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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: within the “wherein the temperature increasing process includes:” phrase, the limitation (“increasing the temperature of the second stage part to be higher than that of the first stage part,”) ends with a comma, whereas the remaining limitations are separated by semicolons. The comma should be replaced with a semicolon for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over deRijke (US 5,513,499) in view of Andeen (US 5,517,823) and Olsen (US 4,763,483).
In regard to claim 1, deRijke teaches a method for regenerating a cryopump (method for partial regeneration of cryopump 10) (col. 3, ll. 5-30; col. 6, l. 17 – col. 7, l. 47; fig. 3) that includes:
a cooler (refrigerator 16, a closed-loop helium refrigerator with a two-stage expander) equipped with a first stage part (first stage of refrigerator 16, cooling first stage cryoarray 18 to 50K–100K) and a second stage part (second stage of refrigerator 16, cooling second stage cryoarray 20 to 12K–20K) which is cooled to a lower temperature than the first stage part (col. 1, ll. 35-44; col. 5, ll. 2-4; col. 6, ll. 4-8; fig. 1);
a cryopanel (cryoarrays 18, 20) equipped with a first panel (first stage cryoarray 18) including a heat-shield body (cup-shaped first stage cryoarray 18 surrounding second stage cryoarray 20) and a baffle (baffle 22, which shields second stage cryoarray 20 from vacuum chamber 12) which is cooled by the first stage part, and a second panel (second stage cryoarray 20 with sorbent) which is cooled by the second stage part (col. 1, ll. 41-44; col. 5, ll. 2-9; fig. 1);
a cryopump vessel (housing 30) configured to surround the cryopanel (housing 30 encloses cryoarrays 18, 20) (col. 5, ll. 15-17; fig. 1);
a first heater (first stage heater 70, in thermal contact with first stage cryoarray 18) provided in the first stage part; and a second heater (second stage heater 72, in thermal contact with second stage cryoarray 20) provided in the second stage part (col. 5, ll. 51-56; col. 7, ll. 30-33; fig. 2), the method comprising:
a temperature increasing process (purge cycle, steps 82-84) of increasing temperatures of the first stage part and the second stage part (heating of cryoarrays 18, 20 to the partial regeneration temperature, the first stage cryoarray also being heated) by supplying a purge gas (nitrogen from inert gas source 74) into the cryopump vessel during an operation of the cooler (refrigerator 16 is not required to be turned off during the purge cycle) (col. 3, ll. 37-46; col. 5, ll. 56-60; col. 6, ll. 25-27, 35-47; col. 6, l. 64 – col. 7, l. 8; fig. 3);
a roughing process (step 86, turbopump 40 and roughing pump 44 activated) of evacuating gases captured in the cryopump vessel (gases liberated from the cryoarrays) until the cryopump vessel has a predetermined pressure (pressure value at which step 90 is initiated) (col. 7, ll. 9-22, 34-41; fig. 3); and
a cool-down process (step 90, refrigerator 16 energized continuously) of lowering the temperatures of the first stage part and the second stage part to their operating temperatures, respectively (cryoarrays 18, 20 cooled to their normal operating temperatures) (col. 3, ll. 27-30; col. 7, ll. 34-47; fig. 3),
wherein the temperature increasing process includes:
increasing the temperature of the first stage part to between 120K and 160K by using the first heater (heating supplemented by first stage heater 70 during the purge cycle, which terminates when first stage temperature sensor 60 senses the partial regeneration temperature of 120K–140K, preferably about 130K; first stage heater 70 permitting independent control of the first stage cryoarray 18 within that range) (col. 6, ll. 47-53; col. 6, l. 64 – col. 7, l. 8; col. 7, ll. 24-33; fig. 3, steps 84, 88); and
increasing the temperature of the second stage part to between 130K and 170K by using the second heater (heating supplemented by second stage heater 72, second stage cryoarray 20 brought to and regulated within the partial regeneration temperature range of 120K–140K, preferably about 130K) (col. 6, ll. 44-53; col. 7, ll. 1-8, 24-33; fig. 3, steps 82-88).
deRijke’s preferred first-stage temperature of about 130K and its preferred range of 120K–140K lie within the claimed range of 120K to 160K. A specific example in the prior art that is within a claimed range anticipates the range. MPEP § 2131.03(I). deRijke’s preferred second-stage range of 120K–140K, and its broader 100K–160K range (col. 6, ll. 50-52), overlap the claimed range of 130K to 170K. In the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP § 2144.05(I).
deRijke does not explicitly teach increasing the temperature of the second stage part to be higher than that of the first stage part.
However, Andeen teaches a partial regeneration of a two-stage cryopump in which warm nitrogen purge gas is introduced while the cryogenic refrigerator continues to operate, and in which the first stage (first-stage heat station 50 and radiation shield 64) is warmed to and held at about 110K, retained sufficiently low to avoid release of water vapor therefrom, while the second stage (second-stage heat station 54 and cryopanel array 62) is heated by the stage heater (heater assembly 69, heating the second stage through heater mount 73) to a higher set point of 175K–200K, preferably 190K, to minimize contamination of the adsorbent with gases such as nitrogen and argon (col. 4, ll. 5-24, 35-38; col. 5, ll. 3-23; figs. 2, 5, steps 102-112).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the partial regeneration method of deRijke to include heating the second stage cryoarray to a higher temperature than the first stage cryoarray, with the first stage held low enough to retain its condensed water vapor, as taught by Andeen, in order to minimize contamination of the adsorbent with gases such as nitrogen and argon while avoiding release of water vapor from the first stage (Andeen col. 5, ll. 13-21).
Andeen further establishes that the stage temperatures are result-effective variables: the second-stage set point is raised to minimize adsorbent contamination and is held down to shorten the cool-down time, and the first-stage temperature is kept low enough to avoid releasing water vapor (Andeen col. 5, ll. 13-23). Selecting first-stage and second-stage temperatures within the claimed ranges, which lie within or overlap the ranges deRijke discloses, would therefore have been a matter of routine optimization. MPEP § 2144.05(II).
deRijke as modified by Andeen does not explicitly teach that the predetermined pressure of the roughing process ranges from 5 Torr to 15.2 Torr.
However, Olsen teaches a two-stage cryopump regeneration in which the refrigerator continues to operate during regeneration (col. 4, ll. 42-50), followed by a roughing process in which the pumping volume within vacuum vessel (12) is evacuated by air ejector (56) through roughing conduit (58) to about 5 to 10 torr, after which the refrigerator is thermally coupled to cool the cryopanels and the cooled first stage cryopanel (60) completes the rough pumping (col. 4, ll. 51-63; col. 5, ll. 3-6; sole figure). Olsen’s roughing termination pressure of about 5 to 10 torr lies within the claimed range of 5 Torr to 15.2 Torr. MPEP §§ 2131.03(I), 2144.05(I).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of deRijke as modified by Andeen to include ending the evacuation of the cryopump housing and beginning cool-down at a roughing termination pressure of about 5 to 10 torr, as taught by Olsen, in order to render the cryopump effectively self-roughing from pressures obtainable by an air ejector, which does not present oil contamination, and thereby expedite the regeneration procedure.
In regard to claim 4, the modified deRijke teaches the method for regenerating a cryopump of claim 1, wherein deRijke further teaches that the roughing process includes turning off the first heater (first stage heater 70, which controller 66 energizes and deenergizes) when the temperature of the first stage part reaches a predetermined first temperature ranging from 120K to 160K (the preset partial regeneration temperature of about 130K sensed by first stage temperature sensor 60, at which the purge cycle and the supplemental heating by first stage heater 70 are terminated, the cryoarrays thereafter being held within 120K–140K by controlling the heaters on and off) (col. 5, ll. 51-56; col. 6, l. 66 – col. 7, l. 5; col. 7, ll. 24-33; fig. 3, steps 84, 88); and evacuating the gases captured in the cryopump vessel when the first heater is turned off (turbopump 40 and roughing pump 44 activated in step 86 once the desired partial regeneration temperature has been reached and the purge cycle terminated, and operating throughout the heater on-off regulation of step 88) (col. 7, ll. 9-33; fig. 3, steps 86-88). deRijke’s predetermined first temperature of about 130K lies within the claimed range of 120K to 160K. MPEP § 2131.03(I).
In regard to claim 5, the modified deRijke teaches the method for regenerating a cryopump of claim 1, wherein deRijke further teaches that the roughing process includes evacuating water captured by the first stage part (water vapor that evaporates from first stage cryoarray 18 at partial regeneration temperatures being removed from cryopump 10 by the evacuation) (col. 2, ll. 27-29; col. 7, l. 65 – col. 8, l. 3); and evacuating at least one of hydrogen, helium, neon, argon, nitrogen, and oxygen captured by the second stage part (nitrogen, oxygen, and argon condensed on the outside surface of second stage cryoarray 20, and hydrogen, neon, and helium adsorbed on its sorbent, being liberated and pumped from cryopump 10 by turbopump 40 and roughing pump 44) (col. 6, ll. 8-12, 47-62; col. 7, ll. 9-22; fig. 3, step 86). Setting the roughing termination pressure as taught by Olsen does not change this evacuation, Olsen likewise teaching that the rough pumping performed before cool-down removes water vapor from the cryopump chamber (Olsen col. 1, l. 59 – col. 2, l. 3).
In regard to claim 6, the modified deRijke teaches the method for regenerating a cryopump of claim 1, wherein deRijke further teaches that the roughing process includes turning off the second heater (second stage heater 72) when the cryopump vessel has the predetermined pressure (when the pressure within cryopump 10 reaches the desired value, temperature regulation is discontinued in step 90 by turning off second stage heater 72, and cool-down begins) (col. 7, ll. 34-41; fig. 3, step 90).
deRijke does not explicitly teach the following limitation of claim 6: (a) the predetermined pressure at which the second heater is turned off being a pressure ranging from 5 Torr to 15.2 Torr.
However, Olsen teaches (a): after regeneration, the pumping volume within vacuum vessel (12) is roughed by air ejector (56) through roughing conduit (58) to about 5 to 10 torr, and upon reaching that pressure the refrigerator is thermally coupled to cool the cryopanels, i.e., the regeneration warm-up ends and cool-down begins at a roughing termination pressure of about 5 to 10 torr (col. 4, ll. 51-63; col. 5, ll. 3-6; sole figure). Olsen’s pressure of about 5 to 10 torr lies within the claimed range. MPEP §§ 2131.03(I), 2144.05(I).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modified method of deRijke to include turning off the second stage heater and beginning cool-down when the cryopump housing reaches a roughing termination pressure of about 5 to 10 torr, as taught by Olsen, in order to render the cryopump effectively self-roughing from pressures obtainable by an air ejector, which does not present oil contamination, and thereby expedite the regeneration procedure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEBESHET MENGESHA whose telephone number is (571)270-1793. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7-4, alternate Fridays, EST. 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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/W.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
