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
1. Applicant's election with traverse of Invention III, claims 13-27 in the reply filed on 05/13/24 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Group V shares the subject matter of elected claims 13, 14, and 20. This is not found persuasive because, the shared subject matter is not special, as evidenced by the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) below. The examiner agrees that claims 29-31 could be rejoined if claim 13 was found allowable.
2. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Status
3. Claims 1-36 are pending with claims 1-12 and 28-36 withdrawn. Claims 13-27 are examined herein.
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.
4. Claims 14 is 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.
5. Claim 14 is rejected because the recitation “from outside” lacks antecedent basis. There is no reference point to determine what space is “outside.” Further, this recitation is unclear in view of the introduction in claim 13 of “an external environment.” Is the “outside” recited in claim 14 referring to the “external environment” previously introduced?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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.
6. Claims 13-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2)as being anticipated by Vinokhodov et al., US 2022/0310351.
7. Regarding claim 13, Vinokhodov discloses a target holding device (Fig. 1) for quantum beam irradiation ([0014]), comprising: a target material container (12) having a containing part (13) for a target material (6) to be irradiated with a quantum beam (5) and an opening through which the containing part is connected to an external environment (see Fig. 1), wherein the target material container is rotatable about an axis of rotation (10) passing through the containing part and the opening, and a rotational drive mechanism (15) configured to generate a drive force for rotation of the target material container ([0059]).
8. Regarding claim 14, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 13 and further discloses a device wherein the target material container has a base (12) and a surrounding wall (13) extending from the base, wherein the base and the surrounding wall demarcate at least a portion of the containing part from outside, and wherein the axis of rotation further passes through the base (see Fig. 1).
9. Regarding claim 15, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 14 and further discloses a device
wherein the target material container has an inner surface (7) on the surrounding wall, the inner surface being a surface of revolution having the axis of rotation as its central axis (see Fig. 1 and [0051-2]).
10. Regarding claim 16, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 15 and further discloses a device wherein the surface of revolution is part of a cylindrical surface, the cylindrical surface having an axis that is the central axis or the axis of rotation, and wherein a generatrix that generates the cylindrical surface and the axis of rotation are parallel to each other (see Fig. 1 and [0050]).
11. Regarding claim 17, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 14 and further discloses a device wherein the target material container further comprises an inner flange extending from the surrounding wall toward the opening (see Fig. 1 and [0052] “two radial surfaces”).
12. Regarding claim 18, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 14 and further discloses a device wherein the rotational drive mechanism is capable of adjusting a rotational speed of the target material container so that at least a portion of the target material is repeatedly positioned in an irradiation area of the quantum beam while being pressed by centrifugal force toward an inner surface of the surrounding wall ([0059], [0087]).
13. Regarding claim 19, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 13 and further discloses a device
wherein the axis of rotation is arranged with respect to the quantum beam so that the axis of rotation is non-parallel to an irradiation axis of the quantum beam (see Fig. 1).
14. Regarding claim 20, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 14 and further discloses a device
wherein the axis of rotation is oriented such that it is tilted from a horizontal plane, and wherein the quantum beam has an irradiation axis contained in a horizontal plane and is directed to irradiate through the opening to the target material which is being pressed by centrifugal force against an inner surface of the surrounding wall (see Fig. 1: there is no portion of Vinokhodov that suggests that the device must be employed in the orientation illustrated, so merely rotating the device, as illustrated, counter clockwise by about 60° would result in the limitation claimed).
15. Regarding claim 20, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 14 and further discloses a device wherein the target material container comprises a conductive material ([0051], [0053]).
16. Regarding claim 23, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 13 and further discloses a device
wherein the rotational drive mechanism is in thermal contact with the target material container (see Fig. 1) and has a heat transfer member (17) extending along the axis of rotation 9see Fig. 1).
17. Regarding claim 24, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 13 and further discloses a device
wherein the rotational drive mechanism has a heat transfer adjusting structure (20) that impedes heat transfer between the rotational drive mechanism and the target material container.
18. Regarding claim 26, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 13 and further discloses a device further comprising: a container heater 914) configured to heat the target material container; and a container heater controller configured to control a heating operation of the container heater based on a temperature of the target material container or the target material ([0058]).
19. Regarding claim 27, Vinokhodov discloses the device of claim 13 and further discloses a device
further comprising: a container cover covering at least a portion of the opening and permitting rotation of the target material container around the axis of rotation and permitting irradiation with the quantum beam (see Fig. 1: a structure extends between the radial flanges of the groove 7, through which the electron beam device passe).
Allowable Subject Matter
20. Claims 22 and 25 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARON M DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6882. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:00 - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at 571-272-6878. 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.
/SHARON M DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights