DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application No. 19108022 filed on 02/28/2025 are presented for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/28/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in para [0016], t3 should read t1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Heibel et al. (US 2022/0139588; Hereinafter, “Heibel”).
Regarding claim 1: Heibel discloses a nuclear power source (fig. 1) comprising:
a radiation source layer (102), wherein the radiation source layer comprises a composition configurable to emit beta radiation (para [0012]);
a first electrical insulator layer (104) disposed over the radiation source layer (102); a first casing layer (106) disposed over the first electrical insulator layer (104), wherein the first casing layer (106) comprises a metal having an atomic number of 13 or less (aluminum or magnesium; para [0014]) or a metal alloy (aluminum alloy or magnesium alloy; para [0014]) having a primary metal having an atomic number of 13 or less;
a first electrode (108) in contact with the radiation source layer (102); and
a second electrode (110) in contact with the first casing layer (106), wherein a voltage potential is present between the first electrode (108) and the second electrode (110) when the radiation source layer emits beta radiation (para [0018]),
wherein the first electrical insulator layer (104) has a thickness that reduces an average energy of the beta radiation emitted (since the thickness controls the resistance of the insulation layer) from the radiation source layer (102) that contacts the first casing layer (106) such that Bremsstrahlung radiation emitted when the beta radiation reaches the first casing layer is reduced (“…a minimal, if any, Bremsstrahlung radiation produced…”; para [0014]).
Regarding claim 2/1: Heibel discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses the radiation source layer (102) comprises thulium, a thulium isotope, strontium, a strontium isotope, or a combination thereof (para [0012]).
Regarding claim 3/1: Heibel discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses the first electrical insulator layer (104) comprises a metal oxide, diamond, or a combination thereof (para [0013]).
Regarding claim 4/1: Heibel discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses the first casing layer (106) comprises aluminum, an aluminum alloy, magnesium, or a magnesium alloy (para [0014]).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heibel.
Regarding claim 6/1: Heibel discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses the radiation source layer has a third thickness in a range of 0.5 mm to 5 mm (1 mm; para [0012]).
Heibel does not specifically disclose that the first electrical insulator layer (104) has a first thickness in a range of 0.1 mm to 5 mm, and the first casing layer (106) has a second thickness in a range of 0.1 mm to 5 mm.
However, Heibel does not specifically disclose the exact dimensions of the first electrical insulator layer and the first casing layer, the values of the first electrical insulator layer and the first casing layers are result effective variables since increasing or decreasing the first electrical insulator layer (104) provides the desired electrical resistance between the radiation source layer 102 and the casing layer 106 (para [0013]) and the first casing layer (106) inhibits traversal of beta radiation (e.g., slow the beta radiation) through the casing layer 106 (para [0014]). And since Heibel discloses the general condition of the claim, it is within the level of ordinarily skilled artisan to find the optimum range for the first electrical insulator layer and the first casing layers (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have formed the battery of Heibel with the first electrical insulator layer (104) has a first thickness in a range of 0.1 mm to 5 mm, and the first casing layer (106) has a second thickness in a range of 0.1 mm to 5 mm to achieve the desired resistance between the radiation source layer 102 and the casing layer 106, and the amount of inhibition of the traversal of beta radiation as disclosed by Heibel.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7-15 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 16-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 16: none of the prior arts in record, alone or in combination disclose the method steps of “…at least two nuclear power source form a source assembly and are connected in a parallel electrical circuit; and a container comprising: a second electrical insulator layer disposed over the source assembly; a radiation shielding layer disposed over the second electrical insulator layer; a third electrical insulator layer disposed over the radiation shielding layer; a second casing layer disposed over the third electrical insulator layer; a third electrode in contact with the radiation shielding layer, wherein the third electrode is in electrical communication with the first electrode of each of the at least two nuclear power sources; and a fourth electrode in contact with the second casing layer, wherein the fourth electrode is in electrical communication with the second electrode of each of the at least two nuclear power sources”. Claims 17-20 are allowable for depending on claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED ELNAKIB whose telephone number is (571)270-0638. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-4:00PM. 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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/AHMED ELNAKIB/ Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights