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 § 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.
(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.
Claims 1, 2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JPH05234699A [hereinafter Hitachi-I].
Regarding Claim 1:
Hitachi-I teaches an electron beam irradiation device (para. [0001]: “a multi-stage acceleration tube for accelerating the electron beam”), comprising:
an acceleration tube (Fig. 3- acceleration tube18), comprising a plurality of acceleration electrodes (Fig. 2- acceleration electrodes 1 and 5) disposed in parallel in an axis direction for generating an electric field for accelerating an electron beam (see annotated Fig. 2 below); and
a plurality of shield rings (Fig. 2-electric field relaxation electrodes 7), disposed in parallel in the axis direction so as to form a pair with the acceleration electrodes on a radially outer side of the acceleration tube (see annotated Fig. 2 below), and the shield rings respectively being electrically connected to the acceleration electrodes that form the pair therewith (para. [0010]: each accelerating electrode 1 and 5 is fixed by an electric field relaxation electrode 7, which shield/relieves the electric field around the acceleration tube by reducing electric field concentration), wherein
PNG
media_image1.png
865
1150
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the electron beam irradiation device comprises a conductive shield member (Fig. 2-electric field relaxation electrodes 14) surrounding a radially outer side of a ring group composed of the plurality of shield rings (see annotated Fig. 2 above and para. [0012]: electric field relaxation electrodes 14 is a conductive electrode disposed radially outside the electrode group and configured to relax/shield the electric field around the acceleration tube), and
the shield member surrounds at least a portion in the axis direction in the ring group (see annotated Fig. 2 above).
Regarding Claim 2:
Hitachi-I teaches the electron beam irradiation device of claim 1. Hitachi-I further teaches a power supply device, supplying power to the acceleration tube (see annotated Fig. 3 below and para. [0009]: high voltage generation circuit, at least includes rectifier 23, the high-voltage capacitor 21, resistor divider 17, the reference resistor 16); and
a pressure tank (Fig. 3- pressure tank 15), accommodating the acceleration tube, the ring group, the shield member, and the power supply device (see annotated Fig. 3 below, all claimed elements are within the pressure tank 15).
PNG
media_image2.png
776
711
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6:
Hitachi-I teaches the electron beam irradiation device of claim 1. Hitachi-I further teaches wherein the shield member surrounds all in the axis direction in the ring group (as shown in Fig. 2, each electric field relaxation electrode 7 is surrounded by an electric field relaxation electrode 14, thus the multiple electric field relaxation electrodes 14 collectively surround all electric field relaxation electrodes 7).
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.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitachi -I in view of JPH02278642A [hereinafter Hitachi-II].
Regarding Claim 3:
Hitachi-I teaches the electron beam irradiation device of claim 2. However, Hitachi-I does not specifically note that wherein the shield member is electrically connected to the pressure tank and has the same potential as the pressure tank. Hitachi-II teaches wherein
the shield member is electrically connected to the pressure tank and has the same potential as the pressure tank (Figs. 1-2 and paras. [0017-0018 and 0021]: DC voltage generated in the DC capacitors is applied to components within the shield tank 21, e.g., applied to ring-shaped shield electrode 32 (“shield member”) via connection line 45).
Hitachi-I teaches an electron beam irradiation device in which an acceleration tube, a shield ring group (field relaxation electrodes 7), and a shield member (field relaxation electrodes 14) are accommodated in a pressure tank 15. Likewise, Hitachi-II also teaches an electron beam irradiation device in which an acceleration tube, a shield ring group (first shield electrode group 31), and a shield member (second shield electrode group 32) are accommodated in a pressure tank (shield tank 21). Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify Hitachi-I’s electron beam irradiation device to include the pressure tank arrangement of Hitachi-II, so that the shield member in the modified system is electrically connected to the pressure tank and both of which are at the same potential, because both references are directed to high-voltage electron beam acceleration structure, and placing shield member at the same potential as the pressure tank would further provide a predictable shielding/field-stabilizing effect and reduce unwanted discharge or electric field disturbance around the acceleration tube.
Regarding Claim 4:
Hitachi-I in view of Hitachi-II teaches the electron beam irradiation device of claim 3.
Hitachi-II further teaches wherein the acceleration tube comprises a thermionic emission unit (Fig. 2- electron gun filament 18) which emits thermoelectrons at one end unit in the axis direction of the acceleration tube (para. [0017]: electron gun filament generating electron beam passing through the multistage acceleration tube 30).
As such, Hitachi-I in view of Hitachi-II further teaches in the axis direction of the acceleration tube, an end unit side where the thermionic emission unit is provided is an upper stage side, and an opposite side thereof is a lower stage side, the acceleration tube emits an accelerated electron beam from an end unit of the lower stage side, and the pressure tank comprises an exit port for emitting the electron beam emitted from the end unit of the lower stage side of the acceleration tube to the outside of the pressure tank. In the modified system, the thermionic emission unit would emit electrons from the upper stage side. The accelerated electrons pass through the acceleration tube towards the lower stage side, and exit at the exit port of the pressure tank, as shown in the annotated Fig. 3 from Hitachi-I below.
PNG
media_image3.png
753
607
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5:
Hitachi-I in view of Hitachi-II teaches the electron beam irradiation device of claim 4.
Hitachi-II further teaches the shield member surrounds a portion in the axis direction in the ring group (Fig. 1(a) shows ring-shaped shield electrodes 32a-32c (“shield member”) appear to surround only selected axial portions of ring-shaped shield electrodes 31a-31c (“shield ring group”), not the entire axial length of the ring-electrode group), and
Hitachi-I further teaches the shield member surrounds a radially outer side of at least the lowermost stage of the shield ring in the ring group (as shown in Fig. 2, since each shield ring electrode 7 is radially surrounded by a corresponding conductive shield member 14, the lowermost stage of the shield ring electrode in the ring group is also radially shielded by a conductive shield member).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitachi -I in view of US 3949265 A [hereinafter Holl].
Regarding Claim 7:
Hitachi-I teaches the electron beam irradiation device of claim 1. However, Hitachi-I does not specifically note that wherein the shield member comprises a heat release hole which penetrates from an inner circumferential side to an outer circumferential side of the shield member.
Holl teaches a multistage charged-particle accelerator having cylindrical screens disposed around high voltage accelerator components. In particular, Holl teaches a first cylindrical screen 11 surrounds high voltage components and that the upper part of the screen contains opening 13 to allow the screen to be evaluated (see Fig. 1 and 3: 4-13 of Holl).
As such, Hitachi-I in view of Holl teaches wherein the shield member comprises a heat release hole which penetrates from an inner circumferential side to an outer circumferential side of the shield member, because modify the shield member of Hitachi-I with the opening taught in Holl would allow heat to escape from the inside of the shield member to the outside.
It would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the conductive shield member of Hitachi-I to include through-holes as taught by Holl, because Holl teaches providing openings in the shield screen of a multistage charged particular accelerator to allow evacuation of the inside of the screen while maintaining the shielding function. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing such through-opening in the shield ember would also allow heat to pass from the inner peripheral side to the outer peripheral side of the shield member, thereby facilitating thermal release from the shield acceleration region without materially changing the shield function.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2504. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:00.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/JING WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/ROBERT H KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights