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 .
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) 1-4, and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama (JP: 59-119649 A) of record in view of Forster et al. (US. Pat: 5,208,512~hereinafter “Forster”).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Kageyama discloses (in at least fig. 1) a large electron tube (title), comprising: a collector (6) that is tubular; and a magnetic body (10) disposed outside the collector having no axial symmetry with respect to a center axis of the collector (6).
Kageyama does not expressly disclose the magnetic body inhibit parasitic oscillation in the collector and wherein the collector has a resonant frequency satisfying a condition for electron cyclotron resonance.
Forster in the same field of endeavor discloses (in at least fig. 1) a magnetic body (24, 26 and 28) disposed outside of the collector in order to inhibit parasitic oscillation in the collector and wherein the collector has a resonant frequency satisfying a condition for electron cyclotron resonance (at least fig. 1; abstract; Because electron cyclotron resonance is achieved, the magnetic body inhibits parasitic oscillation in the collector).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the large electron tube of Kageyama with the teaching of Forster in order to inhibit parasitic oscillation in the collector.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kageyama and Forster discloses (in at least fig. 1 both refs) the magnetic body (10, 24, 26 and 28) is designed such that a spent electron beam in the collector (6) collides against a water-cooled part of the collector.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kageyama and Forster does not expressly disclose a sweep mechanism that sweeps a line of magnetic force in the collector.
However, it is well-known in the art to form electron tube comprised of, in part, a sweep mechanism that sweeps a line of magnetic force in the collector as evident by Miyake (WO 2007/052774 A1) of record which discloses (in at least fig. 3) sweeping mechanism (44, 45, 47) that sweeps a line of magnetic force in the collector.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the electron tube device of Kageyama and Forster with the sweeping mechanism of Miyake in order to sweep a line of magnetic force in the collector.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kageyama and Forster discloses (in at least fig. 1 both refs) the magnetic body (10, 24, 26 and 28) is a plate-like magnetic body disposed along an outer side surface of the collector, but is silent about covering not more than 1/2 of an outer circumference of the collector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the electron tube of Kageyama and Forster such that it covers not more than ½ of an outer circumference of the collector, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kageyama and Forster discloses (in at least fig. 1 both refs; col. 2, lines 2-12) a magnetron injection electron gun that generates a hollow electron beam.
Regarding claim 7, Kageyama discloses (in at least fig. 1) the magnetic body (10) is an iron plate.
Regarding claim 8, Kageyama discloses (in at least fig. 1) the large electron tube is a gyrotron.
Regarding claim 9, Kageyama discloses (in at least fig. 1) the large electron tube is a klystron (intended use).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 14, Kageyama discloses (in at least fig. 1) a method for using a large electron tube, the large electron tube including a collector (6) that is tubular, the method comprising the steps of: spreading a spent electron beam in the collector (6) in an asymmetrical manner; but fails to disclose changing a ratio at which a magnetic body plate, which is disposed outside the collector in order to inhibit parasitic oscillation in the collector and which has no axial symmetry with respect to a center axis of the collector, covers an outer circumference of the collector (6) by changing a first magnetic body plate to a second magnetic body plate having a size different from that of the first magnetic body plate, the collector having a resonant frequency satisfying a condition for electron cyclotron resonance.
Regarding claim 15, Kageyama discloses (in at least fig. 1) a method for using a large electron tube, the large electron tube including a collector (6) that is tubular, the method comprising the steps of: spreading a spent electron beam in the collector 96) in an asymmetrical manner (see fig. 1; abstract); but fails to disclose changing the number of magnetic body plates to thereby change a ratio at which the magnetic body plates cover an outer circumference of the collector, the magnetic body plates being disposed outside the collector in order to inhibit parasitic oscillation in the collector and having no axial symmetry with respect to a center axis of the collector, the collector having a resonant frequency satisfying a condition for electron cyclotron resonance.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights