DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant, on page 11, argues that Shimonosono teaches away from the invention because the invention intentionally introduces a non-uniform convexity.
This argument is not persuasive because there is no support in the disclosure that a non-uniform convexity is intentionally introduced. In fact, the disclosure intentionally creates a strong magnetic field, that is the strongest and most uniform, in the center of the cavity (see paragraph 25 and figure 3a). Convex distribution is part of this field due to positioning of the coils. This is the same as the prior art device as shown by magnetic field lines 7 in figures 2-3 as well as in other figures. In fact, without a strong field having substantial uniformity in the center of the cavity, the device would not have utility. The magnetic field distribution shapes having concave and convex components are also present in the prior art away from the center in the same way as shown by the applicant in figure 3a due to the same arrangement/positioning of the coils. Thus, the prior art is capable of producing the claimed field distribution and also discloses this distribution as best shown in figures 4 and 13, which shows concave and convex non-uniform field distributions. In other words, the positioning of the coils as well as current supply to the coils creates the field distribution. Since the positioning and current control structures in the prior art are the same as in the claimed device, the field distribution that is being claimed is also capable of being created, and is in fact shown in prior art as best seen in figures 4 and 13.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7, 9, 15-16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimonosono et al. (US 6984264) in view of Hirose (JP 2000-147082).
In re claim 1, Shimonosono, in figures 1-17 (see figure 12 for best embodiment), discloses a superconducting magnet device comprising: a tubular cryostat (5) that defines a central cavity therein; a first superconducting coil set (4a,4d) and a second superconducting coil set (4b-c, 4e-f) that are disposed outside the central cavity and inside the tubular cryostat; a power supply system (connected to 11) that is capable of controlling a magnitude of a first exciting current to the first superconducting coil set and a magnitude of a second exciting current to the second superconducting coil set (inherent function). Shimonosono does not teach independent coil control or coils connected in two series circuits. Hirose however, in figures 1-4, teaches a similar device having a power supply system that is capable of controlling a magnitude of a first exciting current to the first superconducting coil set and a magnitude of a second exciting current to the second superconducting coil set independently of each other (power supply 26-27, and 9) and while the first exciting current is being supplied to the first superconducting coil set and the second exciting current is being supplied to the second superconducting coil set, wherein the power supply system includes a first power supply that supplies the first exciting current to each superconducting coil of the first superconducting coil set and a second power supply that supplies the second exciting current to each superconducting coil of the second superconducting coil set (inherent function of the shown structures). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed a control system to control coils of Shimonosono independently as shown by Hirose in order to provide a more precise field control for better field uniformity (adapting the controller of Hirose for the application of Shimonosono is routine for one of ordinary skill in the art since both coil types are superconducting coils). The combined device discloses that when a center axis of the tubular cryostat is defined as a Z axis and two axes perpendicular to the Z axis and perpendicular to each other are defined as an X axis and a Y axis, respectively, the first superconducting coil set is configured to generate a first magnetic field when the first exciting current is supplied, wherein a X-direction distribution of the first magnetic field has a maximum at a X position of the first superconducting coil set and decreases toward a center of the central cavity along the X axis from the X position of the first superconducting coil set, wherein a Y-direction distribution of the first magnetic field has a maximum at the center of the central cavity and decreases outward along the Y axis from the center of the central cavity, and the second superconducting coil set includes a pair of second superconducting coils disposed to face each other with the central cavity interposed therebetween and disposed adjacent to the pair of first superconducting coils in a clockwise direction around the Z axis, and a second pair of second superconducting coils disposed to face each other with the central cavity interposed therebetween and disposed adjacent to the pair of first superconducting coils in a counterclockwise direction around the Z axis (the arrangement shown in figure 12 is the same as the claimed arrangement), and the second superconducting coil set is configured to generate a second magnetic field when the second exciting current is supplied, wherein a X-direction distribution of the second magnetic field has a maximum at the center of the central cavity and decreases outward along the X axis from the center of the central cavity, wherein a Y-direction distribution of the second magnetic field has a minimum at the center of the central cavity and increases outward along the Y axis from the center of the central cavity (the disclosed device is capable of performing the claimed functionality since all of the structural components necessary to perform this functionality are already disclosed. Furthermore, the coils are capable of being energized to create a magnetic field distribution that meets the claim limitations. The field distributions shown in the figures meet the claim limitations (see figures 2-4, and 12-13 for best views of coil arrangements and field distributions)).
In re claim 7, Shimonosono, in figure 12, discloses that the first pair of second superconducting coils are disposed on a line forming an angle of 60 degrees from the X axis clockwise around the Z axis, and the second pair of second superconducting coils are disposed on a line forming an angle of 60 degrees from the X axis counterclockwise around the Z axis (as shown in figure 12; 60 degree angles are inherent to the six coil arrangement evenly distributed around the cavity as shown).
In re claim 9, Shimonosono modified by Hirose teaches that the power supply system includes a power supply controller (26-27, 9 in Hirose) that controls the magnitude of the first exciting current and the magnitude of the second exciting current such that a total value of magnetic fields generated at a predetermined position in the central cavity by the first superconducting coil set and the second superconducting coil set does not exceed an upper limit value (this is inherent functionality of the controller so it does not malfunction).
In re claim 15, Shimonosono modified by Hirose discloses that the first superconducting coil set includes a pair of first superconducting coils connected in series in the tubular cryostat (series connection is discussed by Hirose in paragraphs 6 and 8 and would have been obvious to have applied to the combined device to power the windings of Shimonosono), the power supply system further comprises a first circuit connecting the first power supply to the first superconducting coil set, the first circuit comprising a positive feedthrough terminal and a negative feedthrough terminal that introduce the first exciting current into the tubular cryostat, the positive feedthrough terminal and the negative feedthrough terminal configured to provide airtightness of the tubular cryostat (inherent functionality for proper temperature control), a positive electrode of the first power supply is connected to one of the pair of first superconducting coils via the positive feedthrough terminal and a negative electrode of the first power supply is connected to the other one of the pair of first superconducting coils via the negative feedthrough terminal (as shown in figures 1-4 of Hirose and figures 14-17 of Shimonosono).
In re claim 16, Shimonosono modified by Hirose discloses that the second superconducting coil set includes a first pair of second superconducting coils connected in series in the tubular cryostat (series connection is discussed by Hirose in paragraphs 6 and 8 and would have been obvious to have applied to the combined device to power the windings of Shimonosono), the power supply system further comprises a second circuit connecting the second power supply to the second superconducting coil set, the second circuit comprising a positive feedthrough terminal that introduces the second exciting current into the tubular cryostat, the positive feedthrough terminal configured to provide airtightness of the tubular cryostat, a positive electrode of the second power supply is connected to the first pair of second superconducting coils via the positive feedthrough terminal (as shown in figures 1-4 of Hirose and figures 14-17 of Shimonosono).
In re claim 4, Hirose teaches that it is known to connect superconducting coils in series (series connection is discussed by Hirose in paragraphs 6 and 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have applied this teaching and have connected a second pair of superconducting coils disclosed by Shimonosono in series in the same way as the first pair discussed in claim 16 above. The negative feedthrough terminal configured to provide airtightness of the tubular cryostat, a negative electrode of the second power supply connected to the second pair of second superconducting coils via the negative feedthrough terminal are disclosed by both references (as shown in figures 1-4 of Hirose and figures 14-17 of Shimonosono).
In re claim 18, Shimonosono in view of Hirose discloses that the first superconducting coil set and the second superconducting coil set are configured to generate a combined magnetic field distribution of the first magnetic field and the second magnetic field in the central cavity when the first exciting current is supplied to the pair of first superconducting coils and the second exciting current is supplied to the first and second pairs of second superconducting coils (this is an inherent function of the disclosed coils and is shown in figures 4-10 and 13), and the power supply system is configured to control a balance between the first exciting current and the second exciting current to adjust a convex shape of the combined magnetic field distribution (this is an inherent functionality of the disclosed device in order to achieve desired field distributions as shown in the figures; without this functionality the device would not be able to produce the disclosed field distributions).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 11-12 are allowed.
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 Alexander Talpalatski whose telephone number is (571)270-3908. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM PT.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 5712723985. 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.
/Alexander Talpalatski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837