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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 2/4/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 12 have been amended.
Claims 2-11 are as previously presented.
Claim 13 has been added.
Claims 1-13 are still pending in this application, with claim 1 being independent.
Applicant's amendment overcomes some of the 11/4/2025 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1-12.
Applicant's amendment overcomes the 11/4/2025 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) of claim 12.
Applicant's arguments regarding the 11/4/2025 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1-12, directed towards the claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) of “processing device”, are not persuasive, as described in the 'Response to Arguments' section below. Therefore, these rejections are maintained.
Applicant's arguments regarding the 11/4/2025 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of amended claim 12 are not persuasive, and a rejection has been presented below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
Claim 1:
the limitation “processing device” is being interpreted as any structure capable of controlling operations of a heating device, since the specification does not provide any corresponding structure, see claim rejections under 35 USC § 112(a) and 35 USC § 112(b) below.
the limitation “heating device” is being interpreted as an electric heating device such as a resistive element, and equivalents thereof [para. 0036].
the limitation “temperature measuring device” is being interpreted as an infrared temperature sensor, a laser temperature sensor, a thermocouple, and equivalents thereof [para. 0037].
the limitation “control device” is being interpreted as a switch, a variable resistor, and equivalents thereof [para. 0037].
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, the recitation of “processing device” in claims 1 and 12 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. “Merely restating a function associated with a means-plus-function limitation is insufficient to provide the corresponding structure for definiteness. See, e.g., Noah, 675 F.3d at 1317, 102 USPQ2d at 1419; Blackboard, 574 F.3d at 1384; Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1334, 86 USPQ2d at 1239. It follows therefore that such a mere restatement of function in the specification without more description of the means that accomplish the function would also likely fail to provide adequate written description under section 112(a) or pre-AIA section 112, first paragraph.” MPEP § 2181-IV.
Claims 2-12 are also rejected due to dependence on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The recitation of “processing device” in claim 1 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Specifically, the disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite. Applicant may: a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f; b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 2-12 are also rejected due to dependence on a rejected claim.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandrasekharan (US 20200051834 A1) in view of Baggett (US 20190304820 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chandrasekharan discloses:
A pipeline temperature control equipment [fig. 1: vapor delivery system 167], used in a semiconductor equipment [fig. 1: substrate processing system 120; para. 0070], comprising a processing device [fig. 1: system controller 180] and multiple heating assemblies [fig. 2A: heater zones 250-1 to 250-N; para. 0047: “A plurality of heater zones 250-1, 250-2, ... , 250-N (collectively heater zones 250) (where N is an integer greater than one) are used to heat gas lines, valves and/or other components along the gas flow paths.”],
wherein the multiple heating assemblies are distributed along an extension direction of a temperature-controlled pipeline to correspondingly control temperatures of multiple heated parts of the temperature-controlled pipeline, and each of the multiple heating assemblies corresponds to a respective heated part of the multiple heated parts [Multiple heating zones are arranged along gas lines, so as to provide a progressive heating profile of gas lines so as to reduce the risk of condensation; fig. 2A; paras. 0015, 30: “In other features, the N heater zones are arranged around gas lines from a source to a processing chamber. The N heater zones provide a progressive heating profile from the source to the processing chamber.”, “Progressive heating may be used to overcome condensation risks in gas lines.”], and comprises a respective heating device [figs. 2B-C: TCR heater 283], a respective first temperature measuring device [figs. 2B-C: thermocouple 284], a respective second temperature measuring device [figs. 2B-C: TCR heater 283], and a respective control device [figs. 2B-CL: controller 280];
both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in each heating assembly are used to measure a real-time temperature [see fig. 7, showing a temperature T1 measured by thermocouple 284, and a temperature T2 measured by TCR heater 283] of a heated part of the multiple heated parts in the temperature-controlled pipeline corresponding to the heating device in the heating assembly [para. 0032: “A resistance of the TCR-based heater can be measured to provide an average temperature in the heater zone... Temperature is also monitored in each zone using a TC to provide a local temperature (representing a point location in the heater zone).”];
both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in each heating assembly are connected to the respective control device [see figs. 2B-C];
and the control device in each heating assembly is connected to the processing device [see fig. 1, showing controller 180 connected to vapor delivery system 167];
the processing device is configured to, for each of the multiple heating assemblies, according to
a target temperature of a corresponding heated part [In order to effect the desired progressive heating profile of the pipeline, ideal temperatures as a function of a length of the pipeline are disclosed, wherein each heater zone corresponds to a particular location along the length of the pipeline; para. 0055: “Referring now to FIG. 3, a graph illustrates ideal temperature as a function of length along a gas flow path to a processing chamber. In some applications, it is desirable for the temperature of the gas flow path to monotonically increase as the gas traverses the plurality of heater zones 250.”] and
a measured value of the first temperature measuring device [i.e., a temperature T1 of thermocouple 284; para. 0048: “Referring now to FIG. 2B, the controller 280 may be used to control operation of the heater zones 250. A heater driver 282 may be used to supply power to the TCR heaters 283. One or more temperature sensors or thermocouples 284 may be used to sense temperature in the heater zones 250.”],
control operations of a corresponding heating device through a corresponding control device, until a temperature of the corresponding heated part meets the target temperature [para. 0063: “Control can be performed using a control system similar to those shown in FIGS. 2B and 2C. In this example, the TC 920 monitors the average temperature in the oven 910. The controller 280 stores the resistive ratios of the TCRs and controls the power output to the TCR heaters based thereon. In some examples, the resistive ratios of the TCRs are maintained by the controller 280 to maintain uniform temperature in each of the heater zones.”];
the processing device is further configured to, for any one of the multiple heating assemblies, when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is abnormal [In order to address abnormal readings due to the location of the thermocouple, feedback from the temperatures measured is used to make a determination if an override falls below or goes above a particular value; paras. 0030, 32-33: “If a thermocouple (TC) is located at a pressure drop/expansion location, the thermocouple will sense a low temperature and the gas line may be heated hotter than desired. If the thermocouple is located away from the pressure drop, localized cooling may occur… As will be described further below, a combination of primary control and secondary override/monitoring is performed using the feedback from the TCR heater and the TC in each heater zone. In a first approach, the temperature that is sensed by the TC is used as a control set point for the heater zone and the average temperature that is sensed by the TCR heater is used as monitor/override. If the average temperature of the heater zone falls below or goes above a particular value, the controller uses a default duty cycle.”] within a preset time period [i.e., within the time period of the average temperature], according to a measured value of the second temperature measuring device [i.e., T2 is an average temperature taken over a preset time period; para. 0032: “A resistance of the TCR-based heater can be measured to provide an average temperature in the heater zone.”] and the target temperature of the corresponding heated part [i.e., an ideal temperature corresponding to a particular location on a length of the pipeline], control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat the corresponding heated part [i.e., the default duty cycle is supplied to the corresponding heater]
the processing device is further configured to, when measured values of [Although Chandrasekharan does not explicitly disclose using a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part, nor of any determination of an abnormality of the T2 measuring device, Chandrasekharan does disclose supplying a ‘default power’ to the heater when T1 is determined to be abnormal. Specifically, assuming the temperature T2 to be an accurate representation of the actual temperature of the heating zone, if, as seen in step #732, T2 is not within a predetermined range, the measurements of T1 are ignored (steps #734/#744 are avoided), and a default power is supplied to the heater. Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, would have recognized that using a heating state of an adjacent heating device (i.e., that it is safe to still supply the default power corresponding to the defined ideal target temperature for the corresponding position along the length of the pipeline) to the corresponding heater, as one of a finite number of predictable, equivalent solutions that would still provide the progressive heating profile desired, and would have been motivated to do so in light of Chandrasekharan disclosing supplying the default power in step #750, and since the heating state of a nearby adjacent heating zone would have a target temperature close to the target temperature of the corresponding heating zone, relative to the proximity of the heating zones along the length of the pipeline.].
However, Chandrasekharan does not disclose a determination of whether or not the device measuring T2 is abnormal, specifically, Chandrasekharan does not disclose:
the processing device is further configured to, when measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the heated part.
Baggett, in a similar field of endeavor (i.e., temperature measurement and control), teaches:
the processing device is further configured to, when measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [Baggett discloses multiple thermal monitoring devices 160, corresponding to the multiple first and second measuring devices of the multiple heating assemblies, Baggett teaching wherein if any one device fails, the output from the remaining devices may be used to identify a failure of the device, Baggett further teaching that the thermal monitoring devices may be used in pairs (i.e., as a first and second temperature measuring device of a heater zone), as well as using a temperature measuring device of an adjacent, or close, heating zone; para. 0067: “Furthermore, redundant thermal monitoring devices 160, such as redundant TCs/RTDs, may be implemented in each zone due in order to account for potential high failure rates of the devices. By providing multiple redundant TCs/RTDs, if one fails, the output from the remaining TCs/RTDs may be compared with each other. As such, if a large temperature difference is identified between primary and secondary (e.g., redundant) sensors, such a scenario could be identified as a failure of the TC or RTD, and the system may be placed in a “hold” mode, rather than attempting to drive the heater(s) 136 to match the output of the TC/RTD. Redundant TCs/RTDs, for example, may be positioned close to one another for redundancy, and for uniformity, pairs of TCs/RTDs may be positioned at various locations about the thermal chuck 130”].
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 equipment of Chandrasekharan, by further including a determination of whether or not the second temperature measuring device is abnormal, specifically wherein:
the processing device is further configured to, when measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [A person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, would have been motivated to configure Chandrasekharan’s processing device to determine when both measured values T1 and T2 are abnormal, as taught by Baggett, since Baggett teaches this accounts for failure of the devices that improves uniformity and temperature accuracy; paras. 0066-67: “Multiple locations for the temperature measurement on the workpiece 118 are further contemplated. For example, temperatures may be monitored at several locations around the workpiece for uniformity (e.g., inner and outer zones may be adjusted and controlled for better uniformity). Thus, having multiple thermal monitoring devices 160 at multiple locations advantageously improves uniformity and temperature accuracy. Furthermore, redundant thermal monitoring devices 160, such as redundant TCs/RTDs, may be implemented in each zone due in order to account for potential high failure rates of the devices.”].
Regarding claim 2, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses: A pipeline temperature control method comprising:
S1: receiving a temperature control command [para. 0064: “At 1020, a predetermined temperature is maintained in the oven based upon the measured temperature and a desired temperature.”];
S2: for each of the multiple heating assemblies, when the measured value of the first temperature device is normal within the preset time period, according to the target temperature of the corresponding heated part and the measured value of the first temperature measuring device, controlling the operations of the corresponding heating device through the corresponding control device, until temperature of the corresponding heated part meets the target temperature [see fig. 7, showing steps 734/744, wherein depending on a temperature T1 being less than or greater than threshold values, power is increased (738) or decreased (748) to the heater];
S3: for any one of the multiple heating assemblies, when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is abnormal and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device is normal within the preset time period, according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the corresponding heated part, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat the corresponding heated part [i.e., if T2 is NOT within a range TH1A to TH1B (see fig. 7, showing step #732), thus indicating a stop limit/override situation with regards to T1, a default power is supplied to the heater, and/or a notification is generated; para. 0054: “At 732… In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”];
S4: when the measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow the heating state of the heating device of the adjacent heated part to heat the corresponding heated part [Baggett teaches determining a failure of either the first or second measuring device in order to continue heating; para. 0067].
Regarding claim 3, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S2 comprises:
when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], according to the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the first temperature measuring device, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [see fig. 7, showing a loop wherein T1 is monitored (#720), and after a determination step #732, power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome #738 or #748, or in a negative outcome #750.].
Regarding claim 4, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 3.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S2 comprises:
when the measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device increase with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], and an absolute value of a difference between the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device does not exceed a first preset difference [i.e., normal operation, positive outcome at #732]; or, the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is greater than the measured value of the second temperature measuring device, and the absolute value of the difference between the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device exceeds the first preset difference [i.e., abnormal operation, negative outcome at #732], according to the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the first temperature measuring device [An absolute value of a difference between T1 and T2 may be used at #732, wherein T1 may be larger than T2; fig. 7: #732; para. 0054: “In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 with a predetermined temperature threshold (#732), the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750), or an increased or decreased power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome (#738/#748); fig. 7].
Regarding claim 5, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 3.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S2 comprises:
when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing] and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device remains unchanged within the preset time period [i.e., wherein T2 remains unchanged, and stays between TH1A and TH1B; fig. 7: #732], according to the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the first temperature measuring device [fig. 7: steps #720, #724], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 with a predetermined temperature threshold (#732), the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750), or an increased or decreased power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome (#738/#748); fig. 7].
Regarding claim 6, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S3 comprises:
when the measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device increase with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is less than the measured value of the second temperature measuring device, and an absolute value of a difference between the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device exceeds a first preset difference [An absolute value of a difference between T1 and T2 is used, wherein T1 may be lower than T2; fig. 7: #732; para. 0054: “In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”], according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the second temperature measuring device [fig. 7: steps #720, #724], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [i.e., an increased or decreased power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome (#738/#748); fig. 7].
Regarding claim 7, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S3 comprises:
when the measured value of the second temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing] and the measured value of the first temperature measuring device remains unchanged within the preset time period, according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the second temperature measuring device [An absolute value of a difference between T1 and T2 is used, wherein T1 may remain the same; fig. 7: #732; para. 0054: “In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [see fig. 7, showing a loop wherein T2 is monitored (#724), and after a determination step #732, power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome #738 or #748, or in a negative outcome #750.].
Regarding claim 8, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S3 comprises:
when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device continues to exceed a first preset value or a jump amplitude exceeds a second preset value for a preset number of times within the preset time period [fig. 3: #744, temperature threshold #TH3], and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the second temperature measuring device, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [para. 0055: “If 734 is false, the method continues at 744 and determines whether the temperature T1 is greater than or equal to a temperature threshold TH3. If 744 is true, the method reduces power or the duty cycle to the TCR heater at 748.”].
Regarding claim 9, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses wherein the step S4 comprises:
when the measured value of the second temperature measuring device remains unchanged within the preset time period [i.e., an abnormal T2, wherein T2 remains unchanged, but does not stay between TH1A and TH1B (negative outcome at #732), and/or if indicated as failing per the teachings of Baggett], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow the heating state of the heating device of the adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 and arriving at a negative determination, the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750)].
Regarding claim 10, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses wherein the step S4 comprises:
when the measured value of the second temperature measuring device continues to exceed a first preset value [i.e., an abnormal T2, wherein T2 exceeds TH1B (negative outcome at #732), and/or if indicated as failing per the teachings of Baggett] or a jump amplitude exceeds a second preset value for a preset number of times within the preset time period, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow the heating state of the heating device of the adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 and arriving at a negative determination, the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750)].
Regarding claim 11, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses, after the step S4:
after heating the heated part for the preset time period, obtaining a current temperature of the heated part [i.e., monitoring T1 at #720], and determining an absolute value of a difference between the target temperature of the heated part and the current temperature is less than a preset value [see #734, #744, wherein T1 is compared to values TH2, TH3, and in view of the disclosed ideal target temperature, is equivalent to an absolute value of a difference between T1 and the target temperature], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device of the heated part to maintain a constant temperature through heating [see fig. 7, showing a loop wherein power is increased or decreased to the heater (#738/#748) such that T1 is maintained between TH3 to TH2].
Regarding claim 12, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
In view of Chandrasekharan disclosing the conventional practice of selecting the position of a heating device and temperature measuring devices so as to determine how to control he heating device, [para. 0052: “How the temperature will be controlled will vary depending upon where the thermocouple is located.”], including, e.g., proximity of the heating device to the respective heated part, Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses wherein:
for the multiple heating assemblies, positions of each of the corresponding heating devices, the corresponding first temperature measuring devices, and the corresponding second temperature measuring devices with respect to the corresponding heated parts of the temperature-controlled pipeline are identical.
In this case, selecting a given position of each heating device and temperature measuring device such that they are identical with respect to the corresponding heated part would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application, e.g., the physical properties of the corresponding heated part.
Regarding claim 13, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
Chandrasekharan further discloses:
wherein the heating state comprises at least one heating parameter selected from
a current output parameter of the heating device of the adjacent heated part or a heat preservation power of the heating device of the adjacent heated part [para. 0048: “Current sensors 288 may be used to sense current supplied to the TCR heaters by the heater driver 282.”; paras. 0008-0011],
and controlling the corresponding heating device to follow the heating state comprises controlling the corresponding heating device according to the at least one heating parameter [para. 0006: “In other features, the controller is configured to selectively control power supplied to the resistive heater in each of the N heater zones based on the local temperature and selectively override power supplied to the resistive heater in each of the N heater zones based on the average temperature.”].
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) of “processing device”, Examiner respectfully maintains that the limitation ‘processing device’ (i.e., the means) of claim 1, for controlling operations of (i.e., the function) a heating device through a switch according to a target temperature and a measured temperature, uses the nonce term “device”, and is not modified by sufficient structure, and since the specification also does not provide any sufficient structure, and only merely restates functions associated with the limitation “processing device”, i.e., (the disclosure merely restates that the processing device “receives measured temperatures… stores target temperatures and algorithms… controls each heating device, performs logic upon detection of abnormal readings by switching measuring devices… and commanding the affected heating device…”) and does not adequate description of the structure that would accomplish the receiving/storing/controlling/performing logic/commanding, see MPEP § 2181-IV, the claims fail to comply with the written description requirement, and the Examiner respectfully maintains the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) of claims 1-12.
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1-12, since the written description fails to disclose structure for performing the functions of a processing device, it is unclear if the processing device is directed towards, e.g., a controller (i.e., a CPU) and/or software (i.e., computer instructions or algorithms), Examiner respectfully maintains the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1-12.
Regarding amended claim 12, which has been amended to now recite “wherein the heating state comprises at least one heating parameter selected from a current output parameter of the heating device of the adjacent heated part or a heat preservation power of the heating device of the adjacent heated part and controlling the corresponding heating device to follow the heating state comprises controlling the corresponding heating device according to the at least one heating parameter”, Applicant argues that Chandrasekharan fails to disclose or suggest claim 12, specifically “Without acquiescing to the Office's assertions, Applicant respectfully Chandrasekharan is completely silent on positions of each of the corresponding TCR heaters 283 and the corresponding thermocouples 284 with respect to heated parts being identical in the heater zones 250.”. Examiner respectfully disagrees, and has presented Chandrasekharan as disclosing claim 12 in the new rejection above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J EVANGELISTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm EST.
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, Edward F Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/THEODORE J EVANGELISTA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761