DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Claims 1-18 and 20 are pending and are examined herein. Claim 19 has been canceled.
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 11/7/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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: “switch closing device” and “switch closing arrangement” in claim 1 and 10. The corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof, is the structures identified as 160 and discussed as such in the specification (for the switch closing device), and the arrangements of claim 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 17, as discussed in the specification regarding ultraviolet light, radioactive source, and the triggering electrode (for the switch closing arrangement). See the related Section 112 rejections in this regard.
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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the radioactive source of claims 7 and 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because the arrow for reference number 110 should extend beyond the leftmost line of the drill tool 120, ending closer to 112 (Fig. 1). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-18 and 20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 10 As discussed with respect to Section 112(f) above, these claims have each invoked Section 112(f) as to “switch control device” but the specification is unbounded with regard to corresponding structure. The listing of corresponding structure includes “another programmable device” and “the switch control device 160 may be embodied by many different constructions” (specification page 9 and page 10, respectively). These are unbounded limitations, thus the corresponding structure for "switch control device” in this claim is not duly limited as required when Section 112(f) is invoked. Claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20 depend from one of claims 1 and 10.
Claims 1 and 10 Use of pronouns, e.g. “it,” “its,” etc. render the claim indefinite in that it is unclear to which noun or other term the pronoun refers. Claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20 depend from one of claims 1 and 10.
Claims 8 and 17 The term "much" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term 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.
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 9-14, 18, and 20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moeny (US20180148981).
Claim 1 Moeny discloses a drilling arrangement for high voltage electro pulse rock drilling [at least Figs. 32,33A,38-40,51-55; abstract; para. 0333-0376; Moeny disclosing that components of the various embodiments are interchangeable/substitutable with all embodiments, such that disclosures of components and functions are not limited to a single embodiment; para. 0282,0407], the drilling arrangement comprising:
a pulsed power generator [at least para. 0230] for generating high voltage electro pulses [one example of the many embodiments disclosed being discussed at para. 0222-0233,0343-0352; Figs. 32-33B,54A-55];
a drill tool [at least 114,118,670,750; Figs. 4-7B,54a,54B] for forming a drill hole by conveying the generated high voltage electro pulses, via electrodes [at least 108,110; e.g., the “electrode sets” referenced many times; abstract; para. 0111-0118,0122,0155,0230, 0233,0237-0243; Figs. 1-7,17B,32,33A,35-37] in the drill tool, through mineral substrate 106 [para. 0233];
a switch [at least 160; e.g., at least Figs. 12,32,34; para. 0038,0140,0225,0228,0233-0235,0280,0287,0299-0304,0343-0348,0350-0352; e.g., “liquid and gas switches, solid state switches, and metal vapor switches” (para. 0228), “wide variety of switches and pulsed power circuits can be used for either spiker 230 or sustainer 231 to switch the stored electrical energy into the substrate, including but not limited to solid state switches, gas or liquid spark gaps, thyratrons, vacuum tubes, and solid state optically triggered or self-break switches (see FIGS. 12-15)” (para. 0233), “solid state switch controlled or gas-switch controlled pulse generating system” (para. 0344)], arranged between the pulsed power generator and the electrodes [at least shown on Fig. 32; para. 0025], wherein the switch when it is closed allows high voltage electro pulses from the pulsed power generator to reach the electrodes [at least Fig. 32];
and a switch control device [switches are at least controlled by the “Instrumentation, Communication and Control Subsystem” having the “command and control and instrumentation system”; Fig. 55; para. 0353,0358,0369,0334],
wherein the switch is a controllable switch [para. 0353,0357,0358,0369,0287,0334] comprising a switch closing arrangement [i.e., at least some disclosed switch types described above provide for ionization of a gas as part of activating the switch, e.g., the “gas-switch” types requiring such ionization , the “optically triggered” switch type using light as part of the activation/ionization, and the gas “spark gap” type requiring a sufficient breakdown voltage to ionize the gas], which is arranged to be controlled by receiving a switch trigger signal [at least para. 0280,0350-0353,0357,0358] emitted from the switch control device to close the switch [e.g., para. 0234; “close” in this claim considered as providing for activation, Moeny reversing such that the switch is activated when “open”].
Claim 2 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 1, discloses that the pulsed power generator comprises a pulse transformer in the form of a bank of capacitors [para. 0184] and is arranged to generate a high voltage electro pulse each time the switch is closed [e.g., para. 0234; “close” in this claim considered as providing for activation, Moeny reversing such that the switch is activated when “open”].
Claim 3 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 1, discloses that the pulsed power generator is arranged to continuously generate high voltage electro pulses, and the switch control device is arranged to synchronize the switch trigger signal with the high voltage electro pulses from the pulsed power generator [e.g., the above-described switch control device controls switch triggering signals to provide the desired switch activation for continuously feeding the high voltage pulse to the bit; para. 0234,0357,0358].
Claim 4 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 3, discloses that the switch control device is arranged to synchronize the switch trigger signal with the high voltage electro pulses from the pulsed power generator by using the switch trigger signal also for triggering the pulses from the pulsed power generator [e.g., the above-described switch control device controls switch triggering signals to provide the desired switch activation for feeding the high voltage pulse to the bit, as well as, controlling power from the pulsed power generator; para. 0357,0358,0353].
Claim 5 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 1, discloses that the switch comprises a spark gap filled with a switch gas between switch electrodes [as discussed at claim 1 herein regarding at least the gas “spark gap” switch type], and the switch closing arrangement causes the ionization of the switch gas and thereby the closing of the switch [ionization necessarily being accomplished for the switch to perform].
Claim 9 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 1, discloses more than one switch [para. 0251].
Claim 10 As discussed with respect to claim 1, Moeny discloses a method for high voltage electro pulse rock drilling using a drilling arrangement [at least Figs. 32,33A,38-40,51-55; abstract; para. 0333-0376; Moeny disclosing that components of the various embodiments are interchangeable/substitutable with all embodiments, such that disclosures of components and functions are not limited to a single embodiment; para. 0282,0407] comprising a pulsed power generator [at least 230], a drill tool [at least 114,118,670,750; Figs. 4-7B,54a,54B] comprising electrodes [at least 108,110; e.g., the “electrode sets” referenced many times; abstract; para. 0111-0118,0122,0155,0230,0233,0237-0243; Figs. 1-7,17B,32,33A,35-37], and a controllable switch [at least 160; e.g., at least Figs. 12,32,34; para. 0038,0140,0225,0228,0233-0235,0280,0287,0299-0304,0343-0348,0350-0352; e.g., “liquid and gas switches, solid state switches, and metal vapor switches” (para. 0228), “wide variety of switches and pulsed power circuits can be used for either spiker 230 or sustainer 231 to switch the stored electrical energy into the substrate, including but not limited to solid state switches, gas or liquid spark gaps, thyratrons, vacuum tubes, and solid state optically triggered or self-break switches (see FIGS. 12-15)” (para. 0233), “solid state switch controlled or gas-switch controlled pulse generating system” (para. 0344); switches are at least controlled by the “Instrumentation, Communication and Control Subsystem” having the “command and control and instrumentation system”; Fig. 55; para. para. 0353,0357,0358,0369,0287,0334], arranged between the pulsed power generator and the electrodes, wherein the switch when it is closed allows high voltage electro pulses from the pulsed power generator to reach the electrodes [at least Fig. 230], the method comprising:
generating high voltage electro pulses, using the pulsed power generator pulses [at least para. 0230; one example of the many embodiments disclosed being discussed at para. 0222-0233,0343-0352; Figs. 32-33B,54A-55];
forming a drill hole by conveying the generated high voltage electro pulses, via the electrodes [at least 108,110; e.g., the “electrode sets” referenced many times; abstract; para. 0111-0118,0122,0155,0230,0233,0237-0243; Figs. 1-7,17B,32,33A,35-37] , through mineral substrate 106; and
controlling a switch closing arrangement [i.e., at least some disclosed switch types described above provide for ionization of a gas as part of activating the switch, e.g., the “gas-switch” types requiring such ionization , the “optically triggered” switch type using light as part of the activation/ionization, and the gas “spark gap” type requiring a sufficient breakdown voltage to ionize the gas] to close the controllable switch, wherein the switch closing arrangement is controlled by:
receiving a switch trigger signal [at least para. 0280,0350-0353,0357,0358] emitted from a switch control device [switches are at least controlled by the “Instrumentation, Communication and Control Subsystem” having the “command and control and instrumentation system”; Fig. 55; para. 0353,0358,0369,0334]; and
closing the controllable switch based on the switch trigger signal [e.g., para. 0234; “close” in this claim considered as providing for activation, Moeny reversing such that the switch is activated when “open”].
Claim 11 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 10, discloses that the pulsed power generator comprises a pulse transformer in the form of a bank of capacitors [para. 0184] and is arranged to generate a high voltage electro pulse each time the switch is closed [e.g., para. 0234; “close” in this claim considered as providing for activation, Moeny reversing such that the switch is activated when “open”].
Claim 12 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 10, discloses that the generating of the high voltage electro pulses comprises continuously generating high voltage electro pulses, and the controlling of the switch closing arrangement comprises synchronizing the switch trigger signal with the generated high voltage electro pulses [e.g., the above-described switch control device controls switch triggering signals to provide the desired switch activation for continuously feeding the high voltage pulse to the bit; para. 0234,0357,0358] .
Claim 13 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 12, discloses that using the switch trigger signal also for triggering the pulses from the pulsed power generator, in order to synchronize the switch trigger signal with the high voltage electro pulses from the pulsed power generator [e.g., the above-described switch control device controls switch triggering signals to provide the desired switch activation for feeding the high voltage pulse to the bit, as well as, controlling power from the pulsed power generator; para. 0357,0358,0353].
Claim 14 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 10, discloses that the switch comprises a spark gap filled with a switch gas between switch electrodes [as discussed at claim 10 herein regarding at least the gas “spark gap” switch type], and the switch closing arrangement causes the ionization of the switch gas and thereby the closing of the switch, using the switch closing arrangement [ionization necessarily being accomplished for the switch to perform].
Claim 18 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 10, discloses more than one switch [para. 0251].
Claim 20 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 1, discloses a rock drilling machine comprising a drilling arrangement according to claim 1 [para. 0106].
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 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.
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.
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.
Claims 6, 7, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moeny, in view of Jiang et al. (CN108183392A).
Claim 6 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 5, discloses that a “wide variety” of switches may be used [para. 0233], and otherwise discloses all the limitations of this claim, but does not explicitly disclose that the switch closing arrangement comprises a light emitting device, which causes the ionization of the switch gas by emitting light into the switch gas.
For high pulse power electrical pulses, Jiang discloses a switch for which ionization is caused by emitting ultraviolet light into the switch gas [Figs. 1,2; e.g., the use of the spark pin emits light; “Specific executing examples” and the three following paragraphs], and also that the prior art includes a switch wherein ionization is enabled by a light emitting device, which causes the ionization of the switch gas by emitting light into the switch gas [“the background technology” and the two paragraphs following].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus and methods of Moeny to include a switch in which ionization of the spark gap was caused by a light emitting device emitting light into the switch gas, as disclosed by Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have expected that this combination of prior art elements and techniques would have been within the skill of the art and would successfully yield and achieve the expected and predictable result that a known ionization process would enable the switch to feed the high voltage pulse to the bit.
Claim 7 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 5, discloses that a “wide variety” of switches may be used [para. 0233], and otherwise discloses all the limitations of this claim, but does not explicitly disclose that the switch closing arrangement comprises a radioactive source, which causes the ionization of the switch gas by emitting radioactive radiation into the switch gas.
For high pulse power electrical pulses, Jiang discloses that the prior art includes a switch wherein ionization is enabled by a radioactive source, which causes the ionization of the switch gas by emitting radioactive radiation into the switch gas [Figs. 1,2; “the background technology” and the two paragraphs following].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus and methods of Moeny to include a switch in which ionization of the spark gap was caused by a radioactive source, such switches disclosed as known by Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have expected that this combination of prior art elements and techniques would have been within the skill of the art and would successfully yield and achieve the expected and predictable result that a known ionization process would enable the switch to feed the high voltage pulse to the bit.
Claim 15 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 14, discloses that a “wide variety” of switches may be used [para. 0233], and otherwise discloses all the limitations of this claim, but does not explicitly disclose that the switch closing arrangement comprises a light emitting device, and the causing of the ionization of the switch gas involves using said light emitting device to emit light into the switch gas.
For high pulse power electrical pulses, Jiang discloses a switch for which ionization is caused by emitting ultraviolet light into the switch gas [Figs. 1,2; e.g., the use of the spark pin emits light; “Specific executing examples” and the three following paragraphs], and also that the prior art includes a switch wherein ionization is enabled by a light emitting device, which causes the ionization of the switch gas by emitting light into the switch gas [“the background technology” and the two paragraphs following].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus and methods of Moeny to include a switch in which ionization of the spark gap was caused by a light emitting device emitting light into the switch gas, as disclosed by Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have expected that this combination of prior art elements and techniques would have been within the skill of the art and would successfully yield and achieve the expected and predictable result that a known ionization process would enable the switch to feed the high voltage pulse to the bit.
Claim 16 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 14, discloses that a “wide variety” of switches may be used [para. 0233], and otherwise discloses all the limitations of this claim, but does not explicitly disclose that the switch closing arrangement comprises a radioactive source, and the causing of the ionization of the switch gas involves using said radioactive source to emit radioactive radiation into the switch gas.
For high pulse power electrical pulses, Jiang discloses that the prior art includes a switch wherein ionization is enabled by a radioactive source, which causes the ionization of the switch gas by emitting radioactive radiation into the switch gas [Figs. 1,2; “the background technology” and the two paragraphs following].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus and methods of Moeny to include a switch in which ionization of the spark gap was caused by a radioactive source, such switches disclosed as known by Jiang. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have expected that this combination of prior art elements and techniques would have been within the skill of the art and would successfully yield and achieve the expected and predictable result that a known ionization process would enable the switch to feed the high voltage pulse to the bit.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moeny, in view of Kapishnikov (SU1081717).
Claim 8 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 5, discloses that a “wide variety” of switches may be used [para. 0233], and otherwise discloses all the limitations of this claim, but does not explicitly disclose that the switch closing arrangement comprises an ignition electrode, arranged so that there is an ignition spark gap between the ignition electrode and one of the switch electrodes, where the ignition spark gap is much smaller than the spark gap between the switch electrodes, and the ionization of the switch gas is caused by a voltage being applied to the ignition electrode, causing the ignition spark gap to break down.
Kapishnikov discloses a trigatron switch [Figure] for high-voltage pulse technology [Description, first paragraph], having an ignition electrode 5, arranged so that there is an ignition spark gap between the ignition electrode and one 3 of the switch electrodes 2,3, where the ignition spark gap is much smaller than the spark gap between the switch electrodes [Figure], and the ionization of the switch gas is caused by a voltage being applied to the ignition electrode, causing the ignition spark gap to break down [i.e., the function of a trigatron switch].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus and methods of Moeny to include a trigatron switch in which ionization of the spark gap was caused by a voltage being applied to an ignition electrode, as disclosed by Kapishnikov. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have expected that this combination of prior art elements and techniques would have been within the skill of the art and would successfully yield and achieve the expected and predictable result that a known ionization process would enable the switch to feed the high voltage pulse to the bit.
Claim 17 Moeny, as discussed with respect to claim 14, discloses that a “wide variety” of switches may be used [para. 0233], and otherwise discloses all the limitations of this claim, but does not explicitly disclose that the switch closing arrangement comprises an ignition electrode, arranged so that there is an ignition spark gap between the ignition electrode and one of the switch electrodes, where the ignition spark gap is much smaller than the spark gap between the switch electrodes, and the causing of the ionization of the switch gas involves applying a voltage to the ignition electrode, causing the ignition spark gap to close.
Kapishnikov discloses a trigatron switch [Figure] for high-voltage pulse technology [Description, first paragraph], having an ignition electrode 5, arranged so that there is an ignition spark gap between the ignition electrode and one 3 of the switch electrodes 2,3, where the ignition spark gap is much smaller than the spark gap between the switch electrodes [Figure], and the ionization of the switch gas is caused by a voltage being applied to the ignition electrode, causing the ignition spark gap to break down [i.e., the function of a trigatron switch].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the apparatus and methods of Moeny to include a trigatron switch in which ionization of the spark gap was caused by a voltage being applied to an ignition electrode, as disclosed by Kapishnikov. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably have expected that this combination of prior art elements and techniques would have been within the skill of the art and would successfully yield and achieve the expected and predictable result that a known ionization process would enable the switch to feed the high voltage pulse to the bit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hasson et al. (US4035683) discloses a gas spark gap switch in which ionization results from ultraviolet light [Figs. 1,2; col. 4, line 59 – col. 5, line 9].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE STERLING GRAY whose telephone number is (313)446-4820. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4 Eastern - M-F.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at 571-270-7741. 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.
/GEORGE S GRAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
