DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This Office Action is in response to the Amendments to the Claims and Remarks filed June 22, 2026.
In view of the Amendments to the Claims filed June 22, 2026, the rejections of claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) previously presented in the Office Action sent April 1, 2026 have been withdrawn.
In view of the Amendments to the Claims filed June 22, 2026, the rejections of claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 previously presented in the Office Action sent April 1, 2026 have been substantially maintained and modified only in response to the Amendments to the Claims.
Claims 1-9 are currently pending.
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) 1-5, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akune (JP 11148872 A included in Applicant submitted IDS filed April 15, 2024) in view of Jacobs et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0289574 A1) or, in the alternative, unpatentable over Akune (JP 11148872 A included in Applicant submitted IDS filed April 15, 2024) in view of Jacobs et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0289574 A1) and Jackman et al. (GB 2472758 A).
With regard to claim 1, Akune discloses a thermocouple structure comprising:
a thermocouple including a junctional part at which one end of a positive electrode wire and one end of a negative electrode wire are joined together (as depicted in Fig. 1-2, a thermocouple including a junctional part at which one top end of a positive electrode wire 12 and one top end of a negative electrode wire 12 are joined together);
a multi-hole quartz glass pipe (as depicted in Fig. 1-2 and annotated Fig. 2 below, a quartz glass pipe at component 14 and the portion of component 32 below component 36 not including component 38 cited to read on the claimed “multi-hole quartz glass pipe”; see [0012] teaching “quartz”; see Fig. 1-3, particularly Fig. 3 depicting holes at an end surface of the solid material of the quartz glass pipe at 14 which implicitly teaches the cited quartz glass pipe including solid material except where wires 12 are disposed; however, upon contrary evidence that the cited quartz glass pipe is not solid material except where wires 12 are disposed, it would have alternatively been obvious to a person having ordinary skill to have provided the cited quartz glass pipe to include a solid quartz insulator material with bores/holes where wires 12 are disposed in order to keep the wires separated other than at the junctional part; see Jackman et al. at Fig. 4 and column 1) including
PNG
media_image1.png
548
490
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
at least a first through-hole, through which the positive electrode wire passes, and a second through-hole, through which the negative electrode wire passes, in a longitudinal direction of a columnar shape (as depicted in Fig. 1-2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, at least a first through-hole through which the cited positive electrode wire 12 passes at the top end of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe where wires 12 pass through into bond portion 38, and a second through-hole, through which the cited negative electrode wire 12 passes at the top end of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe where wires 12 pass through into bond portion 38, in a longitudinal direction of a columnar shape);
a quartz glass lid (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, a quartz glass lid at the portion of component 32 and 36 above component 38, as it comprises quartz glass);
a wiring structure in which the positive electrode wire passes through the first through-hole, the negative electrode wire passes through the second through-hole (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, a wiring structure in which the cited positive electrode wire 12 passes through the cited first through-hole at the top end of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe into bond portion 38, the cited negative electrode wire 12 passes through the cited second through-hole hole at the top end of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe into bond portion 38),
the junctional part is disposed on one end side of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the cited junctional part is disposed on one top end side of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe), and
the positive electrode wire and the negative electrode wire are drawn out of an opposite end side of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe to an outside of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe (as depicted in Fig. 1 and Fig. 3, the cited positive electrode wire 12 and the cited negative electrode wire 12 are drawn out of an opposite end side of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe to an outside of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe); and
a sealing part formed by fusion-bonding one end surface of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe to a surface of the quartz glass lid (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, a sealing part at 32; the claimed product-by-process limitation “formed by fusion-bonding one end surface of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe to a surface of the quartz glass lid” requires the structure of one end surface of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe and a surface of the quartz glass lid directly bonded without intermediate adhesive layers/material; the cited sealing part 32 is cited to read on the product-by-process limitation “formed by fusion-bonding one end surface of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe to a surface of the quartz glass lid” because, as depicted in annotated Fig. 2, it includes the structure of one top end surface of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe and a bottom surface of the cited quartz glass lid directly bonded without intermediate adhesive layers/material),
the sealing part sealing one end side of the first through-hole and one end side of the second through-hole and covering the junctional part (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the cited sealing part 32 sealing one top end side of the cited first through-hole and one top end side of the cited second through-hole from the external environment of the thermocouple structure and covering the cited junctional part).
Akune does not disclose wherein the positive and negative electrode wires have a wire diameter of 0.01 to 1.0 mm.
