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.
Claims 8 and 15-16 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.
Claim 8, lines 1-2 recite, “wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields is electrically isolated” which is unclear to the Examiner if the totality of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields are to be electrically isolated or if each of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields are individually electrically isolated. Further, it is unclear what the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields are to be electrically isolated from (i.e., the cryostats, the other overlapping concentric radiation shields of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields, or both). For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to require any electrical isolation of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields. The Examiner recommends making clarifying amendments to specify the electrical isolation.
Claim 15, lines 1-2 recite, “wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields is electrically isolated” which is unclear to the Examiner if the totality of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields are to be electrically isolated or if each of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields are individually electrically isolated. Further, it is unclear what the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields are to be electrically isolated from (i.e., the cryostats, the other overlapping concentric radiation shields of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields, or both). For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to require any electrical isolation of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields. The Examiner recommends making clarifying amendments to specify the electrical isolation.
Claim 16 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 15.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 8, 10, 13-15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Renger et al. (Cryogenic microwave link for quantum local area networks), hereinafter Renger.
Regarding claim 1, Renger discloses a cryogenic system (Fig. 2; Pg. 1, In this paper, we demonstrate the realization of a 6.6 meter long cryogenic link connecting two dry dilution refrigerators, acting as quantum communication nodes referred to as "Alice" and "Bob", located in separate laboratories), comprising:
a first cryostat and a second cryostat (Fig. 2, Alice, Eve, Bob); and
a tunnel that connects the first cryostat and the second cryostat, wherein the tunnel contracts or expands in length between the first cryostat and the second cryostat (See annotated Fig. 2 of Renger blow tunnels A connect Alice to Eve and Eve to Bob; Pg. 3, Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the cryogenic link connecting two dry dilution refrigerators, Alice and Bob, spaced apart by 6.6 m, Pg. 9, The length of the cryogenic link between the two dilution refrigerators results in a thermal contraction of the inner shields of the order of 1 cm along the link axis during cooling down. Additionally, the standard cryostat radiation shields contract vertically during cool down (by 1-2 mm). Without suitable mitigation such contractions would damage the cryostat tails. The vertical contraction is addressed by ensuring sufficient clearances for the arms of the link to be off-set at room temperature - the shields become coaxial as the system cools. These offsets (calculated and designed into the tails) are different for each cryostat as the respective heights of the tails are different [Fig. 6(a)]. Along the length of the link, the PT1, PT2 and still stages, have edge welded bellows included to compensate for the expected contraction of the shields. These edge welded bellows are manufactured from stainless steel and allow for sufficient movement to compensate for thermal contraction (thermalization of the link will be discussed in the following section). Figure 7 (e) shows the edge welded bellows stacked concentrically as they would be in the link. Figure 7(f)-(h) depicts the respective bellows for the PT1, PT2, and still stages. The MC temperature tube consists of two independent segments with an overlapping (sliding fit) section at the center of the link. As the shield contracts, the sliding section takes up any length change without exerting forces on the mixing chambers of the dilution refrigerators).
PNG
media_image1.png
485
930
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Renger
Regarding claim 3, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the tunnel comprises:
a plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields that contract or expand the tunnel along a central axis of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields (Fig. 5; Pg. 8, The cryogenic link consists of four segments with a shield structure coinciding with that of dilution fridges; Pg. 9, The length of the cryogenic link between the two dilution refrigerators results in a thermal contraction of the inner shields of the order of 1 cm along the link axis during cooling down).
Regarding claim 4, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 3 (see the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields comprise insulator rings that thermally isolate the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields (Pg. 3, In order to ensure vacuum tightness and be able to attain a background pressure around 1 x 10-6 mbar, we employ Viton O-ring vacuum seals between room temperature counterparts of the cryolink. Radiation shields corresponding to different temperature stages are thermally separated from each other via fiberglass spacers and designed with sufficient mechanical flexibility to mount the link arms. The entire system is designed with multiple degrees of freedom to enable in-situ adjustment of a relative orientation between Alice, Bob, Eve, and the cryogenic link arms).
Regarding claim 8, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 3 (see the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields is electrically isolated (Fig. 2 of Renger depicts Viton O-rings to be disposed throughout the cryogenic link and the cryostats; Pg. 3, In order to ensure vacuum tightness and be able to attain a background pressure around 1 x 10-6 mbar, we employ Viton O-ring vacuum seals between room temperature counterparts of the cryolink. Radiation shields corresponding to different temperature stages are thermally separated from each other via fiberglass spacers and designed with sufficient mechanical flexibility to mount the link arms. The entire system is designed with multiple degrees of freedom to enable in-situ adjustment of a relative orientation between Alice, Bob, Eve, and the cryogenic link arms; Further, the teachings of Renger at least imply the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields is electrically isolated as Viton is an electrical insulator since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01); As best understood, see 112(b) rejections above).
Regarding claim 10, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the tunnel comprises:
a handling bar that horizontally supports the first cryostat or the second cryostat, and wherein the handling bar absorbs compression loads to prevent collapsing of the tunnel (Pg. 8, support frames for Bob and Eve are designed with an adjustable top plate. These top plates are equipped with adjusting screws and bars which allow for movement along horizontal and vertical axes (and corresponding rotations if adjustments are made in opposition); Further, the teachings of Renger at least imply wherein the handling bar absorbs compression loads to prevent collapsing of the tunnel since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
Regarding claim 13, Renger discloses a cryogenic system (Fig. 2; Pg. 1, In this paper, we demonstrate the realization of a 6.6 meter long cryogenic link connecting two dry dilution refrigerators, acting as quantum communication nodes referred to as "Alice" and "Bob", located in separate laboratories), comprising:
a plurality of cryostats (Fig. 2, Alice, Eve, Bob); and
a plurality of tunnels that connect the plurality of cryostats, wherein the plurality of tunnels contract or expand in length (See annotated Fig. 2 of Renger blow tunnels A connect Alice to Eve and Eve to Bob; Pg. 3, Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the cryogenic link connecting two dry dilution refrigerators, Alice and Bob, spaced apart by 6.6 m, Pg. 9, For future scalability, the cryostat shields contain additional orifices for potential connection of more link arms….The length of the cryogenic link between the two dilution refrigerators results in a thermal contraction of the inner shields of the order of 1 cm along the link axis during cooling down. Additionally, the standard cryostat radiation shields contract vertically during cool down (by 1-2 mm). Without suitable mitigation such contractions would damage the cryostat tails. The vertical contraction is addressed by ensuring sufficient clearances for the arms of the link to be off-set at room temperature - the shields become coaxial as the system cools. These offsets (calculated and designed into the tails) are different for each cryostat as the respective heights of the tails are different [Fig. 6(a)]. Along the length of the link, the PT1, PT2 and still stages, have edge welded bellows included to compensate for the expected contraction of the shields. These edge welded bellows are manufactured from stainless steel and allow for sufficient movement to compensate for thermal contraction (thermalization of the link will be discussed in the following section). Figure 7 (e) shows the edge welded bellows stacked concentrically as they would be in the link. Figure 7(f)-(h) depicts the respective bellows for the PT1, PT2, and still stages. The MC temperature tube consists of two independent segments with an overlapping (sliding fit) section at the center of the link. As the shield contracts, the sliding section takes up any length change without exerting forces on the mixing chambers of the dilution refrigerators).
PNG
media_image1.png
485
930
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Renger
Regarding claim 14, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 13 (see the rejection of claim 13 above), wherein each of the plurality of tunnels comprises:
a plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields that contract or expand a corresponding tunnel along a central axis of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields (Fig. 5; Pg. 8, The cryogenic link consists of four segments with a shield structure coinciding with that of dilution fridges; Pg. 9, The length of the cryogenic link between the two dilution refrigerators results in a thermal contraction of the inner shields of the order of 1 cm along the link axis during cooling down).
Regarding claim 15, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 15 (see the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields is electrically isolated, and wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields comprise insulator rings that thermally isolate the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields (Fig. 2 of Renger depicts Viton O-rings to be disposed throughout the cryogenic link and the cryostats; Pg. 3, In order to ensure vacuum tightness and be able to attain a background pressure around 1 x 10-6 mbar, we employ Viton O-ring vacuum seals between room temperature counterparts of the cryolink. Radiation shields corresponding to different temperature stages are thermally separated from each other via fiberglass spacers and designed with sufficient mechanical flexibility to mount the link arms. The entire system is designed with multiple degrees of freedom to enable in-situ adjustment of a relative orientation between Alice, Bob, Eve, and the cryogenic link arms; Further, the teachings of Renger at least imply the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields is electrically isolated as Viton is an electrical insulator since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01); As best understood, see 112(b) rejections above).
Regarding claim 19, Renger discloses a cryogenic system (Fig. 2; Pg. 1, In this paper, we demonstrate the realization of a 6.6 meter long cryogenic link connecting two dry dilution refrigerators, acting as quantum communication nodes referred to as "Alice" and "Bob", located in separate laboratories), comprising:
a plurality of cryogenic environments (Fig. 2, Alice, Eve, Bob); and
a plurality of tunnels that connect the plurality of cryogenic environments, wherein the plurality of tunnels contract or expand in length (See annotated Fig. 2 of Renger blow tunnels A connect Alice to Eve and Eve to Bob; Pg. 3, Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the cryogenic link connecting two dry dilution refrigerators, Alice and Bob, spaced apart by 6.6 m, Pg. 9, For future scalability, the cryostat shields contain additional orifices for potential connection of more link arms….The length of the cryogenic link between the two dilution refrigerators results in a thermal contraction of the inner shields of the order of 1 cm along the link axis during cooling down. Additionally, the standard cryostat radiation shields contract vertically during cool down (by 1-2 mm). Without suitable mitigation such contractions would damage the cryostat tails. The vertical contraction is addressed by ensuring sufficient clearances for the arms of the link to be off-set at room temperature - the shields become coaxial as the system cools. These offsets (calculated and designed into the tails) are different for each cryostat as the respective heights of the tails are different [Fig. 6(a)]. Along the length of the link, the PT1, PT2 and still stages, have edge welded bellows included to compensate for the expected contraction of the shields. These edge welded bellows are manufactured from stainless steel and allow for sufficient movement to compensate for thermal contraction (thermalization of the link will be discussed in the following section). Figure 7 (e) shows the edge welded bellows stacked concentrically as they would be in the link. Figure 7(f)-(h) depicts the respective bellows for the PT1, PT2, and still stages. The MC temperature tube consists of two independent segments with an overlapping (sliding fit) section at the center of the link. As the shield contracts, the sliding section takes up any length change without exerting forces on the mixing chambers of the dilution refrigerators).
PNG
media_image1.png
485
930
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Renger
Regarding claim 20, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 19 (see the rejection of claim 19 above), wherein each of the plurality of tunnels comprises:
a plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields that contract or expand a corresponding tunnel along a central axis of the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields (Fig. 5; Pg. 8, The cryogenic link consists of four segments with a shield structure coinciding with that of dilution fridges; Pg. 9, The length of the cryogenic link between the two dilution refrigerators results in a thermal contraction of the inner shields of the order of 1 cm along the link axis during cooling down).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renger et al. (Cryogenic microwave link for quantum local area networks), hereinafter Renger in view of Stautner (US Patent No. 11,384,883), hereinafter Stautner.
Regarding claim 2, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Renger does not disclose wherein the tunnel comprises:
a gate valve that isolates the first cryostat from the second cryostat when closed.
Stautner teaches the use of a gate valve to open and close flow through a tunnel connected to a cryostat (Fig. 4, cryostat 101, gate valve 126, cryostat induction tube 132; Col. 4, lines 29-31, a gate valve 126 that is configured to minimize, if not eliminate, the ingress of environmental air into the cryostat 101).
Renger fails to teach a gate valve that isolates the first cryostat from the second cryostat when closed, however Stautner teaches that it is a known method in the art of cryostats to include the use of a gate valve to open and close flow through a tunnel connected to a cryostat. This is strong evidence that modifying Renger as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. aiding in reducing the heat load to the cryostat caused during the disengagement of a cryogenic transfer line (Stautner, Col. 4, lines 31-33)). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Renger by Stautner and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of aiding in reducing the heat load to the cryostat caused during the disengagement of a cryogenic transfer line (Stautner, Col. 4, lines 31-33).
Claims 5-6, 9, 12, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renger et al. (Cryogenic microwave link for quantum local area networks), hereinafter Renger in view of Doherty et al. (US Patent No. 4,011,732), hereinafter Doherty.
Regarding claim 5, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 3 (see the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields comprise:
a set of flanges associated with distinct temperature stages that attach to radiation shields that correspond to the distinct temperature stages within the first cryostat or the second cryostat (See annotated Fig. 5 of Renger below, set of flanges B; Pg 8, individual cryostat shields are then aligned with respect to their vacuum cans, as shown in Fig. 5(c). Figure 5(a) shows the Bob connection port before alignment and Fig. 5(b) shows the alignment jig… the cryogenic link Prior to the alignment procedure we need to mount the shields on all three individual cryostats; Pg. 9, Figure 7. Illustration of various steps of the cryogenic link connection procedure. Panel (a) shows Bob's connection ports together with the to-be-connected link arm).
However, Renger does not disclose wherein the set of flanges comprise a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact.
Doherty teaches connecting flanges via a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact (Fig. 3, flange 85, mating flange 58, grippers 116, circular band 117; Abstract, A heat-stationed bayonet connector suitable for connecting liquid cryogen sources and refrigeration loads to a cryogenic fluid transfer line or for connecting components such as flexible sections, etc., into the transfer line. The incorporation of a cold heat station in the bayonet connector and its thermal connection to a coolant makes it possible to intercept heat flow along the length of the bayonet and thereby to minimize heat losses associated with the connector; Col. 5, lines 49-52, FIG. 3 also illustrates the incorporation of the heat stationed bayonet connector of this invention into a typical liquid helium process line designated by the numeral 40; Col. 5-6, lines 66-68 and 1-2, The two sections of the bayonet connector are retained in their engaged position by means of a clamp member comprising a series of grippers 116 held by a circular band 117 which is tightened around the grippers by a nut and bolt (not shown)).
Renger fails to teach herein the set of flanges comprise a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact, however Doherty teaches that it is a known method in the art of cryogenic flange connections to include connecting flanges via a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact. This is strong evidence that modifying Renger as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. intercepting heat flow along the length of the bayonet and thereby to minimize heat losses associated with the connector (Doherty, Abstract)). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Renger by Doherty and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of intercepting heat flow along the length of the bayonet and thereby to minimize heat losses associated with the connector (Doherty, Abstract).
PNG
media_image2.png
437
920
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5 of Renger
Regarding claim 6, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 3 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein each of the radiation shields comprises a mating flange that corresponds to a flange in the set of flanges in the tunnel (Renger, See annotated Fig. 5 of Renger below, mating flanges C; Pg 8, individual cryostat shields are then aligned with respect to their vacuum cans, as shown in Fig. 5(c). Figure 5(a) shows the Bob connection port before alignment and Fig. 5(b) shows the alignment jig… the cryogenic link Prior to the alignment procedure we need to mount the shields on all three individual cryostats; Pg. 9, Figure 7. Illustration of various steps of the cryogenic link connection procedure. Panel (a) shows Bob's connection ports together with the to-be-connected link arm).
PNG
media_image2.png
437
920
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5 of Renger
Regarding claim 9, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 5 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 5 above), further comprising:
an outer vacuum chamber that is electrically isolated from the tunnel, the first cryostat, and the second cryostat (Fig. 2 of Renger depicts Viton O-rings to be disposed throughout the cryogenic link and the cryostats; Pg. 3, In order to ensure vacuum tightness and be able to attain a background pressure around 1 x 10-6 mbar, we employ Viton O-ring vacuum seals between room temperature counterparts of the cryolink. Radiation shields corresponding to different temperature stages are thermally separated from each other via fiberglass spacers and designed with sufficient mechanical flexibility to mount the link arms. The entire system is designed with multiple degrees of freedom to enable in-situ adjustment of a relative orientation between Alice, Bob, Eve, and the cryogenic link arms; Pg. 7, Both cryostats are equipped with a customized tailset; a room temperature outer vacuum chamber (OVC), an aluminum radiation shield for the first (PT1) and second (PT2) PTR stages and radiation shields for the still and mixing chamber (MC) stages, manufactured from electropolished copper. Further, the teachings of Renger at least imply the outer vacuum chamber is electrically isolated from the tunnel, the first cryostat, and the second cryostat as Viton is an electrical insulator since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
Regarding claim 12, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 9 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 9 above), wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises:
a set of ports on the outer vacuum chamber to support different angular configurations (Renger, Fig. 6; Pg. 9, For future scalability, the cryostat shields contain additional orifices for potential connection of more link arms…As an example, such an additional connection port for Eve can be seen in Fig. 6 (b) and allows for potential extension of the system).
Regarding claim 16, Renger discloses the cryogenic system of claim 14 (see the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the plurality of overlapping concentric radiation shields comprises:
a set of flanges associated with distinct temperature stages that attach to radiation shields that correspond to the distinct temperature stages within the plurality of cryostat (See annotated Fig. 5 of Renger below, set of flanges B; Pg 8, individual cryostat shields are then aligned with respect to their vacuum cans, as shown in Fig. 5(c). Figure 5(a) shows the Bob connection port before alignment and Fig. 5(b) shows the alignment jig… the cryogenic link Prior to the alignment procedure we need to mount the shields on all three individual cryostats; Pg. 9, Figure 7. Illustration of various steps of the cryogenic link connection procedure. Panel (a) shows Bob's connection ports together with the to-be-connected link arm).
However, Renger does not disclose wherein the set of flanges comprise a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact.
Doherty teaches connecting flanges via a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact (Fig. 3, flange 85, mating flange 58, grippers 116, circular band 117; Abstract, A heat-stationed bayonet connector suitable for connecting liquid cryogen sources and refrigeration loads to a cryogenic fluid transfer line or for connecting components such as flexible sections, etc., into the transfer line. The incorporation of a cold heat station in the bayonet connector and its thermal connection to a coolant makes it possible to intercept heat flow along the length of the bayonet and thereby to minimize heat losses associated with the connector; Col. 5, lines 49-52, FIG. 3 also illustrates the incorporation of the heat stationed bayonet connector of this invention into a typical liquid helium process line designated by the numeral 40; Col. 5-6, lines 66-68 and 1-2, The two sections of the bayonet connector are retained in their engaged position by means of a clamp member comprising a series of grippers 116 held by a circular band 117 which is tightened around the grippers by a nut and bolt (not shown)).
Renger fails to teach herein the set of flanges comprise a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact, however Doherty teaches that it is a known method in the art of cryogenic flange connections to include connecting flanges via a twist-lock mechanism for thermal contact. This is strong evidence that modifying Renger as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. intercepting heat flow along the length of the bayonet and thereby to minimize heat losses associated with the connector (Doherty, Abstract)). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Renger by Doherty and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of intercepting heat flow along the length of the bayonet and thereby to minimize heat losses associated with the connector (Doherty, Abstract).
PNG
media_image2.png
437
920
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5 of Renger
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renger as modified by Doherty as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Niknammoghadam et al. (US 20250052479), hereinafter Niknammoghadam.
Regarding claim 7, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 5 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 5 above).
However, Renger as modified does not disclose wherein the radiation shields of the first cryostat or the second cryostat comprise removable panels.
Niknammoghadam teaches wherein the radiation shields of a cryostat comprise removable panels (Fig. 1, vacuum chamber 1401, radiation shield modules 1412, 1413, 1414, 1415; Pg. 12, paragraphs 132-133, In close resemblance to the modularity of the (at least one of the) cold plates, also at least one of the heat radiation shields (here: all heat radiation shields) is modular. In FIG. 14, radiation shield modules 1412, 1413, 1414, and 1415 are shown. Each of the radiation shield modules is sector-like, comprising a vertical, rectangular side portion and a sector-formed bottom portion. This should be construed as an example only, as the radiation shield modules could be shaped differently. For example, the side portions and bottom portions could be separate from each other, and/or there could be a set of side portions and a separate, common bottom portion of the modular radiation shield. If the division into modules of the heat radiation shield(s) follows at least approximately the same division lines as the division into modules of the cold plate(s), an important advantage is achieved: in order to access an area inside the cryogenic cooling system or platform, it is sufficient to remove only some modules. One does not need to disassemble e.g. the whole of the plurality of heat radiation shields).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cryogenic system of Renger as modified wherein the radiation shields of the first cryostat or the second cryostat comprise removable panels as taught by Niknammoghadam. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to access an area inside the cryogenic cooling system or platform, it is sufficient to remove only some modules and one does not need to disassemble e.g. the whole of the plurality of heat radiation shields (Niknammoghadam, Pg. 12, paragraphs 133).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renger as modified by Doherty as applied to claims 9 above, and further in view of Jiang et al. (US Patent No. 12,320,557), hereinafter Jiang.
Regarding claim 11, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 9 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 9 above).
However, Renger as modified does not disclose wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises removable panels to access the radiation shields of the first cryostat or the second cryostat.
Jiang teaches wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises removable panels to access the radiation shields of a cryostat (Fig. 10, module 200, door 210; Fig. 12; Col 14, lines 11-22, The front face of the module 200 comprises a door 210 that is securely fitted to the housing by hinges and bolts so that a vacuum can be maintained inside the housing. The door 210 can be opened in order to provide access to the interior of the module 200, for example during servicing and to adjust any bolts, such as those provided on the side faces of the housing or the radiation shields. FIG. 12 shows a perspective view of the system according to a third embodiment in which the doors 210 of each module 200, 250 are not shown in order to illustrate the various connections between the two modules 200, 250).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cryogenic system of Renger as modified wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises removable panels to access the radiation shields of the first cryostat or the second cryostat as taught by Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification opened in order to provide access to the interior of the module, for example during servicing (Jiang, col. 14, lines 14-18).
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renger et al. (Cryogenic microwave link for quantum local area networks), hereinafter Renger in view of Jiang et al. (US Patent No. 12,320,557), hereinafter Jiang.
Regarding claim 17, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 5 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 5 above), further comprising:
an outer vacuum chamber that is electrically isolated from the tunnel, the first cryostat, and the second cryostat (Fig. 2 of Renger depicts Viton O-rings to be disposed throughout the cryogenic link and the cryostats; Pg. 3, In order to ensure vacuum tightness and be able to attain a background pressure around 1 x 10-6 mbar, we employ Viton O-ring vacuum seals between room temperature counterparts of the cryolink. Radiation shields corresponding to different temperature stages are thermally separated from each other via fiberglass spacers and designed with sufficient mechanical flexibility to mount the link arms. The entire system is designed with multiple degrees of freedom to enable in-situ adjustment of a relative orientation between Alice, Bob, Eve, and the cryogenic link arms; Pg. 7, Both cryostats are equipped with a customized tailset; a room temperature outer vacuum chamber (OVC), an aluminum radiation shield for the first (PT1) and second (PT2) PTR stages and radiation shields for the still and mixing chamber (MC) stages, manufactured from electropolished copper. Further, the teachings of Renger at least imply the outer vacuum chamber is electrically isolated from the tunnel, the first cryostat, and the second cryostat as Viton is an electrical insulator since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
However, Renger does not disclose wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises removable panels to access the radiation shields of the plurality of cryostats.
Jiang teaches wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises removable panels to access the radiation shields of a cryostat (Fig. 10, module 200, door 210; Fig. 12; Col 14, lines 11-22, The front face of the module 200 comprises a door 210 that is securely fitted to the housing by hinges and bolts so that a vacuum can be maintained inside the housing. The door 210 can be opened in order to provide access to the interior of the module 200, for example during servicing and to adjust any bolts, such as those provided on the side faces of the housing or the radiation shields. FIG. 12 shows a perspective view of the system according to a third embodiment in which the doors 210 of each module 200, 250 are not shown in order to illustrate the various connections between the two modules 200, 250).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cryogenic system of Renger of claim 13 wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises removable panels to access the radiation shields of the plurality of cryostats as taught by Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification opened in order to provide access to the interior of the module, for example during servicing (Jiang, col. 14, lines 14-18).
Regarding claim 18, Renger as modified discloses the cryogenic system of claim 17 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 9 above), wherein the outer vacuum chamber comprises:
a set of ports on the outer vacuum chamber to support different angular configurations (Renger, Fig. 6; Pg. 9, For future scalability, the cryostat shields contain additional orifices for potential connection of more link arms…As an example, such an additional connection port for Eve can be seen in Fig. 6 (b) and allows for potential extension of the system).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kelly et al. (US 20230366589) discloses a similar cryogenic system for connecting a plurality of cryogenic environments with a tunnel.
Khatri (US Patent No. 11,747,076) discloses a similar cryogenic system for connecting a plurality of cryogenic environments with a tunnel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON T MOORE whose telephone number is 571-272-6555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5.
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, 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.
/DEVON MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 July 31st, 2026
Prosecution Insights