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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“wavelength based distribution element” in claim 28.
“polarization based distribution element” in claim 29.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
(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, 4-12, 23-27, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2017/0206988 to Garrett et al (Garrett).
Regarding claim 1, Garrett discloses a thermoacoustic engine (50, fig. 3; [42]) that consists essentially of:
a heat exchanger (coolant; [43] or ambient environment; [58]); and
a resonator (housing 52 with interior chamber 54, fig. 3; [42]) that is in communication with the heat exchanger, wherein the resonator comprises a media (heat source 62, fig. 3; [42], [51]) configured to absorb one or more electromagnetic signals (gamma absorber; [51]); wherein the media is fluid ([49]; gas within fuel rod); and
wherein the thermoacoustic engine is configured to receive the one or more electromagnetic signals and generate acoustic power ([44]; converts a portion of this heat flow or temperature gradient into an acoustic standing wave within the resonator defined by the interior chamber 54).
Regarding claim 4, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein each thermoacoustic engine lacks a stack ([61]).
Regarding claim 5, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein each thermoacoustic engine lacks an additional heat exchanger ([45]).
Regarding claim 6, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein the resonator is a loop resonator ([39] configured to impose a travelling acoustic wave, and wherein the one or electromagnetic signals are laser pulses (laser Doppler anemometry used to measure acoustic streaming; [80]-[83]).
Regarding claim 8, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein the heat exchanger is an ambient heat exchanger ([58]).
Regarding claim 9, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein the heat exchanger is configured to be maintained at a temperature that is lower than a temperature of an illuminated portion of the resonator (high temperature end 70 is the illuminated portion which contains the heat source 62, and the low temperature end 72 is the coolant portion (heat exchanger as claimed); [43]).
Regarding claim 10, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein the media is gas ([49]), wherein gas located within an illuminated region of the resonator undergoes a thermoacoustic process ([46]).
Regarding claim 11, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, wherein the thermoacoustic engine is configured to generate acoustic waves when exposed to pulses of electromagnetic signals ([46]).
Regarding claim 12, Garrett discloses a method, comprising:
receiving, by a thermoacoustic engine, one or more electromagnetic signals ([51]; gamma absorber receiving gamma radiations); and
generating acoustic power ([44]; converts a portion of this heat flow or temperature gradient into an acoustic standing wave within the resonator defined by the interior chamber 54), by the thermoacoustic engine and in response to the receiving of the electromagnetic signals;
wherein the thermoacoustic engine consists essentially of a heat exchanger (coolant; [43] or ambient environment; [58]) and a resonator (housing 52 with interior chamber 54, fig. 3; [42])that is in communication with the heat exchanger, wherein the resonator comprises a media (heat source 62, fig. 3; [42], [51]) configured to absorb the one or more electromagnetic signals (gamma absorber; [51]); wherein the media is fluid ([49]; gas within fuel rod).
Regarding claim 23, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by an additional thermoacoustic engine (fig. 4; [30], [52]), one or more additional electromagnetic signals ([51]; gamma absorber receiving gamma radiations); and generating acoustic power ([44]; converts a portion of this heat flow or temperature gradient into an acoustic standing wave within the resonator defined by the interior chamber 54), by the additional thermoacoustic engine and in response to the receiving of the one or more additional electromagnetic signals;
wherein the additional thermoacoustic engine consists essentially of an additional heat exchanger (coolant; [43] or ambient environment; [58]; each engine will have its own heat exchanger as shown in fig. 4) and an additional resonator (housing 52 with interior chamber 54, fig. 3; [42]; each engine will have its own housing resonator) that is in communication with the additional heat exchanger, wherein the additional resonator comprises a media (heat source 62, fig. 3; [42], [51]) configured to absorb one or more additional electromagnetic signals that are received by the additional thermoacoustic engine (gamma absorber; [51]).
Regarding claim 24, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by additional thermoacoustic engines (fig. 4; [30], [52]), additional electromagnetic signals ([51]; gamma absorber receiving gamma radiations); and generating acoustic power ([44]; converts a portion of this heat flow or temperature gradient into an acoustic standing wave within the resonator defined by the interior chamber 54), by the additional thermoacoustic engines and in response to the receiving of the additional electromagnetic signals;
wherein each one of the additional thermoacoustic engines consists essentially of an additional heat exchanger (coolant; [43] or ambient environment; [58]; each engine will have its own heat exchanger as shown in fig. 4) and an additional resonator (housing 52 with interior chamber 54, fig. 3; [42]; each engine will have its own housing resonator) that is in communication with the additional heat exchanger, wherein the additional resonator comprises a media (heat source 62, fig. 3; [42], [51]) configured to absorb one or more additional electromagnetic signals that are received by the additional thermoacoustic engine (gamma absorber; [51]).
Regarding claim 25, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 23, comprising distributing a plurality of electromagnetic signals between a plurality of thermoacoustic engines ([52]), wherein the plurality of thermoacoustic engines comprises the additional thermoacoustic engines and the thermoacoustic engine ([52]), wherein the plurality of electromagnetic signals comprises the one or more electromagnetic signals and the additional electromagnetic signals ([52]).
Regarding claim 26, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 25, wherein the plurality of electromagnetic signals are a plurality of radiation signals (gamma signals; [51]).
Regarding claim 27, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 25, wherein the plurality of electromagnetic signals are a plurality of pulses of radiation (gamma signals [51]).
Regarding claim 30, Garrett discloses an energy providing unit, comprising: one or more thermoacoustic engines (50, fig. 3; [42]); wherein each thermoacoustic engine of the one or more thermoacoustic engines consists essentially of a heat exchanger (coolant; [43] or ambient environment; [58]) and a resonator (housing 52 with interior chamber 54, fig. 3; [42]) that is in communication with the heat exchanger, wherein the resonator comprises a media (heat source 62, fig. 3; [42], [51]) configured to absorb one or more electromagnetic signals (gamma absorber; [51]); and wherein the thermoacoustic engine is configured to receive the one or more electromagnetic signals and generate acoustic power ([44]; converts a portion of this heat flow or temperature gradient into an acoustic standing wave within the resonator defined by the interior chamber 54) wherein the media is fluid ([49]; gas within fuel rod).
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.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2021/0241751 to Cukurel.
Regarding claim 3, Garrett discloses the thermoacoustic engine according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that which Cukurel discloses:
the one or more electromagnetic signals are one or more electrical current signals ([64]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the electrical current signals as electromagnetic signals as taught by Cukurel with the device of Garrett so as to be able to receive input energy from other sources and can be used in wider array of applications such as jet engines ([68]; Cukurel).
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of US 4,484,820 to Rosencwaig.
Regarding claim 28, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 25 but does not explicitly disclose which Rosencwaig discloses:
the distributing is executed using a wavelength based distribution element (laser 42, fig. 1; col. 4, lines 60-68).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the distributing executed using a wavelength based distribution element as taught by Rosencwaig with the device of Garrett so as to provide a new and improved method for obtaining the plate-mode resonant signatures of an integrated circuit die and substrate combination utilizing thermo-acoustic microscopy in order to evaluate the integrity of the bond achieved between the members (col. 2, lines 7-12; Rosencwaig).
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of US 2010/0019171 to Jiang et al (Jiang).
Regarding claim 29, Garrett discloses the method according to claim 25 but does not explicitly disclose which Jiang discloses:
the distributing is executed using a polarization based distribution element ([12], [27], [28] ,[76]-[77]; electromagnetic signal is polarized).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the distributing executed using a polarization based distribution element as taught by Jiang with the device of Garrett so that user can not just measure the intensity of the electromagnetic signal 118…, but also determine the polarizing direction of the electromagnetic signal 118 ([76]; Jiang).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 4/6/2026, with respect to 112(a) rejection of claims 28-29 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(b) rejection of claims 28-29 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 4/6/2026 with respect to prior art rejection of claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Garrett does not disclose stackless thermoacoustic engine as required by claim 4 in a single embodiment. However, the office respectfully disagrees. Garrett clearly discloses in [61] that the engine can be stackless and the device is similar to one shown in fig. 6. Furthermore, the paragraph also discloses that any of the embodiments can be used to have a stackless thermoacoustic device. As such, the claim limitation is met.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., In the present invention, the media (fluid) within the resonator both absorbs AND emits electromagnetic radiation. This dual functionality is crucial to the operation of the claimed thermoacoustic engine. As disclosed in the specification, the fluid undergoes a cascade of heat transfer from one parcel to the next, shuttling heat via a "bucket brigade" of a multitude of gas parcels in series. This absorbing and emitting fluid media fulfills the function that was previously performed by a solid stack in prior thermoacoustic devices. The specification explains that "the thermoacoustic engine includes a AHX and a resonator that is filled with an optically absorbing (and therefore also emitting, due to Kelvin's theorem) fluid." The emission property, governed by Kelvin's theorem, is essential because it enables the thermoacoustic process where "a parcel oscillates spatially, while periodically compressing and expanding. Inside the engine, it interacts with the non-uniform radiative field, absorbing net radiative heat while compressed, and emitting net radiation while expanded.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Garrett discloses a thermoacoustic device that has all the structural limitations of claim 1 as currently written. For example, paragraphs [46], [69]-[72], [106], Garrett clearly discloses that electromagnetic radiations are absorbed and heats fuel pallets. As such, the claim limitations are met.
Applicant further argues that Garrett does not disclose that the media is fluid. However, the office respectfully disagrees. Garrett clearly discloses in [49] that the fuel rod contains gas. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that fuel gas contained within the fuel rod will absorb these electromagnetic radiations are heat up. Therefore, Garrett discloses that the media is fluid.
Applicant further argues that Garrett does not disclose the limitations of claim 25. However, the office respectfully disagrees. Fig. 4 of Garrett clearly discloses more than one thermoacoustic devices with each having their own thermoelectric signals and absorbers. As such, the claim, as currently written, is anticipated by Garrett.
Applicant further argues that Garrett combined with Rosencwaig does not disclose “the distribution is executed using a wavelength based distribution element” as required by claim 28. However, the office respectfully disagrees. First off, Garrett discloses in [80]-[83], laser based signals to measure the time-averaged acoustically driven streaming. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that light travels in waves. As such, the laser based signals are the signals distributed by laser. Furthermore, Rosencwaig also discloses using laser waves to send waves to the target in column 4, lines 60-68. This when combined with Garrett will allow Garrett to use a laser to send signals. As such, the combination is proper and the claim limitation is met.
Applicant yet further argues that Garrett combined with Jiang does not disclose the limitations of claim 29. However, the office respectfully disagrees. Jiang is directed to a methos and device of measuring electromagnetic signal wherein the electromagnetic signals are polarized (see paragraph [76]). This when combined with Garrett will allow electromagnetic signals in the device to be polarized so that the intensity of the signals can be measured. Therefore, the combination is proper and the limitation is met.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DAPINDER SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/DAPINDER SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/MARK A LAURENZI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights