DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the request for continued examination filed on May 13th, 2026. Claims 1, 3-14, and 16-18 are pending.
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 .
Drawings
Amended drawings were received on March 6th, 2026. These drawings are accepted and entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 and 35 USC 112(a)
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, 3-14, and 16-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not supported by either a credible asserted utility or a well-established utility. In particular, the claims recite a particle detection system with a deformable member for sealing a space between housing elements so as to inhibit or prevent passage of gas through the space. The asserted utility of this is to inhibit or prevent the gas from coming into contact with electron emissive surfaces within the housing.
However, the claims require that the particle detector is within a vacuum chamber, and the space being sealed is at a location separate from the input aperture admitting the particle beam and its associated carrier gas stream. Because the detector is in a vacuum space, the only location at which gases could enter the housing would be the input aperture, due to its location in the path of the carrier gas stream. By sealing the housing elements at a location distant from the input aperture, the deformable member or deformable mass serves to prevent gas egress, rather than gas ingress. Therefore, the level of gases inside the housing would be expected to increase, rather than decrease, and the gases, which enter through the input aperture, would not be prevented or inhibited from contacting the electron emissive surfaces. In fact, by preventing the gases from leaving the internal environment one would ensure that more gas molecules contact the electron emissive surfaces.
To illustrate this, examiner has annotated the figures from applicant’s application to show the gas flows that would be expected. Though examiner has shown the vacuum pump being attached to a port at the bottom of the vacuum chamber, other vacuum port locations could be used, and in every case the gases would be drawn toward the pump but some would continue on the line towards the ion detector due to momentum. Though examiner only shows an annotated figure for the embodiment shown in figures 8A-B, the same basic gas circulation pattern would be expected in the embodiments in figures 9A-B and 10A-B.
PNG
media_image1.png
722
1048
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
824
1032
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Given the facts discussed above, it is not credible that the claimed invention would inhibit or prevent contact of any gas with one or more electron emissive surfaces. Whatever very small level of gas might be present immediately external to the housing and near the space between the housing elements would be pushed away from the space by the pressure differential between the relatively high pressure within the internal environment of the housing and the lower pressure of the vacuum chamber. Hence these gas molecules would be effectively removed by the pressure differential in the case that the space is not blocked and never reach the interior regardless.
Claims 1, 3-14, and 16-18 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 a credible 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 § 112(b)
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 16 & 17 are 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.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “wherein when the particle detector is in operation within a vacuum chamber of a mass spectrometer the inhibition or prevention of passage of the gas through the space is sufficient so as to cause an environment about the electron emissive surface(s) or a collector/anode surface of the particle detector to be different to the environment immediately external to the particle detector with regard to: presence, absence or partial pressure of a gas species in the respective environments; and/or presence, absence or concentration of a contaminant species in the respective environments.” It is unclear what level of inhabitation or prevention of the passage of gas would be considered sufficient, particularly given that the difference between the gases in the internal and external environments depends not only on the passage of gas through the space but also the level of pumping of the vacuum chamber, the distance between the transfer line and the input aperture, the size of the input aperture, and the gas content and flow speed of the carrier gas.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites “wherein the first and second housing elements, and the deformable member or the deformable mass are configured so as to together decrease a vacuum conductance of the particle detector.” It is unclear what this adds to the claim, since decreasing vacuum conductance is another way of saying gas passage is inhibited, which is already claimed.
Relevant Arts
US 2011/0002109 (Hauschild et al.) discloses a particle detection system comprising:
a vacuum chamber (inherent, both the particle detector and the mass analyzer require vacuum to function); and
a particle detector (elements 1-9) disposed within the vacuum chamber (inherent, must be in the vacuum chamber since the particle detector does not include its own vacuum housing), the particle detector comprising:
an input aperture to admit a particle beam (“entrance opening for the primary beam (10).”);
one or more electron emissive surfaces at least partially surrounded by first and second housing elements defining a space therebetween (microchannel plate, element 9, partially surrounded by stops 4, 4’); and
a deformable member or a deformable mass some or all of which occupies the space and forms a seal between the first and second housing elements (spring structures, element 5 & 6), the first and second housing elements and the deformable member or the deformable mass defining on one side an environment internal the particle detector and on another side an environment external the particle detector, wherein the deformable member or the deformable mass comprises a central region which when contacted by the first and/or second housing elements is deformed (“As a result of the introduction of the component into the fixture according to the invention, the spring structure is deflected from its rest position and exhibits a spring force on the component, such that the component is brought to a defined position.”).
Hauschild et al. does not disclose inhibiting or preventing passage of gas through the space, and the springs are deliberately placed so as not to do so.
US 2014/0264013 (Rafferty et al.) discloses a particle detection system comprising:
a vacuum chamber (element 110); and
a particle detector (element 117), the particle detector comprising:
an input aperture to admit a particle beam (element 251);
one or more electron emissive surfaces at least partially surrounded by first and second housing elements defining a space therebetween (“In use, ejected ions may enter detector 117 via aperture 251 on input end 252 and may contact one or more discrete electrodes encased in a space 254 within housing 250 to produce, in a cascade multiplication process, current.” P 54); and
a deformable member or a deformable mass some or all of which occupies the space and forms a seal between the first and second housing elements, the first and second housing elements and the deformable member or the deformable mass defining on one side an environment internal the particle detector and on another side an environment external the particle detector, wherein the deformable member or the deformable mass comprises a central region which when contacted by the first and/or second housing elements is deformed so as to inhibit or prevent passage of a gas through the space, thereby inhibiting or preventing contact of the gas with the one or more electron emissive surfaces (“Output end 153 may be sealed using, for example, an ultra-vacuum sealant to maintain low pressures within detector 117 and chamber 110c.” P 44, note that the use of a deformable member as a sealant is disclosed, even if at another location, and it would have been obvious to use this as the sealant, see “The sealing engagement of input end 152, o-ring 160, and second wall 110b in recess 129a may provide a pressure barrier so that enclosed space 110c of vacuum chamber 110 and channel 154 may be maintained at low pressures.” P 53).
Rafferty et al. does not disclose the particle detector being disposed within the vacuum chamber, and it is precisely the fact that it is outside the vacuum chamber that is the reason inhibiting gas passage is useful, as the housing is exposed to gases that are not part present in the vacuum chamber.
US 5,097,173 (Schmidt et al.) discloses a detection system comprising:
a detector, the detector comprising:
one or more electron emissive surfaces (fig. 8, elements 70, 42) at least partially surrounded by first and second housing elements defining a space therebetween (fig. 8, elements 62 and 36); and
a deformable member or a deformable mass some or all of which occupies the space and forms a seal between the first and second housing elements, the first and second housing elements and the deformable member or the deformable mass defining on one side an environment internal the particle detector and on another side an environment external the particle detector, wherein the deformable member or the deformable mass comprises a central region which when contacted by the first and/or second housing elements is deformed so as to inhibit or prevent passage of a gas through the space, thereby inhibiting or preventing contact of the gas with the one or more electron emissive surfaces (fig. 8, element 72).
Schmit et al. is directed to an electron multiplier used for detecting photons and therefore does not include either a vacuum chamber surrounding the housing or an input aperture. It is precisely because the electron multiplier is being used to detect photons and not in the vacuum chamber of a particle spectrometer that the window and its associated sealant are needed, since the detector must be sealed to form its own vacuum envelope.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed May 13th, 2026, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART whose telephone number is (571)270-5782. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6pm Pacific Time M-F.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
