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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract recites “The present invention relates to the technical field of low-temperature refrigeration apparatuses”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shichi et al (US 20110266465).
Regarding claim 1, Shichi teaches a closed-loop refrigerant gas cooling device (fig. 12), wherein the closed-loop refrigerant gas cooling device comprises: a refrigerant gas circulation assembly (403, 4040, 407); a refrigeration assembly (400, 16, 416), which comprises a heat insulation shell (416) and a refrigerator (40, 408, 402, 410) mounted in the heat insulation shell; and a thermostat (405, 414), which is in communication with a gas output end (403) of the refrigerant gas circulation assembly via a flexible delivery rod (404) in the heat insulation shell, and is in communication with a gas intake end of the refrigerant gas circulation assembly (407); wherein the refrigerator cools a refrigerant gas (helium gas, paragraph 0153) in the refrigerant gas circulation assembly located in the heat insulation shell, and the refrigerant gas cooled enters the thermostat via the flexible delivery rod (fig. 12) to cool the thermostat (paragraph 0153) and enters the refrigerant gas circulation assembly for circulation (fig. 12).
Regarding claim 8, Shichi teaches the refrigeration assembly further comprises a first support (18) which is configured for placing the heat insulation shell and is placed on the ground via a vibration isolation rubber pad (19).
Regarding claim 9, Shichi teaches the closed-loop refrigerant gas cooling device further comprises a second support (17) on which the flexible delivery rod is placed via a fixation press block and which is placed on the ground via a vibration isolation rubber pad (19).
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.
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) 2-4, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shichi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huang et al (CN 213454351).
Regarding claim 2, Shichi teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach the refrigerant gas circulation assembly comprises a circulation pump, wherein a gas output end of the circulation pump is in communication with the flexible delivery rod via a gas output circulation pipe, and a gas intake end of the circulation pump is in communication with the thermostat via a gas intake circulation pipe.
However, Huang teaches the refrigerant gas circulation assembly comprises a circulation pump (17), wherein a gas output end (14 to 10 to 12) of the circulation pump is in communication with the flexible delivery rod (12) via a gas output circulation pipe (14 go 10), and a gas intake end of the circulation pump (12 to 10 to 14) is in communication with the thermostat via a gas intake circulation pipe (12 to 10 to 14) to provide an efficient a reverse flow type closed circulation low temperature cooling system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the closed-loop refrigerant gas cooling device of Shichi to include the refrigerant gas circulation assembly comprises a circulation pump, wherein a gas output end of the circulation pump is in communication with the flexible delivery rod via a gas output circulation pipe, and a gas intake end of the circulation pump is in communication with the thermostat via a gas intake circulation pipe in view of the teachings of Huang to provide an efficient a reverse flow type closed circulation low temperature cooling system.
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach wherein the refrigerant gas circulation assembly further comprises a refrigerant gas storage tank (16 of Huang) which is in communication with the gas output circulation pipe via a pipe (unnumbered pipe with 15, fig. 1 of Huang) to supply the refrigerant gas to the refrigerant gas circulation assembly (16 to 17 to 14 of Huang).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach the pipe is provided thereon with a seal valve (15 of Huang).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach the gas intake circulation pipe or the gas output circulation pipe is provided thereon with a needle valve (23 of Huang) and a safety valve (11 of Huang), wherein the needle valve is configured to adjust a flow velocity (paragraph 0059 of Huang) of the refrigerant gas in the gas intake circulation pipe and the gas output circulation pipe, and the safety valve is configured to control a pressure (paragraph 0060) in the gas intake circulation pipe or the gas output circulation pipe.
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach the gas intake circulation pipe or the gas output circulation pipe is provided thereon with a pressure gauge (pressure gauge, paragraph 0057 of Huang) which is configured to monitor the pressure in the gas intake circulation pipe and the gas output circulation pipe (paragraph 0057 of Huang).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shichi in view of Huang as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Shirron (US 20170059214).
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach wherein the gas intake circulation pipe or the gas output circulation pipe is provided thereon with a first gas evacuation port which is configured for performing vacuum evacuation on the gas intake circulation pipe and the gas output circulation pipe.
However, Shirron teaches wherein the gas intake circulation pipe is provided thereon with a first gas evacuation port (180) which is configured for performing vacuum evacuation on the gas intake circulation pipe (paragraph 0050) to efficiently evacuate the gas.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the closed-loop refrigerant gas cooling device of the combined teachings to include the gas intake circulation pipe or the gas output circulation pipe is provided thereon with a first gas evacuation port which is configured for performing vacuum evacuation on the gas intake circulation pipe and the gas output circulation pipe in view of the teachings of Shirron to efficiently evacuate the gas.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shichi in view of Huang as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Wolff (US 20090135418).
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach the heat insulation shell is provided thereon with a second gas evacuation port which is configured for performing vacuum evacuation of the interior of the heat insulation shell.
However, Wolff teaches the heat insulation shell is provided thereon with a second gas evacuation port (opening for 74) which is configured for performing vacuum evacuation of the interior of the heat insulation shell (paragraph 0058) to efficiently evacuate helium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the closed-loop refrigerant gas cooling device of the combined teachings to include the heat insulation shell is provided thereon with a second gas evacuation port which is configured for performing vacuum evacuation of the interior of the heat insulation shell in view of the teachings of Wolff to efficiently evacuate helium.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3840. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-3:00 CT pm M-F.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571) 270-5054. 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.
/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights