosure top to the enclosure walls at the interface between the enclosure top and the enclosure walls, as taught by Nagasaka.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chindo (U.S. Pub. 2020/0028516) in view of Kitching et al. (U.S. Pub. 2005/0007118).
Regarding claim 9, Chindo is applied as above, but does not disclose the enclosure is sealed with an anodic bond.
Kitching discloses (Fig. 5) the enclosure is sealed with an anodic bond [0047]-[0049].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chindo’s device so that the enclosure is sealed with an anodic bond, as taught by Kitching.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03-13-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that claim 1 requires the functional property "having a thermal conductivity that is less than that of air at the same pressure", which Chindo lacks. However, the quoted claim limitation is not a function limitation (i.e. is not a function that the device performs, rather, it is a statement of intention of the selection of the gas, and the intention itself does not have patentable weight). Since Chindo discloses all the structural features of claim 1, and Chindo discloses that a gas can be selected which meets the limitations in claim 1 (i.e. krypton or argon, which have a thermal conductivity that is less than that of air at the same pressure, see pars. [0073] and [0078]-[0079]), Chindo anticipates the claim.
Applicant also argues that Chindo lists additional gasses that do not have the claimed properties, however, when the species is clearly named, the species claim is anticipated no matter how many other species are additionally named – see MPEP 3121.02(II). Therefore, since Chindo discloses argon and krypton, which both at equal pressure, exhibit lower thermal conductivity than air, the reference anticipates claim 1.
Applicant also argues that the intended use of the Invention results in different design choices, however, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention 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. Also, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., non-atmospheric, e.g., 400 kPa, fills; and package geometry for heat loss reduction) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
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 Benjamin Schmitt, whose telephone number is (571) 270-7930. The examiner can normally be reached M-F | 8:30-5:00.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/BENJAMIN R SCHMITT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights