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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/18/2026.
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.
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, 2, 4, 7, 10, 12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein (2017/0059722) in view of E.H. Eberhardt (3,337,737).
Regarding Claim 1, Stein discloses a radiation portal monitor (Para. 0011: Disclosed is a self-stabilizing scintillation detector system for the measurement of nuclear radiation, preferably gamma radiation) comprising: a scintillator configured to convert high energy photons into low energy photons (Para. 0018: a scintillator crystal 10 with a reflective coating 11, reflecting the light 12 [low energy photons], emitted from the scintillator when a gamma ray 15 [high energy photons] from a radiation source 16 interacts with the scintillation crystal); a photomultiplier tube (PMT) coupled to said scintillator (Paras. 0018-0019: a scintillator crystal 10 with a reflective coating 11, reflecting the light 12, emitted from the scintillator when a gamma ray 15 from a radiation source 16 interacts with the scintillation crystal. At one side of the scintillation crystal, a photocathode 20 is located.. When the light 12 hits the photocathode 20, photoelectrons 25 are emitted and directed to a dynode chain 30 within a photomultiplier tube (PMT) 50; Fig. 1), said PMT comprising: a photocathode configured to convert the low energy photons into electrons (Paras. 0018-0019: a scintillator crystal 10 with a reflective coating 11, reflecting the light 12, emitted from the scintillator when a gamma ray 15 from a radiation source 16 interacts with the scintillation crystal. At one side of the scintillation crystal, a photocathode 20 is located. When the light 12 [low energy photons] hits the photocathode 20, photoelectrons 25 [electrons] are emitted and directed to a dynode chain 30 within a photomultiplier tube (PMT) 50; Fig. 1); a series of dynodes configured to cascade the electrons (Para. 0019: When the light 12 hits the photocathode 20, photoelectrons 25 are emitted and directed to a dynode chain 30 within a photomultiplier tube (PMT) 50, hitting the first dynode DI. The number of electrons hitting the first dynode DI is then multiplied by a factor G from the first dynode, then hitting the second third and so on dynodes before leading to the anode 40) to facilitate detecting gamma events (Claim 1: A self-stabilizing scintillation detector system for the measurement of nuclear radiation, preferably gamma radiation. a photomultiplier (PMT) with n. dynodes and an evaluation system connected to the output port of the PMT; Claim 4: The detector system of claim 1 utilizing only those electric currents Idyn1 and Idyn2 at the at least two dynodes m1 and m2 when the measured current I is above a predefined threshold; Claim 5: The detector system of claim 4 wherein the threshold is set to allow only electric currents Idyn1 and Idyn2 and to pass, being equivalent to a measured gamma-event with a deposited gamma energy of at least 10 MeV preferably between 10 MeV and 100 MeV)
Stein fails to explicitly disclose an electron deflecting arrangement configured to selectively deflect the electrons before they encounter said series of dynodes.
Eberhardt is in the field of multiplier phototubes (Claim 10) and teaches an electron deflecting arrangement configured to selectively deflect the electrons before they encounter said series of dynodes (Claim 10: In a multiplier phototube having a photocathode adapted to receive radiation from a source of unknown intensity and to convert the same to a first electron beam, electron multiplying means including a plurality of dynode elements. means for calibrating said phototube comprising means for continuously providing a second electron beam in said tube simultaneously with said first beam and having a predetermined beam current, said second beam being normally directed away from and not impinging upon said multiplying means; means selectively deflecting both said first beam away from said multiplying means and said second beam onto the same so that only said second beam is multiplied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Stein to include an electron deflecting arrangement as taught by Eberhardt for the purpose of providing a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Col. 1 lines 42 56).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the radiation portal monitor of claim 1, wherein said electron deflecting arrangement comprises at least one coil.
Eberhardt teaches said electron deflecting arrangement comprises at least one coil (Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 are provided. When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18. Thus, with switch 37 closed, the output signal appearing across the load resistor 26 is responsive to the calibrated electron beam 32 rather than to the electron beam 17 resulting from the unknown radiation 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Stein to include an electron deflecting arrangement as taught by Eberhardt for the purpose of providing a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Eberhardt, Col. 1 lines 42 56).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the radiation portal monitor of claim 2, wherein said at least one coil comprises a pair of coils positioned and oriented to generate a lateral magnetic field that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
Eberhardt teaches at least one coil comprises a pair of coils positioned and oriented to generate a lateral magnetic field that is oblique to a longitudinal axis of said PMT (Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 [lateral magnetic field oblique to the longitudinal axis of the PMT, see Fig. 1] are provided. When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to teach at least one coil comprises a pair of coils positioned and oriented to generate a lateral magnetic field that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of said PMT, since discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would have been to providing a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Eberhardt, Col. 1 lines 42 - 56).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the radiation portal monitor of claim 2, wherein said at least one coil is arranged such that electromagnetic forces generated by said at least one coil act on the electrons to destructively affect a trajectory of the electrons and cause signal reduction in said PMT.
Eberhardt teaches at least one coil is arranged such that electromagnetic forces generated by said at least one coil act on the electrons to destructively affect a trajectory of the electrons and cause signal change in said PMT (Col. 3 lines 16 30: When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38 [destructive affect of electron beam], and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18. Thus, with switch 37 closed, the output signal appearing across the load resistor 26 is responsive to the calibrated electron beam 32 rather than to the electron beam 17 resulting from the unknown radiation 20 [PMT signal change]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to teach at least one coil is arranged such that electromagnetic forces generated by said at least one coil act on the electrons to destructively affect a trajectory of the electrons and cause signal reduction in said PMT, since discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Eberhardt, Col. 1 lines 42 - 56).
Regarding Claim 10, Stein discloses a method of operating a radiation portal monitor (Para. 0011: Disclosed is a self-stabilizing scintillation detector system for the measurement of nuclear radiation, preferably gamma radiation), said method comprising: converting high energy photons into low energy photons using a scintillator (Para. 0018: a scintillator crystal 10 with a reflective coating 11, reflecting the light 12 [low energy photons], emitted from the scintillator when a gamma ray 15 [high energy photons] from a radiation source 16 interacts with the scintillation crystal); converting the low energy photons into electrons using a photocathode of a photomultiplier tube (PMT) (Paras. 0018-0019: a scintillator crystal 10 with a reflective coating 11, reflecting the light 12, emitted from the scintillator when a gamma ray 15 from a radiation source 16 interacts with the scintillation crystal. At one side of the scintillation crystal, a photocathode 20 is located When the light 12 [low energy photons] hits the photocathode 20, photoelectrons 25 [electrons] are emitted and directed to a dynode chain 30 within a photomultiplier tube (PMT) 50; Fig. 1); a series of dynodes of the PMT (Para. 0019: When the light 12 hits the photocathode 20, photoelectrons 25 are emitted and directed to a dynode chain 30 within a photomultiplier tube (PMT) 50, hitting the first dynode DI. The number of electrons hitting the first dynode DI is then multiplied by a factor G from the first dynode, then hitting the second third and so on dynodes before leading to the anode 40). Stein fails to explicitly disclose selectively deflecting, using an electron deflecting arrangement, at least some of the electrons before they encounter a series of dynodes of the PMT.
Eberhardt teaches selectively deflecting, using an electron deflecting arrangement, at least some of the electrons before they encounter a series of dynodes of the PMT (Claim 10: In a multiplier phototube having a photocathode adapted to receive radiation from a source of unknown intensity and to convert the same to a first electron beam, electron multiplying means including a plurality of dynode elements. means for calibrating said phototube comprising means for continuously providing a second electron beam in said tube simultaneously with said first beam and having a predetermined beam current, said second beam being normally directed away from and not impinging upon said multiplying means; means selectively deflecting both said first beam away from said multiplying means and said second beam onto the same so that only said second beam is multiplied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Stein to include an electron deflecting arrangement as taught by Eberhardt for the purpose of providing a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Eberhardt, Col. 1 lines 42 - 56).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 10, wherein selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a pair of coils positioned and oriented to generate a lateral magnetic field that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the PMT.
Eberhardt teaches selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons (Col. 1 line 56 Col. 2 line 2: the calibrating means comprising means for providing a second electron beam having a predetermined beam current and means for selectively deflecting the normal electron beam away from the multiplier means and the second beam onto the same) using a pair of coils positioned and oriented to generate a lateral magnetic field that is oblique to a longitudinal axis of the PMT (Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 [lateral magnetic field oblique to the longitudinal axis of the PMT, see Fig. 1] are provided When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to teach selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a pair of coils positioned and oriented to generate a lateral magnetic field that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the PMT, since discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would have been to providing a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Eberhardt, Col. 1 lines 42 56).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 10, wherein selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons acting on the electrons using electromagnetic forces generated by at least one coil to destructively affect a trajectory of the electrons and cause signal reduction in the PMT.