However, the wire diameter is a result effective variable which directly affects the wires’ ability to sufficiently withstand the range of temperatures the thermocouple is exposed to (see Jacobs et al. at [0037]).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have optimized the wire diameters of the positive and negative electrode wires in the structure of Akune and arrive at the claimed range through routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05); especially since it would have led to optimizing the wires’ ability to sufficiently withstand the range of temperatures the thermocouple is exposed to.
With regard to claim 2, independent claim 1 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Akune discloses wherein
the sealing part covers the junctional part with the junctional part clamped between an end surface on the one end side of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe and an end surface on one end side of the quartz glass lid (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the sealing part at 32 covers the cited junctional part with the cited junctional part clamped in bonding portion 38 between a top end surface on the cited one top end side of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe and a bottom end surface on one bottom end side of the cited quartz glass lid).
With regard to claim 3, dependent claim 2 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above.
Akune discloses does not disclose wherein the junctional part is a thin junctional part having a maximum thickness of 100 pm or less.
However, the thickness of the junctional part is a result effective variable directly affecting the wires of the junctional part’s ability to sufficiently withstand the range of temperatures the thermocouple is exposed to (see Jacobs et al. at [0037]).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have optimized the thickness of the junctional part in the structure of Akune, as modified above, and arrive at the claimed range through routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05); especially since it would have led to optimizing the wires of the junctional part’s ability to sufficiently withstand the range of temperatures the thermocouple is exposed to.
With regard to claim 4, independent claim 1 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Akune discloses wherein
the multi-hole quartz glass pipe has a hole receiving the junctional part on an end surface on the one end side (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe has a hole receiving the cited junctional part on a top end surface on the cited one end side, such as the hole of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe where bonding portion 38 is disposed),
the junctional part is received in the hole (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the cited junctional part is received in the cited hole), and
the sealing part covers the junctional part received in the hole with the quartz glass lid (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the cited sealing part at 32 covers the cited junctional part received in the cited hole with the cited quartz glass lid).
With regard to claim 5, dependent claim 4 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Akune discloses wherein
the hole is a counterbore, or a groove defined by a notch connecting an edge of the first through-hole and an edge of the second through-hole (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, the cited hole is a counterbore as it includes a hole at the cited first through-hole or second through-hole which is enlarged at the hole where bonding portion 38 is disposed).
With regard to claim 8, independent claim 1 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Akune discloses wherein
a temperature measurement target object made of quartz glass concurrently serves as the quartz glass lid (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, a temperature measurement target object, portion of component 32 and 36 above component 38, made of quartz glass, as it comprises quartz glass, concurrently serves as the quartz glass lid), and
a temperature of the temperature measurement target object is measured (the cited temperature measurement target object is cited to read on the claimed “a temperature of the temperature measurement target object is measured” because it is structurally capable of having a temperature measured).
With regard to claim 9, dependent claim 8 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Akune discloses wherein
a surface of the temperature measurement target object and the one end of the multi-hole quartz glass pipe are stuck and fusion-bonded together (as depicted in Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 2 above, a bottom surface of the cited temperature measurement target object at component 32 and the one top end of the cited multi-hole quartz glass pipe at component 32 are stuck and include the structure of fusion-bonded together).
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akune (JP 11148872 A included in Applicant submitted IDS filed April 15, 2024) in view of Jacobs et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0289574 A1) or, in the alternative, unpatentable over Akune (JP 11148872 A included in Applicant submitted IDS filed April 15, 2024) in view of Jacobs et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0289574 A1) and Jackman et al. (GB 2472758 A), and in further view of Gajdarus (GB 2554350 A).
With regard to claims 6 and 7, independent claim 1 is obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. or, in the alternative, obvious over Akune in view of Jacobs et al. and Jackman et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Akune discloses wherein
the multi- hole quartz glass pipe includes a bend-processed part (see Fig. 1).
Akune does not disclose wherein the multi-hole quartz glass pipe has a pipe diameter of 1 to 5 mm.
However, the pipe diameter is a result effective variable directly affecting the response time with regard to temperature change and mechanical stiffness of the pipe (see Gajdarus at line 25-35, column 1).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have optimize the pipe diameter in the structure of Akune, as modified above, and arrive at the claimed range through routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05); especially since it would have led to optimizing the response time with regard to temperature change and mechanical stiffness of the pipe.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues in the response that none of the previously presented prior art references teach the newly amended claims. However, this argument is addressed in the rejections of the claims above.
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 DUSTIN Q DAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5120. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 6:00 AM to 2:00 PM.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/DUSTIN Q DAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721 August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights