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 § 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.
Claims 6 and 7 are 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.
As to Claim 6, the instant claim recites the limitation "the displacement sensor" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation resulting in unclear scope of the claim. Note that “displacement sensor” is recited in claim 2 however instant claim 6 depends from claim 1 and not claim 2. For examining purposes, examiner has interpreted dependency of claim 6 to be on claim 2.
As to Claim 6, the instant claim recites the limitation “the displacement” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation resulting in unclear scope of the claim. It is vague/unclear if this “the displacement” is referring to the calculated value of “displacement of the displacement slider” (lines 4 – 5 of the instant claim) or displacement reading “obtained by calibration” (line 7).
As to Claim 7, the instant claim recites the limitation “a metal evaporation cavity” in line 4. It is vague/unclear if the aforementioned limitation is same as “metal evaporation cavity” of claim 1 line 2 or if it is an additional cavity.
As to Claim 7, the instant claim recites the limitation “a displacement slider sleeve” in line 8. It is vague/unclear if the aforementioned limitation is same as “a displacement slider sleeve” of claim 1 line 8 or if it is an additional displacement slider sleeve.
As to Claim 7, the instant claim recites the limitation “a pressure balance spring” in line 9. It is vague/unclear if the aforementioned limitation is same as “a pressure balance spring” of claim 1 line 9 or if it is an additional pressure balance spring.
As to Claim 7, the instant claim recites the limitation “a displacement detection system” in line 11. It is vague/unclear if the aforementioned limitation is same as “a displacement detection system” of claim 1 line 7 or if it is an additional displacement detection system.
Due to claim dependency, claims 8 – 10 are also rejected.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0249997 A1 to Sarayama et al. (hereinafter “Sarayama”) in view of NPL cited in IDS of 07/23/2025 titled “Instrumentation-Electronics Pressure Transducer”, 24 Sept 2011, (hereinafter “NPL 2011”).
Regarding Claim 1, Sarayama teaches a metal vapour pressure detection apparatus (see paragraphs [0020] – [0023] describing an apparatus including a melt holding vessel that holds a mixed melt of metal groups, a heater that heats the mixed metal and pressure measurement using pressure sensors, see also paragraph [0113] which states “the method of producing a group III nitride crystal further comprises a step of setting, out of the at least two interfaces, the temperature of the interface positioned closest to the melt holding vessel at a temperature at which a vapor pressure of flux vaporized from the accumulated part is approximately equalized to a vapor pressure of the flux vaporized from the melt held in the melt holding vessel”, see also paragraphs [0120], [0132], see for instance Fig. 1), wherein the detection apparatus comprises a metal evaporation cavity (see reaction vessel 103 comprising a melt holding vessel 101, Fig. 1, see paragraph [0132]) and a pressure detection mechanism (see pressure sensor 108, Fig. 1, see paragraph [0132]) disposed on an outer side of the metal evaporation cavity (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating the pressure sensor 108 being on an outer side of the melt holding vessel 101 and/or reaction vessel 103), wherein
the metal evaporation cavity is used to melt and evaporate metal to form metal vapour (see arrangement at Fig. 1 which includes heaters 109, 110, 111, see also paragraphs [0120], [0162], [0167] describing obtaining vapor pressure, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Even though Sarayama teaches pressure detection mechanism i.e., pressure sensor 108 as described above, Sarayama does not explicitly teach the pressure detection mechanism comprises a displacement generation system and a displacement detection system disposed on the displacement generation system; the displacement generation system comprises a displacement slider sleeve, a displacement slider disposed in the displacement slider sleeve, and a pressure balance spring connected to the displacement slider.
NPL 2011, in the field of pressure transducers, teaches the pressure detection mechanism comprises a displacement generation system and a displacement detection system disposed on the displacement generation system (see page 3 under “Piston Type Pressure Transducer” – Page 4 illustrating the piston type pressure transducer and states “the input pressure is given to the piston. This moves the piston accordingly and causes the spring to be compressed. The piston will be directly proportional to the amount of input pressure exerted. A meter is placed outside the piston and spring arrangement, which indicates the amount of pressure exerted.”…. Mostly, the output of the piston and spring arrangement is given to a secondary device to convert movement into an electrical signal”, hence reading on the arrangement of the pressure detection mechanism as claimed); the displacement generation system comprises a displacement slider sleeve (see the holder of the piston type pressure transducer at page 4), a displacement slider disposed in the displacement slider sleeve (see “Piston” at the piston type pressure transducer figure at page 4), and a pressure balance spring connected to the displacement slider (see “Spring”, page 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the piston type pressure transducer of NPL 2011 into Sarayama, in order to improve reliability of the pressure detection as the piston type pressure detection system has ability to withstand shock and sudden pressure changes.
Sarayama in view of NPL 2011 further teaches;
the displacement slider sleeve is in communication with the metal evaporation cavity (see modification above, see arrangement of pressure sensor of Sarayama being in communication with the metal evaporation cavity as illustrated at Fig. 1 of Sarayama and see the pressure input of NPL 2011 at page 4, hence reading on the invention as claimed), and the displacement slider slides along the displacement slider sleeve under a pressure of the metal vapour; one end of the pressure balance spring is connected to the displacement slider, and the other end is connected to the displacement detection system; and the pressure detection mechanism determines the pressure of the metal vapour according to coordinates of the displacement slider detected by the displacement detection system (see page 3 under “Piston Type Pressure Transducer” – Page 4 of NPL 2011 illustrating the piston type pressure transducer and states “the input pressure is given to the piston. This moves the piston accordingly and causes the spring to be compressed. The piston will be directly proportional to the amount of input pressure exerted. A meter is placed outside the piston and spring arrangement, which indicates the amount of pressure exerted.”…. Mostly, the output of the piston and spring arrangement is given to a secondary device to convert movement into an electrical signal”, hence reading on the arrangement of the pressure detection mechanism as claimed).
Regarding Claim 4, Sarayama in view of NPL 2011 as modified above teaches the pressure balance spring (see “Spring” of NPL 2011 at page 4 of the Piston type pressure transducer figure).
Sarayama in view of NPL 2011 is silent regarding wherein the pressure balance spring is composed of 1-10 springs, with a wire diameter of 0.1-6 mm. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use spring composed of 1-10 springs with a wire diameter as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The modification allows for a more robust pressure transducer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 -3, 7 (including all dependent claims thereof i.e., 5, 6, 8 – 10) are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 raised above is overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. However, an updated search will again be made upon applicant’s response.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form accompanying this office action which includes the following relevant art:
Martini Marcel et al. (EP 2230326 A1) teaches an evaporator with a measurement means for measuring the coating rate of the evaporator, a coating installation having such an evaporator and a method for applying vapor to a substrate. the evaporator comprising an evaporator tube (300, 310, 100) having a distribution pipe (100) with at least one nozzle outlet (110), and wherein the evaporator tube includes a pressure measurement device (10, 12), the pressure measurement device comprising an optical diaphragm gauge (10).
Feng, Qiang (CN 105965021 A) teaches a tabletop low melting-point metal three-dimensional printer nozzle, comprising melted material feeding device, a nozzle body, melted material discharging device, a piston sheet, a pressure controller, an air pressure gauge and a heating sheet, the nozzle main body for storing and spraying the melted material, nozzle shell is provided with a gas pressure chamber and melting chamber, pressure chamber and melting chamber separated by the piston sheet. The invention uses low melting point metal as a printing material, the structure is novel, the increasing pressure chamber inside the nozzle, indirectly controls the pressure in the melting chamber through the air pressure cabin, can directly reaction internal pressure value, the control precision is high, the speed is fast, there is no redundant printing and drawing phenomenon, high product precision, reduces the unnecessary process, increasing the printing efficiency.
Sarayama et al. (U.S. 8,101,020 B2) teaches a crystal growth apparatus having a crucible, a reaction vessel, an alkali metal melt, a gas supplying unit and a heating unit. The crucible holds a melt mixture containing an alkali metal and a group III metal. The reaction vessel surrounds the crucible. The alkali metal melt exists between a vessel space exposed to the melt mixture and outside thereof at a temperature equal to or higher than a melting temperature of the alkali metal. The gas supplying unit supplies a nitrogen source gas to the vessel space via the alkali metal melt. The heating unit heats the crucible and the reaction vessel to a crystal growth temperature.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARRIT EYASSU whose telephone number is (571)270-1403. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 9:00AM - 6:00PM.
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, Laura E. Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
/MARRIT EYASSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights