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 .
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) 1-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SU 529,348 to Gorokhov et al. (Gorokhov).
In reference to claim 1, Gorokhov teaches a cryostat (FIG. 1) for operation with liquid helium (1, FIG. 1), comprising a primary chamber (inside 4, FIG. 1; par 0009) comprising a main region (top of 4 comprising volume filled with gaseous helium, FIG. 1; par 0011) and a pot region (at 1, FIG. 1) configured to contain a bath of liquid helium-4 (1, FIG. 1); a primary inlet (at 7, FIG. 1) configured for introduction of the liquid helium-4, the primary inlet (neck surrounding 7, FIG. 1) comprising a transfer line (7, FIG. 1) extending into the primary chamber (4, FIG. 1); a primary outlet (outlet of 4, FIG. 1) configured for release of gaseous helium-4 (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1 is capable of performing said functional language); and a baffle structure (5, FIG. 1) disposed in the primary chamber (4, FIG. 1) between the pot region (at 1, FIG. 1) and the main region (top of 4 comprising volume filled with gaseous helium, FIG. 1; par 0011), the baffle structure defining at least one flowpath for flow of the gaseous helium-4 (flowpath defined by 5, FIG. 1); wherein the cryostat is configured for operation under a continuous supply of the liquid helium-4 (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1 is capable of performing said functional language); wherein the cryostat is configured for operation at a reduced pressure of the gaseous helium-4 (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1 is capable of performing said functional language), whereby the gaseous helium-4 is pumped off through the primary outlet (above 7, outlet of 4, FIG. 1); wherein the at least one flowpath forms a detoured connection between the pot region and the main region (FIG. 1; par 0009-0011); and wherein the baffle structure (5, FIG. 1) comprises an axial passage for receiving therein the transfer line (at 7, FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 2, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the baffle structure comprises a heat
exchanging region with a heat exchanging area (5, FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 3, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 2 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein a ratio of the heat exchanging area to an average liquid/gas surface area in the pot region is at least 1 or at least 2 or at least 5 or at least 10 (FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 4, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the baffle structure (5, FIG. 1) comprises at least one spiraled surface leading from the pot region to the main region of the primary chamber.
In reference to claim 5, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the axial passage (7, FIG. 1) is formed as a tubular section integrally connected to the baffle structure (5, FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 6, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the baffle structure, or the primary chamber, or both, are made by a 3D-printing technique (see explanation below).
With respect to the product-by-process limitation (bold, italicized above), “even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Thus, the method of making the baffle structure is rejected as non-patentable matter, wherein one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to manufacture the baffle by 3D-printing to reduce the cost.
In reference to claim 7, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches a radiation shield (5, FIG. 1) disposed substantially surrounding at least the pot region of the primary chamber (4, FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 8, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 7 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the radiation shield (5, FIG. 1) is coolable by thermal contact with an outer wall portion (intended use recitation; the structure of FIG. 1 is capable of performing said functional language) of the primary chamber (FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 9, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the primary chamber (4, FIG. 1) is substantially cylindrical (FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 10, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein an external surface of the pot region is configured for external attachment of a sample (cooled object in FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 11, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the primary outlet (above 5, arrow pointing upward, FIG. 1) comprises a coupling configured for connecting to a helium pumping device (unmarked in FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 12, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches a secondary chamber (chamber 3 containing nitrogen, FIG. 1) configured for operation with helium-3 (intended use recitation; the structure of FIG. 1 is capable of performing said functional language), the secondary chamber comprising a secondary inlet and a secondary outlet for the helium-3 (unmarked, top of 2, FIG. 1).
In reference to claim 13, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein the cryostat (FIG. 1) is configured for operation at a reduced pressure of the helium-3, whereby gaseous helium-3 is pumped off through the secondary outlet (intended use recitation; the structure of FIG. 1 is capable of performing said functional language).
In reference to claim 15, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches wherein an external surface of the secondary chamber (nitrogen chamber 3, FIG. 1) is configured with a secondary attachment member for external attachment of a sample (below in the bath 6, FIG. 1).
In reference to claims 16-19, they claim the method of providing and configuring the apparatus of claim 1, thus, they are rejected based on the rejection of apparatus as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above and the associated method steps, which follow directly from the use of the apparatus, are rejected accordingly.
In reference to claim 20, Gorokhov teaches the cryostat as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Gorokhov additionally teaches a sample holder (FIG. 1) configured for attachment to the cryostat according to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 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.
See attached PTO-892 for relevant prior art
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILIP ZEC whose telephone number is (571)270-5846. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri; 9-5.
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, JD Fletcher can be reached at 5712705054. 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.
/FILIP ZEC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
8/28/2026
Prosecution Insights