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 § 102
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.
Claim(s) 14, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawase (US 2021/0063324).
Regarding claim 14, Kawase discloses an X-ray generation apparatus (fig. 5) comprising: an X-ray generation tube (102) including an insulating tube (4) with a first opening end and a second opening end, a cathode (104) arranged to close the first opening end of the insulating tube and including an electron emitting portion (23), and an anode (103) arranged to close the second opening end and including a target (1) that generates X-rays when electrons from the electron emitting portion collide; a driving circuit (112) configured to drive the X-ray generation tube; and an accommodating container (130) configured to accommodate the X-ray generation tube and the driving circuit, wherein the accommodating container has a third opening end (for 4), and the X-ray generation tube (102) is arranged to close the third opening end, the accommodating container is filled with an insulating liquid (108), the accommodating container defines a first space (SP1) storing the driving circuit, and a second space (SP2) protruding from the first space (SP1) and storing the X-ray generation tube (102), the accommodating container includes a protrusion portion (132) surrounding the second space, and one end of the second space forms the third opening end (at the bottom of fig. 5), a side surface of the cathode (104) is surrounded by a member (121) arranged between the cathode and the accommodating container, the accommodating container includes a convex portion (135) protruding toward an interior of the accommodating container in a section including an axis of the X-ray generation tube (fig. 5), and the member has a first region (with 1211) and a second region (1212), wherein the second region (1212) is within the second space (SP2) and the first region (with 1211) is within both the first space (SP1) and the second space (SP2), and all of the first region (with 1211) has a thickness that is larger than a maximum thickness of the second region (1212) .
Regarding claim 16, Kawase discloses wherein the member is made of one of glass epoxy, polycarbonate, glass, and a ceramic (par. 20).
Regarding claim 18, Kawase discloses an X-ray imaging apparatus (fig. 6) comprising: an X-ray generation apparatus (100); and an X-ray detector (212) configured to detect X-rays emitted from the X-ray generation apparatus.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawase as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Ishii et al. (US 2021/0029809; hereinafter Ishii).
Kawase discloses claim 14.
However, Kawase fails to disclose wherein a thickness of the member in the first region is larger than a radius of the insulating tube.
Ishii teaches wherein a thickness of the member in the first region (at 51e) is larger than a radius of the insulating tube (3).
It would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kawase with the teaching of Ishii, since one would have been motivated to make such a modification for a more stable device (Ishii: par. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 and 17 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 29, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Kawase does not disclose the thicker region extending into the second space that stores the X-ray generation tube. The Examiner disagrees. Kawase discloses the thicker region (1212) extending into the second space (SP2) that stores the X-ray generation tube (102). Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive, and at least claim 14 remains rejected.
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 Chih-Cheng Kao whose telephone number is (571)272-2492. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, David Makiya can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
/Chih-Cheng Kao/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884