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
Claim 7 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected device, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/02/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "10" and "11" and “12” have all been used to designate the reaction chamber. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The term “total heat exchange” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “total heat exchange” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear if there is total heat exchange means the temperature between the air in the reaction chamber and clean room are completely switched or partially switched. [0078]-[0081] indicate the temperature may be solely adjusted or mixed and thus partially exchanging heat.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomohiro (JP 2003277073) as cited in the machine translation provided herein and further in view of Ishihara (US 20040134236).
Regarding claim 1, Tomohiro discloses a method for manufacturing a glass particle deposit, the method comprising (title):
manufacturing the glass particle deposit by producing glass particles through glass particle synthesis, or a hydrolysis reaction, [0002], [0011] using flame of a burner (5) and depositing the glass particles on a target (8) {0002], [0011] Fig 1-2 in a reaction container;
and taking out the glass particle deposit from the reaction container (1) and
transporting the glass particle deposit to a clean room (12),
air is introduced into the clean room, or isolation chamber (12), a clean room generators (13), corresponding to the claimed through a clean room filter, that removes particles in the air from intake ports (14) [0011], thus when the glass particle deposit is manufactured
Tomohiro does not clearly discuss air is introduced from a space different from the clean room isolation chamber (12) into the reaction container (3) through a reaction container filter.
In analogous art of manufacturing a glass particle deposit Ishihara discloses a reaction container (Fig 1-2), and air is introduced into the reaction chamber from CG generator (14) [0025] (Fig 1), or (27/28) in Fig 2 [0040] from clean air [0051]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reaction chamber of Tomohiro within the clean room with the reaction chamber of Ishihara as motivated to reduce impurities during manufacturing.
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings of Tomohiro and Ishihara disclose reaction chambers comprising glass particle deposit step of applying glass particles from burners onto a rod. Ishihara depicts air is taken in from an introduction duct (14) opened to what is considered “outdoors” of the reaction chamber, see Fig 1, is introduced into the reaction container.
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings of Tomohiro and Ishihara disclose when the glass particle deposit is manufactured in the reaction chamber, air that is taken in from an introduction duct (Ishihara - 14).
Ishihara does not clearly specify the introduction duct (14) is opened to a room different from the clean room. It would be obvious for the air to be drawn into the reaction chamber from any room and converting to clean gas as suggested by Ishihara as motivated to reduce impurities during manufacturing.
MPEP 2144.04 states:
In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice
Pulling air from outside of the reaction chamber, outside of the clean room, outside an addition surrounding chamber is an obvious matter of design choice absent any unexpected results. There is nothing claimed that indicates it would change the outcome of the method other than reducing impurities in the clean air eventually provided to the reaction space in the method.
Claim(s) 2 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomohiro (JP 2003277073) as cited in the machine translation provided herein and further in view of Ishihara (US 20040134236) as applied above and further in view of Masuda (US 20210381703)
Regarding claim 5, Tomohiro discloses air is introduced into the clean room, or isolation chamber (12), via clean room generators (13), corresponding to the claimed through a clean room filter, that removes particles in the air from intake ports (14) [0011].
Tomohiro fails to disclose air is introduced into the clean room through an air conditioner capable of adjusting a temperature and a humidity.
In analogous art of a method of operating a clean room Masuda discloses controlling the temperature and humidity of air to the clean room [0003]. It would be obvious to modify the method of a clean room in Tomohiro with the steps of controlling the temperature and humidity of the clean room as motivated to further control the environment of the manufactured glass particle deposit.
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings of Tomohiro, Ishihara, and Masuda is considered to have total heat exchange is performed between the air introduced into the reaction container and the air in the clean room as the air combined withing the reaction chamber given the broadest reasonable expectation in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN116209640 controlling gas pressure by exhausting during manufacture then sealing exhaust when deposition ceases
JP2004099353
JP2000319024 reaction chamber 5, with burner 2, exhaust from 6, everything outside is cleanroom [0040], clean air brought in through intake pipe 7, exhaust pipes 9 and 10, valves 11
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JODI COHEN FRANKLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3966. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am-4 pm.
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, Alison Hindelang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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.
JODI COHEN FRANKLIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1741
/JODI C FRANKLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741