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
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 03/05/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings/Specification
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “4” has been used to designate both spindle and joint/pivotable bearing and force element, and first buffer element and first buffer element and hollow spindles.
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.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show reference character “4” as discussed above. They depict characters 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d which all refer to different reference characters than discussed above. as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
The different parts for the same figure number are indicated in published specification USPGPub US 20250051223 at least [0119] and [0142]-[0144].
The different parts of (2a,2b) and (3a,3b) are used for the same figure of hollow spindles as indicated in published specification USPGPub US 20250051223 at least [0146] and [0152]. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “clamping device” and “the pivotable bearing is preferably designed as a ball, conical, roller or plain bearing, and preferably comprises a cardan ball and cone seat” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-12 are directed to a device. MPEP 2114 and 2173.05(g) indicate
"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
Claim 1 requires a device capable of producing a silica blanks comprising;
A hollow substrate tube;
A substrate tube holder comprising;
A clamping device and;
A clamping mechanism comprising;
A first pressure unit and second pressure unit capable of clamping the substrate tube between said first and said second pressure unit.
Said first and second pressure units are capable of generating axial contact pressure in a direction of the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube.
[0118]-[0119] of the specification of the presently filed application indicates the substrate tube is an item being worked upon by the claimed device and is part of the soot body subjected to further treatment outside of the claimed device [0145]. For the purpose of this examination claim 1 claims the structures as indicated above and must be capable of holding a substrate tube relative to said structures as indicated in the claim, but the substrate tube itself is not considered part of the claimed device.
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.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 7, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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) 1-8, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boughton et al. (US 20150128649).
Regarding claim 1, Boughton discloses a device for producing a tubular SiO2 blank in an external deposition process(abstract), comprising:
a substrate tube, (110) which has a substrate tube longitudinal axis, a substrate tube length, a first substrate tube end face, a second substrate tube end face, a substrate tube outer lateral surface, a substrate tube inner lateral surface, a substrate tube outer diameter, a substrate tube inner diameter, a substrate tube wall thickness (see shape and axis of 110 in Fig 4),
The substrate tube has a continuous through-opening running coaxially with the substrate tube longitudinal axis as defined by glass core blank (170) (Fig. 4),
The device comprises a substrate tube holder for tube (110), which comprises a clamping device and which is designed to support the substrate tube see how tube (110) is held in Fig 4
The holder of the substrate tube (110) about an axis of rotation running coaxially with or parallel to the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube [0039] Fig. 4,
"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
The substrate tube is not considered part of the device but an article being worked on by the device.
Regardless, Boughton makes obvious to a skilled artisan the substrate tube holder comprises
a clamping mechanism which comprises clamps (150 and 152) [0041]
a first pressure unit (116) abutting the first substrate tube end face and a second pressure unit (118) abutting the second substrate tube end face [0039] Fig. 4,
at least one force element of (102) which is designed to generate an axial contact pressure with a force component acting in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube (110), which force component causes the substrate tube to be clamped between the first pressure unit and the second pressure unit as depicted in Fig. 4 [0041].
Regarding claims 2-3, the clamping device comprises a first spindle (154), and a second spindle (154), which is situated axially opposite the first spindle in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube and can rotate about the axis of rotation [0041] Fig. 4, wherein the first spindle is mounted on or linked to the first pressure unit in a rotationally fixed but pivotable manner and transmits the axial contact pressure to this first pressure unit, and wherein the second spindle is mounted on or linked to the second pressure unit so as to be rotationally fixed but movable relative to one another and transmits the axial contact pressure to this second pressure unit as indicated by the overall rotary device [0041]-[0042] Fig. 4.
Regarding claim 4, the substrate tube holder comprises a centering unit comprising at least one tubular or rod-shaped centering support (170) extending through the through-opening of the substrate tube and between the first pressure unit and the second pressure unit given the broadest reasonable interpretation this does not require the support (170) to cease at each pressure support (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, the first spindle is designed as a hollow spindle comprising a first inner bore defined within sides (154), and wherein the second spindle is designed as a hollow spindle comprising a second inner bore defined within sides (154), and wherein the centering support (170) projects with a first end into the first inner bore and with a second end into the second inner bore (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, the centering unit comprises centering elements which are placed on the centering support (170) inside the through-hole in the substrate tube (110), and of which a first centering element is arranged in the region of the first substrate tube end face, and a second centering element is arranged in the region of the second substrate tube end face (126 and 140).
Regarding claim 7, the first pressure unit (116 or 118) is considered to comprise a first pressure transmission element and a first buffer element connected thereto in a rotationally fixed manner given the broadest reasonable interpretation compressible, open-cell foam material, such as polyurethane foam is either a buffer element or transmission element [0033]
the pressure transmission element is considered mounted on or linked to the first spindle in a rotationally fixed but considered a pivotable manner because it is an annular shape, and wherein the first buffer element is arranged between the pressure transmission element and the substrate tube and abuts the first substrate tube end face [0033], Fig 2-4.
Regarding claim 8, the first buffer element projects beyond the pressure transmission element and the substrate tube (110) in the radial direction as depicted by the extending portions of 116 and 118 past the tube 110 in Fig 4.
Regarding claim 10, Boughton does not disclose the substrate tube wall thickness and the outer diameter of the substrate tube however it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the dimensions of the substrate tube (110) as motivated by the desired preform.
Regarding claim 11, Boughton discloses the substrate tube holder (110) comprises a compensation mechanism the adapter 140 and affixed to the upper end cap 128 using threaded fasteners and a compression spring 143 [0039] capable of compensating for thermal expansion in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube.
Regarding claim 12, the support element (104) is arranged in what is considered the region of the distal end of the first spindle and/or the second spindle.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boughton et al. (US 20150128649) as applied above and further in view of Curtis et al. (US 5158589).
Regarding claim 9, Boughton does not disclose the material of the substrate tube. In an analogous art Curtis recites graphite is a composition suitable for high temperature applications with silica (Col 11; line 19). It would be obvious to a skilled artisan to use graphite for the composition of the substrate tube as motivated by it being taught as a suitable material for a device in a high temperature manufacture of silica.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Takahashi (US 20190358714).
Regarding claim 1, Takashi discloses a device (Fig 1-2) capable for producing a tubular SiO2 blank in an external deposition process [0006], The device holds
a substrate tube, or target rod (50) with a longitudinal axis, length defined by a first substrate tube end face, a second substrate tube end face, and a substrate tube outer lateral surface and outer diameter.
Takashi does not indicate the lathe device in FIG 1-2 holding a hollow tube (thus a substrate tube inner lateral surface, a substrate tube inner diameter, a substrate tube wall thickness, and a continuous through-opening running coaxially with the substrate tube longitudinal axis) however;
"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
The device taught by Takashi holds a rod substrate and thus is capable of holding a rod with a hollow center.
Takashi discloses a clamping device designed to support the substrate tube (Fig 1 12/13/15/16 and Fig. 2 22/23/25/26) configured to rotate the substrate tube about an axis of rotation running coaxially with or parallel to the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube (axis O [0022], [0030])
a clamping mechanism which comprises a first pressure unit abutting the first substrate tube end face (Fig 1; 12 or Fig 2; 22), a second pressure unit abutting the second substrate tube end face (Fig 1; 15 or Fig 2; 25), and at least one force element designed to generate an axial contact pressure with a force component acting in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube as depicted in Fig 1-2 by the range of motion arrows best depicted as elastic component (28) or due to resistance to thermal expansion of the rod and a stable clamp ( [0018]-[0022], [0025]).
Regarding claim 2, the clamping device comprises a first spindle (16, or 26), which can rotate about the axis of rotation, and a second spindle (13 or 23) rotatable around the same axis of rotation.
The second spindle is situated axially opposite the first spindle in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the proposed substrate tube.
the first spindle (16 or 26) is mounted on or linked to the first pressure unit (15, 25) in a rotationally fixed but pivotable manner and transmits the axial contact pressure to this first pressure unit, and wherein the second spindle is mounted on or linked to the second pressure unit (12, 22) so as to be rotationally fixed but movable relative to one another and transmits the axial contact pressure to this second pressure unit. [0018]-[0019], [0024])
Regarding claim 3, the first spindle (16 or 26) has a free, distal end on which the first pressure unit (12 or 22) is pivotably mounted with rotary motor (11 or 21) [0018], [0024], and wherein the second spindle (16 or 26) has a free distal end on which the second pressure unit (15 or 25) and is considered pivotably mounted given the broadest reasonable interpretation because the single rotary motor rotates both spindles holding said substrate tube as depicted in (Fig 1-2).
Kashiwagi (US 20180050950).
Regarding claim 1, Kashiwagi discloses a device (Fig 1) capable for producing a tubular SiO2 blank in an external deposition process [0022], [0024], The device holds
a substrate tube, target rod (60) with a longitudinal axis Fig 1, length defined by a first substrate tube end face, a second substrate tube end face, and a substrate tube outer lateral surface and outer diameter (Fig 3).
