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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bingham et al. (2013/0264486).
Regarding claim, 1, Bingham discloses an observation device comprising: a neutron emission device that emits neutrons to an inspection object (Bingham, [0043], neutron source 110); a detection device that detects exit neutrons from the inspection object at one set of detection positions in a peripheral direction around the inspection object (Bingham, [0045], array of neutron detectors 140), outside the inspection object, and measures a number of the detected exit neutrons for each of the detection positions (Bingham, [0045]); and a data processing device that generates reconstructed cross-sectional data by performing reconstruction processing based on the number of the detected exit neutrons at each of the one set of detection positions (Bingham, [0058]), wherein the reconstructed cross-sectional data represent a two-dimensional distribution of a neutron reaction rate in an imaginary cross-section of the inspection object (id.).
Regarding claim 2, Bingham further discloses the one set of detection positions is set to surround the inspection object. (Bingham, Fig. 14, ring shaped array of neutron detectors 1420)
Regarding claim 3, Bingham further discloses the data processing device includes a ratio calculation unit that calculates, for each of the one set of detection positions, a ratio of the number of the detected exit neutrons to a reference value (Bingham, [0052], “normalized” images are such because they are a ratio as against a reference value), and a reconstruction unit that generates the reconstructed cross-sectional data by performing the reconstruction processing on the ratio at each of the one set of detection positions, and the reference value varies depending on the detection position. (Bingham, [0054])
Regarding claim 6, Bingham further discloses a pixel value representing the number of detected exit neutrons or the ratio at each of the one set of detection positions arranged in order in the peripheral direction is defined as C., wherein i is an identification number of the one set of detection positions and takes an integer of 0 to N - 1,image data in which pixels of Co to CN-1 are arranged in thisorder in a first direction are defined as one-dimensional image data, image data in which a plurality of pieces of the one-dimensional image data are arranged in a second direction intersecting the first direction are defined as first two- dimensional image data, in the first two-dimensional image data, each of the pieces of the one-dimensional image data excluding the most front one-dimensional image data in the second direction is data in which, in a direction of circulating the pixels in the first direction, the pixels of Co to CN-1 are shifted by a predetermined shift amount from thoseof the different one- dimensional image data adjacent to the one-dimensional image data from a front side in the second direction, andthe data processing device generates second two-dimensional image data that are data extracted from the first two-dimensional image data, over a continuous range in the first direction corresponding to a range along a periphery around the inspection object and equal to or shorter than half of the periphery around the inspection object, and performs the reconstruction processing based on the second two-dimensional image data, and thereby generates the reconstructed cross-sectional data. (Bingham, [0055]-[0058])
Regarding claim 7, Bingham further discloses the second two-dimensional image data are data S(j, p) representing a pixel value at each coordinate (j, p) in a jp coordinate system, j represents a coordinate in the second direction, and p represents a coordinate in the first direction,j takes a value of 0 to M, and p takes a value of 0 to Q, wherein M is a number of pieces of the one-dimensional image data constituting the second two-dimensional image data, and Q is a number of the detection positions corresponding to the continuous range, a pixel value at each coordinate p in each coordinate j is regarded as a pixel value based on the number of detected exit neutrons in a set effective detection area depending on each coordinate p, the data processing device coordinate-transforms the data S(j, p) in the jp coordinate system to generate transformed data, and performs the reconstruction processing on the transformed data to generate the reconstructed cross-sectional data,the transformed data are data acquired by transforming at least the p coordinate out of the j coordinate and the p coordinate in the data S(j, p) into a y coordinate depending on the set effective detection area at each p coordinate, and for the p coordinate having the larger set effective detection area, the transformed y coordinate corresponding to the p coordinate has a larger width in the transformed data. (Bingham [0055]-[0058])
Regarding claim 8, Bingham further discloses the peripheral direction is a direction of rotating around an imaginary reference line passing through an inside of the inspection object, and an imaginary plane intersecting the reference line is defined as an inspection plane, for each of the inspection planes whose positions in a direction of the reference line are different from each other, the detection device detects the exit neutrons from the inspection object at each of the one set of detection positions in the peripheral direction on the inspection plane, and measures the number of the exit neutrons at each of the detection positions, the data processing device generates, for each of the inspection planes, the reconstructed cross- sectional data, based on the number of detected exit neutrons at each of the one set of detection positions on the inspection plane, and generates three-dimensional internal data, based on a plurality of pieces of the reconstructed cross-sectional data, and the three-dimensional internal data represent a three-dimensional distribution of a neutron reaction rate inside the inspection object. (Bingham, [0055])
Regarding claim 9, Bingham further discloses a method comprising: emitting neutrons to an inspection object; detecting exit neutrons that exit from the inspection object as a result of the emitting, at one set of detection positions in a peripheral direction around the inspection object, and measuring a number of the detected exit neutrons at each of the detection positions; and by a data processing device, performing reconstruction processing based on the number of exit neutrons at each of the one set of detection positions, and thereby generating reconstructed cross-sectional data, wherein the reconstructed cross-sectional data represent a two-dimensional distribution of a neutron reaction rate in an imaginary cross-section of the inspection object. (Bingham, [0053]-[0058])
Regarding claim 10, Bingham further discloses the peripheral direction is a direction of rotating around an imaginary reference line passing through an inside of the inspection object, and an imaginary plane intersecting the reference line is defined as an inspection plane, the method further comprises: for the one set of detection positions on each of the inspection planes whose positions in a direction of the reference line are different from each other, detecting, at each of the one set of detection positions, exit neutrons that exit from the inspection object as a result of emitting neutrons to the inspection object, and measuring the number of the detected exit neutrons at each of the detection positions; for each of the inspection planes, by the data processing device, performing the reconstruction processing based on the number of detected exit neutrons at each of the one set of detection positions, and thereby generating the reconstructed cross-sectional data; and generating three-dimensional internal data based on a plurality of pieces of the reconstructed cross-sectional data, and the three-dimensional internal data represent a three-dimensional distribution of a neutron reaction rate inside the inspection object. (Bingham, [0055], [0056])
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.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bingham in view of Inanc (2020/0081150).
Regarding claim 4, Bingham lacks explicit teaching of the inspection object is one inspected for a defect that can exist inside the inspection object, and the reference value varying depending on the detection position is set as a number of detected exit neutrons in an assumed case where the defect does not exist in the inspection object.
Inanc teaches the inspection object is one inspected for a defect that can exist inside the inspection object, and the reference value varying depending on the detection position is set as a number of detected exit neutrons in an assumed case where the defect does not exist in the inspection object. (Inanc, [0026])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Bingham to detect defects in a material in the manner taught by Inanc in such a case where defects result in voids or material differences that differentially interact with neutrons.
Regarding claim 5, Bingham lacks explicit teaching of the inspection object is one inspected for a state of a fluid existing in an inside space of the inspection object, and the reference value varying depending on the detection position is set as a number of detected exit neutrons in an assumed case where the entire inside space is in a uniform state.
Inanc teaches the inspection object is one inspected for a state of a fluid existing in an inside space of the inspection object, and the reference value varying depending on the detection position is set as a number of detected exit neutrons in an assumed case where the entire inside space is in a uniform state. (Inanc, [0026])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Bingham to detect defects in a material in the manner taught by Inanc in such a case where defects result in voids or material differences that differentially interact with neutrons.
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 571-272-2995. 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