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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 18-39 in the reply filed on 1/20/2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. Paragraph 0003 of the specification contains multiple references which are not provided. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “3” has been used to designate both “infrared radiation emitter” and “radiation source”. The issue is that “radiation source” is a broader term than “infrared radiation emitter”, thus two different things being labeled the same.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “6” has been used to designate both “controlled crystallization chamber” and “hydraulic line”.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: reference number 7 is not described in the specification.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: reference number 11 is not described in the specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1 the “the” in “the grains” should be removed, since grains has not been previously introduced. This does not rise to the level of indefiniteness, but appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 the phrase “characterized in that it comprises” is confusing due to “it”. The phrase can simply be amended to say “comprising”. This does not rise to the level of indefiniteness, but appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, “polymer powder” should be “the polymer powder”. This does not rise to the level of indefiniteness, but appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4 a “the” is needed before “grains” for proper antecedent basis. This does not rise to the level of indefiniteness, but appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4 a “the” is needed before “deagglomerated” for proper antecedent basis. This does not rise to the level of indefiniteness, but appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6 there needs to be a comma after nigrosine. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 5 there needs to be an “and” after the comma. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 34 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6 there needs to be a comma after “chamber”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 35 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 5 there needs to be a comma after “chamber”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 37 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 there needs to be a comma after “lead glass”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 37 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “fused quartz known commercially under the names JGS-2 or JGS-3” is not technically correct. JGS-2 and JGS-3 are Chinese industrial standards for fused quartz not the actual name of the fused quartz (see https://jxtwafer.com/about/blogs/1255.html). The phase that should be used is more along the lines of “fused quartz known commercially as JGS-2 of JGS-3.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 38 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 5 there needs to be a comma after nitrogen. Appropriate correction is required.
It is noted that throughout the claims part identifier numbers are used, which are allowed to be use in the claims. However, they are used inconsistently. Some part have the associated numbers and some do not. For clarity sakes it is suggested to either remove all the part numbers, or properly identify all the parts with their numbers.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraphs 0028, 0032 , 0033, 0034, and 0035 the terms JGS-2 and/or JGS-3 are used. Paragraphs 0028 and 0032 the phrases “known commercially under the names” and “under the commercial name”, respectively. While paragraphs 0033-0035 use the phrase “known commercially as”. JGS-2 and JGS-3 are Chinese industrial standards for fused quartz not the actual name of the fused quartz (see https://jxtwafer.com/about/blogs/1255.html). The phrases used in paragraphs 0028 and 0032 need to be amended to say “known commercially as”, which would be the proper identifier for the industrial standard since it is not the actual name of the material.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The terms “type-II phase transition” and “type-II phase transition temperature” used in the claims are being interpreted per paragraph 0001 of the specification as the glass transition and the glass transition temperature of the polymer, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 18-39 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. Dependent claims not rejected separately are rejected due to their dependency.
The term “close to free fall movement” in claims 18 and 25 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. How close is close to free fall? Would a free fall count as close to free fall? Since the disclosure provides no means to discern the phrase claims 18 and 25 are seen as vague and indefinite.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the shield gas" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "carrier gas" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the reduced pressure generator" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the controlled crystallization chamber" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 is seen as vague and indefinite due to the phrase “the liquid polymer particles” in line 16. Claim 18 allows for the particles to melt or reach their glass transition temperature (Tg), but in line 16 the claim states liquid. A polymer is not liquid until it reaches the melting point, thus a polymer below the melting point and at or above the Tg is still a solid. Line 16 contradicts the previous statement of temperature previously stated in claim 18, resulting in a claim that does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired.
Regarding claim 19, the phrase “in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claims 20, 21, 26, 27, 30, 31 37, 38, and 39, the term "advantageously" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the term are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 21 is vague and indefinite due to the use of the CAS number. CAS numbers can change, be deleted, or be reassigned over time. It is suggested to not use the CAS number, since the name of the chemical provides the same patent protection.
Claim 32 is vague and indefinite due to the phrase “is any of the following.” The issue is that this phrase is an inclusive phrase, thus the laser as claimed can have multiple wavelengths, which might not be what the Applicant desires.
Regarding claim 37, the phrase "most advantageously" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase is part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 38 recites the limitation "a shielding gas". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Is this the same or different than the shield gas of claim 18?
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J KENNEDY whose telephone number is (571)270-7068. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-5pm..
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/TIMOTHY KENNEDY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743