Kashiwagi does not clearly depict a hollow tube as the target rod (Fig 1) however;
"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
Kashiwagi discloses a clamping device designed to support the substrate tube (Fig 1) and configured to rotate the substrate tube about an axis of rotation running coaxially with or parallel to the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube [0053]
Kashiwagi discloses a clamping mechanism which comprises first and second clamping jaws, of chucks (30) [0022]-[0024]
Each clamping jaw (30) has a portion abutting the substrate tube end faces as depicted in Fig 1 and considered pressure units as labeled below and given the broadest reasonable interpretation.
PNG
media_image1.png
829
1386
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kashiwagi discloses the spindles, or chucks (30) rotate via rotating mechanisms (20).
Kashiwagi discloses the spindles linked to pressure units as labeled above given the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 3, Kashiwagi discloses the spindles (30) have free distal ends where the pressure units are mounted and configured to be rotatable by rotating device (20) as labeled below;
Regarding claim 4, Kashiwagi discloses shielding members (90) considered a centering unit comprising at least one tubular or rod-shaped centering support extending through the through-opening of the substrate tube and between the first pressure unit and the second pressure unit [0026]-[0028].
Regarding claim 5, Kashiwagi discloses the spindles, or chucks (30) are hollow thus comprising inner bores, to grip the target rod [0023]
Regarding claim 7, Kashiwagi discloses the pressure units as labeled in Fig 1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
829
1386
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 7 further states, “the first pressure unit comprises a first pressure transmission element and a first buffer element connected thereto in a rotationally fixed manner wherein the pressure transmission element is mounted on or linked to the first spindle in a rotationally fixed but pivotable manner, and wherein the first buffer element is arranged between the pressure transmission element and the substrate tube and abuts the first substrate tube end face. “
The pressure units, spindles and rotational elements are disclosed by Kashiwagi.
The pressure unit is considered to comprise “comprises a first pressure transmission element and a first buffer element connected thereto”
Furthermore, MPEP 2144.04 states In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (A claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, "that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice."
Claim 7 does not distinguish the pressure transmission element, buffer elements and spindles relative to one another thus Kashiwagi discloses given the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 7.
Curtis et al. (US 5158589).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Curtis discloses a device (Fig 2) having a burner placement and quartz tube holder thus capable for the intended use of producing a tubular SiO2 blank in an external deposition process. The device capable of holding a substrate tube (10) with a longitudinal axis, length defined by a first substrate tube end face, a second substrate tube end face, and a substrate tube outer lateral surface and outer diameter.
the substrate tube (10) having an inner lateral surface, a substrate tube inner diameter, a substrate tube wall thickness, and a continuous through-opening running coaxially with the substrate tube longitudinal axis.
The device taught by Curtis comprising;
a clamping device (18) designed to support the substrate tube configured to rotate the substrate tube about an axis of rotation running coaxially with or parallel to the longitudinal axis of the substrate tube (Col 6; lines 56-68).
the substrate tube holder comprises clamping mechanism (26, 28).
Clamping mechanism (26, 28) comprises a pressure units to abut the tube end face as labeled below:
at least one force element designed to generate an axial contact pressure with a force component acting in the direction of the longitudinal axis via positioning of compensation mechanism (30) of the substrate tube as depicted in Fig 2 and capable of causing force on longitudinal ends of each side of the tube because force applied to one side will cause a force to react on the other end of the tube (Col 5; lines 13-24).
Regarding claims 2-3, the clamping device comprises a first and second spindles (defined by jaws of 26 and 28) which can rotate about the axis of rotation, (Col 5; lines 45-65)
The second spindle is situated axially opposite the first spindle in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the proposed substrate tube (Fig 2).
the spindle jaws are mounted on or linked to the pressure units and capable of rotating, see labeled Fig 2 below:
PNG
media_image2.png
771
1356
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Curtis does not disclose the composition of every portion of the device however Curtis recites graphite is a composition suitable for high temperature applications (Col 11; line 19). Where Curtis is silent as to the material of the pressure plate it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to use graphite as motivated by it being taught as a suitable material for ahigh temperature lathe part.
Regarding claim 10, "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). The substrate tube itself is not considered a part of the claimed device capable for producing a silica blank therefore the wall thickness of the tube employed during intended use of the device does not further limit the claimed structures of the device.
Regarding claim 12, shafts 44 and 46 are considered support elements on which the corresponding spindle can roll and arranged in the region considered the distal end of either spindle (Col 5; lines 25-44).
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
Prosecution Insights