Eberhardt teaches selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons (Col. 1 line 56 Col. 2 line 2: the calibrating means comprising means for providing a second electron beam having a predetermined beam current and means for selectively deflecting the normal electron beam away from the multiplier means and the second beam onto the same) acting on the electrons using electromagnetic forces generated by at least one coil to destructively affect a trajectory of the electrons and cause signal change in the PMT (Col. 3 lines 16 30: When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38 [destructive effect on electron beam], and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18. Thus, with switch 37 closed, the output signal appearing across the load resistor 26 is responsive to the calibrated electron beam 32 rather than to the electron beam 17 resulting from the unknown radiation 20 [PMT signal change]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to teach electively deflecting at least some of the electrons acting on the electrons using electromagnetic forces generated by at least one coil to destructively affect a trajectory of the electrons and cause signal reduction in the PMT, since discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would have been to providing a reliable calibration method to improve the functionality of a multiplier phototube (Eberhardt, Col. 1 lines 42 56).
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein in view of Eberhardt and Banbury (3,919,550).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 10, further comprising selectively defocusing a subset of the electrons during X-ray events using a focusing electrode of the PMT.
Banbury teaches selectively defocusing a subset of the electrons during X-ray events using a focusing electrode of the PMT (Col. 1 lines 6 - 18: collecting transmitted electrons, secondary radiation (e.g., electrons or X-rays) [x-ray events], emitted from the specimen as a result of bombardment by the electrons of the probe, may be detected to provide an output signal; Col. 2 lines 42 58: An auxiliary electrostatic or ferrite cored magnetic lens 26 [focusing electrode] is positioned between the objective lens 20 and the electron gun 14. The lens 26 is alternately activated and de-activated by means of a square-wave signal from a multivibrator circuit 28. When the lens 26 is deactivated, the probe 18 illuminates only a small spot of the specimen, as described above, but when lens 26 is activated, the probe is defocused, and illuminates a relatively extended area of the specimen).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Stein to include an electron focusing structure as taught by Banbury for the purpose of providing more control over the distribution of an electron beam (Banbury, Col. 2 lines 42 58).
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein in view of Eberhardt and Wolters et al. (2007/0013899)(also published as WO 2007/011630, citations are to the WO document, cited by Applicant).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the radiation portal monitor of claim 1, said PMT is configured to selectively adjust a gain of said series of dynodes to prevent saturation of said PMT during X-ray events.
Wolters is in the field of photomultiplier tube detectors (abstract) and teaches said PMT is configured to selectively adjust a gain of said series of dynodes to prevent saturation of said PMT (Pg. 13 lines 23 32: To avoid anode saturation, switching logic 44 may switch to the intermediate dynode voltage (VD) [dynode gain] once the anode current (IA) approaches, reaches or surpasses the saturation level. For example, switching logic 44 may use the anode saturation level, or a value slightly above or slightly below such level, as a predetermined threshold level) during X-ray events (Pg. 8 lines 18 28: The system illustrated in Fig. 1 includes an illumination subsystem. The illumination subsystem is configured to direct light to a specimen the illumination subsystem is configured to direct light having a relatively harrow wavelength band to the specimen (e.g., nearly monochromatic light or light having a wavelength range of less than about 5 nm, or even less than about 2 nm) [i.e. x-rays]; Pg. 12 lines 9 31: Fig. 2A illustrates one embodiment of a circuit 30 that may be used for detecting light scattered from a specimen [i.e. x-rays]. As such, circuit 30 may be incorporated within the inspection system of Fig. 1 as detector 18. When light (hv) enters the PMT [x-ray events], cathode 34 emits photoelectrons which cascade through dynode chain 36 to produce an amplified photoelectric current (IA) at anode 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Stein to include a PMT system as taught by Wolters for the purpose of preventing inaccurate results from a detector system when relatively large amounts of light are input into said detection system (Wolters, Pg. 11 line 35 Pg. 12 line 8).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Stein fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 10, further comprising selectively adjusting a gain of the series of dynodes to prevent saturation of the PMT during X-ray events.
Wolters teaches selectively adjusting a gain of the series of dynodes to prevent saturation of the PMT (Pg. 13 lines 23 32: To avoid anode saturation, switching logic 44 may switch to the intermediate dynode voltage (VD) [dynode gain] once the anode current (IA) approaches, reaches or surpasses the saturation level. For example, switching logic 44 may use the anode saturation level, or a value slightly above or slightly below such level, as a predetermined threshold level) during X-ray events (Pg. 8 lines 18 28: The system illustrated in Fig. 1 includes an illumination subsystem. The illumination subsystem is configured to direct light to a specimen the illumination subsystem is configured to direct light having a relatively narrow wavelength band to the specimen (e.g., nearly monochromatic light or light having a wavelength range of less than about 5 nm, or even less than about 2 nm) [i.e. x-rays]; Pg. 12 lines 9 31: Fig. 2A illustrates one embodiment of a circuit 30 that may be used for detecting light scattered from a specimen [i.e. x-rays]. As such, circuit 30 may be incorporated within the inspection system of Fig. 1 as detector 18 When light (hv) enters the PMT [x-ray events], cathode 34 emits photoelectrons which cascade through dynode chain 36 to produce an amplified photoelectric current (IA) at anode 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Stein to include a PMT system as taught by Wolters for the purpose of preventing inaccurate results from a detector system when relatively large amounts of light are input into said detection system (Wolters, Pg. 11 line 35 Pg. 12 line 8).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 6, 11, 13, and 14 are 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.
Regarding claim 3, the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or fairly suggest the radiation portal monitor of claim 2, wherein said at least one coil is configured to selectively deflect electrons in synch with X-ray pulses emitted from an X-ray source.
The following prior art Is provided to further set out and define the reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: Eberhardt (US 3,337,737 A) teaches at least one coil is configured to selectively deflect electrons (Col. 1 line 56 Col. 2 line 2: the calibrating means comprising means for providing a second electron beam having a predetermined beam current and means for selectively deflecting the normal electron beam away from the multiplier means and the second beam onto the same), but fails to explicitly teach at least one coil is configured to selectively deflect electrons in synch with X-ray pulses emitted from an X-ray source.
Regarding claim 5, the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or fairly suggest the radiation portal monitor of claim 2, wherein said at least one coil comprises a bucking coil positioned and oriented to generate a longitudinal magnetic field that is aligned with a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
The following prior art is provided to further set out and define the reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: Eberhardt (US 3,337,737 A) teaches at least one coil comprises a coil positioned and oriented to generate a magnetic field (Col. 3 lines 16 - 30; In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 are provided When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18), but fails to explicitly teach at least one coil comprises a bucking coil positioned and oriented to generate a longitudinal magnetic field that is aligned with a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or fairly suggest the radiation portal monitor of claim 2, wherein said at least one coil comprises a first coil and a second coil positioned and oriented to generate a radially outward magnetic field relative to a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
The following prior art is provided to further set out and define the reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: Eberhardt (US 3,337,737 A) teaches at least one coil comprises a first coil and a second coil positioned and oriented a magnetic field relative to a longitudinal axis of said PMT (Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 are provided When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18), but fails to explicitly teach at least one coil comprises a first coil and a second coil positioned and oriented to generate a radially outward magnetic field relative to a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or fairly suggest the method of claim 10, wherein selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons in synch with X-ray pulses emitted from an X-ray source.
The following prior art is provided to further set out and define the reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: Eberhardt (US 3,337,737 A) teaches selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons (Col. 1 line 56 Col. 2 line 2: the calibrating means comprising means for providing a second electron beam having a predetermined beam current and means for selectively deflecting the normal electron beam away from the multiplier means and the second beam onto the same; Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 are provided. When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18), but fails to explicitly teach selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons in synch with X-ray pulses emitted from an X-ray source.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or fairly suggest the method of claim 10, wherein selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a bucking coil positioned and oriented to generate a longitudinal magnetic field that is aligned with a longitudinal axis of the PMT.
The following prior art is provided to further set out and define the reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: Eberhardt (US 3,337,737 A) teaches selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a coil positioned and oriented to generate a magnetic field (Col. 1 line 56 Col. 2 line 2: the calibrating means comprising means for providing a second electron beam having a predetermined beam current and means for selectively deflecting the normal electron beam away from the multiplier means and the second beam onto the same; Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 are provided When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18), but fails to explicitly teach selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a bucking coil positioned and oriented to generate a longitudinal magnetic field that is aligned with a longitudinal axis of the PMT.
Regarding claim 14, the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or fairly suggest the method of claim 10, wherein selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a first coil and a second coil positioned and oriented to generate a radially outward magnetic field relative to a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
The following prior art is provided to further set out and define the reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: Eberhardt (US 3,337,737 A) teaches selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a first coil and a second coll positioned and oriented to generate a magnetic field relative to a longitudinal axis of said PMT (Col. 1 line 56 . Col. 2 line 2: the calibrating means comprising means for providing a second electron beam having a predetermined beam current and means for selectively deflecting the normal electron beam away from the multiplier means and the second beam onto the same; Col. 3 lines 16 30: In order to employ the calibrated electron beam 32 for calibrating the tube, conventional magnetic deflection coils 34, 35 are provided. When the switch 37 is closed thereby to energize the deflection coils 34, 35, electron beam 17 is deflected away from the aperture in element 19 as shown by the broken line 38, and the calibrated electron beam 32 is deflected through the aperture in the element 19 as shown by the broken line 41, and thus is injected into the electron multiplier 18), but fails to explicitly teach selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons comprises selectively deflecting at least some of the electrons using a first coil and a second coil positioned and oriented to generate a radially outward magnetic field relative to a longitudinal axis of said PMT.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN C GUNBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-3107. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/EDWIN C GUNBERG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights