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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant amendments filed 02/20/2026 have been entered. Applicant amendments overcomes the previous 112(b) and 112(d) rejection set forth in the Office Action mailed 11/20/2025, the previous 112(b) and 112(d) rejections are withdrawn.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, 4-12 remain pending in the application, with claims 1, 12 being examined and claims 2, 4-11 being withdrawn pursuant to the election filed 10/29/2024.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 recites “wherein the hollow tube has coating” where it is suggested to amend claim 12 to recite “wherein the hollow tube has a coating” to help the claim read more smoothly.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over translated Yan (CN-208952709-U) in view of Ishigaki (EP-1182249-B1) and translated Zhao (CN-101613377-A).
Regarding claim 1, Yan teaches a reducing member comprising a hollow tube in which at least an inner wall surface is consisting of zinc and in which a sample is transferred ([0023], [0030] see the heat-conducing coils are made of Φ45 steel pipes that are coated with a zinc layer, where the zinc layer prevents the inner walls of the heat-conducting coils from being corroded by high-temperature waste heat steam. Therefore, an inner wall surface of the heat-conducting coil is consisting of zinc),
wherein the hollow tube (3) has a helix shape (see Figure 1 where the heat-conducting coil 3 has a helix shape), and
The limitation “in which a sample is transferred” is directed to the function of the apparatus and/or the manner of operating the apparatus, all the structural limitations of the claim has been disclosed by Yan and the apparatus of Yan is capable of having a sample transferred. As such, it is deemed that the claimed apparatus is not differentiated from the apparatus of Yan (see MPEP §2114).
[0015] describes where waste heat steam generated from material disinfection is introduced into multiple sets of heat-conducing coils, and therefore the heat-conducting coils are capable of having a sample transferred within them.
Further, please note that the sample has not been positively recited in the claim and is therefore not a part of the reducing member.
However, Yan does not teach that the steel pipe has an inner diameter of 0.5 mm to 1.5 mm.
In the same problem solving area of tubing, Ishigaki teaches an internal cooler (Ishigaki; [0099]).
Specifically, Ishigaki teaches where the internal cooler is a coiled tube made of stainless steel arranged in the reactor to cool the reactor by circulating water, and has an internal diameter of 2 mm (Ishigaki; [0099]).
Yan is silent with regards to specific units and dimensions for the heat-conducting coils, therefore, it would have been necessary and thus obvious to look to the prior art for conventional dimensions of heat conducting coils. Ishigaki provides this conventional teaching showing that it is known in the art to use an internal diameter of size of mm, diameter of 2 mm. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have the internal diameter of the heat-conducting coils of Yan be 2 mm because it is taught by Ishigaki that this is an effective diameter for coiled tubes involved with temperature regulation.
While Ishigaki does not specifically teach the inner diameter of the tube to be 0.5 to 1.5 mm, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to determine, through routine experimentation, the optimum inner diameter to a range of 0.5 to 1.5 mm because it is taught by Zhao that for pipelines involved with heating that diameter and length can be adjusted according to equipment scale, flow rate, and preheating temperature (Zhao; [0029]) (MPEP § 2144.05 (II)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is 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 and to fix the claim objection as stated above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 12, the closest prior art of record is translated Yan (CN-208952709-U) in view of Ishigaki (EP-1182249-B1) and translated Zhao (CN-101613377-A).
While Yan does teach that the heat-conducting coils are coated with a zinc layer, it is described that the zinc layer prevents the inner walls of the coils from being corroded by high-temperature waste heat steam. It would not be obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the coils of Yan to have a coating consisting of copper on the inner wall surface consisting of zinc, as this would negate the purpose of the zinc coating.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claim and arguments, see page 6, filed 02/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yan (CN-208952709-U), Ishigaki (EP-1182249-B1) and translated Zhao (CN-101613377-A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA LYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-9856. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 M-Th.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at (571)272-1234. 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.
/S.Y.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1796
/MELVIN C. MAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1759