Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/983,382

CRYOGENIC SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD FOR CRYOGENIC SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 17, 2024
Priority
Jul 13, 2022 — JP 2022-112546 +1 more
Examiner
BABAA, NAEL N
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Sumitomo Heavy Industries Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allowance Rate
424 granted / 550 resolved
+17.1% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
571
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
79.5%
+39.5% vs TC avg
§102
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 550 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 § 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claims 1 and 6, the terms “close, far” in claim 1 are relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close, far” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Clarification is requested. Claims 2-5 are rejected based on their dependency to claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is Diederichs (US 2013/0014517) in view of Morie (US 2019/0011170). The prior art of record when considered as a whole, either alone or in combination, does not anticipate or render obvious: A cryogenic system comprising: a cryocooler including a first cylinder, a second cylinder provided in series with the first cylinder in an axial direction and including a heat absorbing portion thermally connected to a heat source in an axial intermediate portion of the second cylinder, a first temperature sensor measuring a first measurement temperature in one axial end portion of the second cylinder close to the first cylinder, a second temperature sensor measuring a second measurement temperature in the other axial end portion of the second cylinder far from the first cylinder, and a third temperature sensor measuring a third measurement temperature in the heat absorbing portion; and a controller configured to: acquire the first measurement temperature from the first temperature sensor, the second measurement temperature from the second temperature sensor, and the third measurement temperature from the third temperature sensor, set an upper limit temperature of the heat absorbing portion, based on the first measurement temperature, the second measurement temperature, and an axial position of the heat absorbing portion, and control the heat source such that the third measurement temperature is equal to or lower than the upper limit temperature of the heat absorbing portion. Diederichs teaches a cryocooler (see paragraph [0042]) which features a first and second cylinder (see cylinders of 100 in Fig. 6) and three temperature sensors positioned at different positions of the cylinders (510a-c, Fig. 6, see paragraph [0044]), wherein the a controller is connected to the temperature sensors (600, Fig. 6). Diederichs does not teach a controller configured to: acquire the first measurement temperature from the first temperature sensor, the second measurement temperature from the second temperature sensor, and the third measurement temperature from the third temperature sensor, set an upper limit temperature of the heat absorbing portion, based on the first measurement temperature, the second measurement temperature, and an axial position of the heat absorbing portion, and control the heat source such that the third measurement temperature is equal to or lower than the upper limit temperature of the heat absorbing portion. Morie teaches a cryocooler which features positioning the heat absorbing portion’s axial position with respect to a corresponding temperature range relative to a threshold temperature (Morie, paragraph [0092]). While the general teaching is analogous to the claimed invention, the overall control logic recited in claims 1 and 6 is not taught by the combination of references. In the Examiner’s opinion, it would not be obvious to further modify the prior art structures to arrive at the claimed invention, absent impermissible hindsight. Therefore, rendering independent claims 1 and 6, with dependent claims therefrom are considered allowable. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAEL N BABAA whose telephone number is (571)270-3272. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 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, 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. /NAEL N BABAA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 17, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673530
THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE
3y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673777
AIRCRAFT CHILLING SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12669256
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING VARIABLE REFRIGERANT FLOW AIR CONDITIONER, VARIABLE REFRIGERANT FLOW AIR CONDITIONER, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12669257
AIR CONDITIONER
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12656028
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A COMPRESSOR OF AN ENERGY EFFICIENT HEAT PUMP
1y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+3.2%)
2y 9m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 550 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month