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 .
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claims 1 – 16 are presented for examination.
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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the leg member" in L5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 are rejected on the same basis as claim 2 for dependency reasons.
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.
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 Yamamoto (US 2013/0114794 A1; pub. May 9, 2013) in view of Chen et al. (CN 206775811U; pub. Dec. 19, 2017).
Regarding claim 1, Yamamoto discloses: An X-ray generator comprising: an X-ray tube (fig.9 item 2) that generates X-rays; a high-voltage circuit substrate (fig.9 item 3) that applies a high voltage to the X-ray tube; and a housing (fig.9 item 8) which is filled with an insulating oil (fig.9 item 8) and in which the X-ray tube and the high-voltage circuit substrate are accommodated, wherein a shielding cover (fig.9 item 32) made of a shielding material which shields the X-rays is provided in the housing (para. [0033]), the X-ray tube is disposed in the shielding cover.
Yamamoto is silent about: the high-voltage circuit substrate is attached to an outside of the shielding cover.
In a similar field of endeavor Chen et al. disclose: the high-voltage circuit substrate is attached to an outside of the shielding cover (para. [0055]) motivated by the benefits for a low cost and compact size x-ray tube (Chen et al. para. [0005]).
In light of the benefits for a low cost and compact size x-ray tube as taught by Chen et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yamamoto with the teachings of Chen et al.
Regarding claim 13, Yamamoto discloses: an X-ray detector that detects the X-rays (para. [0001] teaches an x-ray generation used in the medical field; it is well known in the art to use an x-ray detector with an x-ray tube).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US 2013/0114794 A1; pub. May 9, 2013) in view of Chen et al. (CN 206775811U; pub. Dec. 19, 2017) and further in view of Ding et al. (US 2015/0371809 A1; pub. Dec. 24, 2015).
Regarding claim 9, the combined references are silent about: an insulating plate-shaped member is disposed between the high-voltage circuit substrate and the shielding cover, and the high-voltage circuit substrate is attached to the shielding cover via the plate-shaped member.
In a similar field of endeavor Ding et al. disclose: an insulating plate-shaped member is disposed between the high-voltage circuit substrate and the shielding cover, and the high-voltage circuit substrate is attached to the shielding cover via the plate-shaped member (para. [0042]) motivated by the benefits for heat management.
In light of the benefits for heat management, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yamamoto and Chen et al. with the teachings of Ding et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 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.
Regarding claim 2, the prior arts alone or in combination fail to teach, disclose, suggest or render obvious: the high-voltage circuit substrate is attached to the shielding cover via an insulating leg member, and is held at a position separated from the shielding cover by a predetermined distance, by the leg member.
Claims 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 would be allowable on the same basis as claim 2 for dependency reasons.
Claim 3 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.
Regarding claim 3, the prior arts alone or in combination fail to teach, disclose, suggest or render obvious: the housing has one side surface which is open, and has a lid body which closes an opening of the one side surface, the lid body is formed with an X-ray window portion through which the X-rays generated by the X-ray tube pass, and the shielding cover and the X-ray tube are attached to the lid body.
Claims 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 would be allowable on the same basis as claim 2 for dependency reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAMADOU FAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-0371. The examiner can normally be reached Mon – Fri 9AM-6PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/MAMADOU FAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884