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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. The Applicant’s claim for benefit of PCT/IB2019/055879 filed 07/10/2019, which claims benefit of Application No. PCT/IB2018/055109, filed 07/11/2018, have been received and acknowledged.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Claim Amendments and Remarks filed January 23, 2026.
Claims Filing Date
January 23, 2026
Amended
19, 41, 48, 60, 62, 63
Cancelled
1-18, 20, 27, 36, 38, 40, 47, 55
Under Examination
19, 21-26, 28-35, 37, 39, 41-46, 48-54, 56-63
Withdrawn Claim Objections
The following objections are withdrawn due to claim amendment:
Claims 41 and 60 lines 1-2 “2 500”, “5 000”, “15 000”.
Claims 62 and 63 lines 1-2 “the fluidized bed of solid particles is at 400°C the flat metal product is put in contact with”.
The following objection is withdrawn due to claim cancellation:
Claim 55 being a substantial duplicate of claim 54.
Withdrawn Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following 112(a) rejections are withdrawn due to claim amendment:
Claim 19 lines 6 and 18 “for longer than 3 minutes”.
Claim 46 line 3 “for longer than 7 minutes”.
While claim 46 was not amended, claim 46 depends from claim 37, which depends from claim 19. Amended claim 19 lines 5-6 and 18-19 recite cooling “from 900 to 350° for longer than 3 minutes and less than 60 minutes”. Therefore, the cooling of dependent claim 46 line 3 “from 900 to 350°C for longer than 7 minutes” is also limited to be less than 60 minutes.
Response to Remarks filed January 23, 2026
Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt
Applicant's arguments filed January 23, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues the claimed cooling from 900 to 350°C for longer than 3 minutes and less than 60 minutes is different from the cited prior art quenching because Gao Fig. 3 quenches in less than 3 minutes (Remarks p. 6 para. 1, p. 7 para. 2) and Van den Sype ‘479 Fig. 2 does not indicate the duration of cooling (Remarks p. 7 para. 1).
Van den Sype ‘479 discloses quenching hardening from 1500°F to 1800°F (818°C to 927°C) to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature (Van den Sype ‘479 5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:%1, Fig. 2). As rendered obvious by Bates, cooling to Ms temperature or Mf temperature reads on the claimed cooling temperature range being to 350°C (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37).
In the pending rejection, Schmidt discloses cooling for longer than 3 minutes and less than 60 minutes (greater than 30 minutes, Schmidt [0025]) forms a better quality product that avoids waviness and unevenness (Schmidt [0025]).
Applicant’s argued Gao Fig. 3 is directed to cooling curves for 16 mm diameter steel bars. In contrast, the claims are directed to “cooling of a flat metal product”. Van den Sype ‘479 and Schmidt are both directed to cooling of a flat metal product (Van den Sype ‘479 4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1; Schmidt [0025]).
Finally, in the pending rejection Gao renders obvious adjusting the heat transfer medium flow rate to reach the respective given cooling rate for sufficient heat-removal and high heat-transfer rates (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control: Cooling Retort and Immersed Cooling Pipes). Gao also renders obvious the flat product having a broad face with the claimed orientation prevents shielding, which hinders heat transfer (Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11). Neither of these disclosures are related to the argued time of cooling from 900 to 350°C.
The applicant argues the austenite, ferrite, pearlite, bainite, martensite, and/or cementite microstructure (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37) formed during cooling lacks evidentiary basis (Van den Sype ‘479 5:53-65) (Remarks para. spanning pp. 7-8, p. 9 para. 2) because Van den Sype ‘479 avoids formation of softer phases of austenite, ferrite, and pearlite such that the article reaches the Ms temperature without intersecting the soft phase threshold and it must be rapid enough to miss the cooling curve nose (Van den Sype ‘479 col. 5 ll. 3-9, 62-64, Fig. 2) (Remarks p. 8 para. 2, para. spanning pp. 8-9).
The advantageous desired microstructure is austenite, ferrite, pearlite, bainite, martensite, and/or cementite. Van den Sype ‘479 Fig. 2 discloses cooling or quenching to Ms at a faster cooling rate, then cooling from Ms to Mf at a slower cooling rate, where the line 7 curve does not intersect the nose of the TTT diagram so that the alloy is substantially transformed into martensite (5:58-65). Therefore, within the context of Van den Sype ‘479 the desired microstructure appears to be martensite. Bates, such as Fig. 29, provides evidence of transformation to martensite by cooling for 3 minutes to less than 60 minutes (180 to 3600 seconds). Further, Schmidt discloses cooling (quenching) of a flat metal product (slab) for greater than 30 minutes advantageously results in a better quality product that avoid waviness and unevenness (Schmidt [0025]). Similarly, applicant’s specification discloses the product of the cooling process avoids deformation (waviness or unevenness) (applicant’s specification [00014], [00035]).“Expected beneficial results are evidence of obviousness of a claimed invention.” MPEP 716.02(c)(II).
For the above cited reasons, the rejection of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt is maintained.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 40 line 1 “the temperature is 800°C” is given the broadest reasonable interpretation of referring to a temperature that the flat metal product has as recited in claim 19 lines 1-2.
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.
Claims 19, 21, 26, 28-34, 36, 37, 40, 46, 49-54, 56-59, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 (US 5,064,479) in view of Gao (Gao et al. Fluidized-Bed Quenching. ASM Handbook, Volume 4A, Steel Heat Treating Fundamentals and Processes. J. Dossett and G.E. Totten, editors. 2013 ASM International.), Bates (Bates et al. Quenching of Steel. ASM Handbook, Volume 4: Heat Treating. ASM Handbook Committee, p. 67-120. 1991 ASM International.), and Schmidt (US 2006/0292513).
Regarding claim 19, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses a method of cooling (quench hardening) (1:5-10) a flat product having a broad face (article 5) (4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1) and a temperature above 400°C (1500°F to 1700°F, 816°C to 927°C) (5:22-28), the method comprising:
putting (immersing) the flat metal product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles (4:43-68, Fig. 1), the solid particles having a direction of circulation (flow of fluid) (5:2-3, Fig. 1) and capturing (transferring) heat released by the flat metal product (heat transfer dominated by properties of particles) (1:59-61, 2:38-50) and transferring said captured heat to a transfer medium to cool the flat metal product (heat removed from the bed by auxiliary heat transfer means) (6:18-22) from 900 to 350°C (quenching hardening with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F, 818°C to 927°C, to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature) (5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2) according to a predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2), the flat metal product (article 5) being put in contact with the solid particles so that the broad face is parallel to the direction of circulation (flow of fluid) of the solid particles (4:43-58, 2:1-6, Fig. 1);
injecting a gas for fluidizing the solid particles in a bubbling regime (bubbly character) (2:38-50, 3:16-26), an injection (gas) flow rate of the gas being controlled (tailored) to match the predefined cooling curve (particular application, time-temperature-transformation diagram) of the flat metal product (4:12-16, 5:41-52, Fig. 2); and
wherein the broad face defines a length and a width of the flat product and a small face defines a thickness of the product, wherein the direction of circulation is vertical and the broad face of the flat product is parallel to the vertical direction and the small face of the flat product is perpendicular to the vertical direction (Fig. 1);
wherein the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) includes different portions (Line 7), each of the different portions having a given cooling rate (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2), thereby avoiding deformation of the flat metal product (fastest possible quench may develop distortion, so the quenching rate of the bed is adjusted) (6:23-33) while the flat metal product is cooled from 900 to 350°C (quenching hardening with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F, 818°C to 927°C, to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature) (5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2) according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2); and
wherein the flat metal product is a flat steel metal product (1:8-9, 5:14-21).
PNG
media_image1.png
613
721
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to cooling for longer than 3 minutes, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses adjusting the quenching rate of the fluidized bed so that stresses and distortion do not develop in the article (6:23-33). While the Fig. 2 time-temperature-transformation diagram of Van den Sype ‘479 indicates x-axis units of time and y-axis units of temperature, the values are not indicated.
Bates discloses the flat metal product is cooled from 900 to 350°C (p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37).
Schmidt discloses cooling (quenching) a flat metal product (slab) for longer than 3 minutes and less than 60 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 to cool from 900 to 350°C for longer than 30 minutes to quench the steel and transform the microstructure to the desired austenite (A), ferrite (F), pearlite (P), bainite (B), martensite (M), and/or cementite (C) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37), which are within the scope of the disclosure of Van den Sype ‘479 (Van den Sype ‘479, 5:53-65, austenite, ferrite, and pearlite are softer phases and martensite and bainite are harder phases), where quenching the slab upright, maintained on the edge (Schmidt [0001]) results in better quality product that avoids waviness and unevenness (Schmidt [0003]-[0005]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Van den Sype ‘479 discloses transferring said captured heat to a transfer medium to cool the flat metal product (heat removed from the bed by auxiliary heat transfer means) (6:18-22), wherein the transfer medium (bed temperature) is adjusted (tailored) so as to reach the respective given cooling rate of the portions (particular application) (4:12-16).
Van den Sype ‘479 is silent to the heat transfer medium having a flow rate that is adjusted so as to reach the respective given cooling rate of the portions.
Gao discloses a method of cooling (quenching) (Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds) with a fluidized bed of solid particles (Fig. 1), the solid particles capturing heat released by the flat metal product and transferring said captured heat to a transfer medium (cooling jacket or cooling pipes or tubes with cooling-fluid, such as water) to cool the product, the flow rate of the transfer medium is adjusted (controlled) so as to reach (adjust) the respective given cooling rate (temperature) of the portions (bed) (Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 to tailor (control) the cooling (temperature) of the (fluidized) bed by adjusting the flow rate of the transfer medium so that the heat-removal capability of the quenching fluidized bed is sufficient (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control) and a higher heat-transfer rate results, which provides a wide range of cooling rates (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control: Cooling Retort and Immersed Cooling Pipes).
Van den Sype ‘479 discloses a flat product having a broad face (article 5) (4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1).
Gao discloses a method of cooling (quenching) (Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds) of a flat metal product having a broad face, the method comprising: putting the flat metal product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles so that the broad face is parallel to the direction of circulation of the solid particles; wherein the broad face defines a length and a width of the flat product and a small face defines a thickness of the flat product, wherein the direction of circulation is vertical and the broad face of the flat product is parallel to the vertical direction and the small face of the flat product is perpendicular to the vertical direction (Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11).
PNG
media_image2.png
351
615
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 for the article 5 to be a flat metal product with a broad face oriented parallel to the vertical direction of circulation because it is the correct arrangement for cooling conditions (Gao Fig. 11) which prevents the “shield” effect caused by deposition of the bed material on the upper surface of the treated parts and in cavities and holes, which adversely affects the uniformity of cooling and thus the uniformed of hardness developed, where the shield acts like a thermal screen, hindering heat transfer (Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed).
Regarding claim 21, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao discloses the transfer medium is water (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control: Cooling Retort and Immersed Cooling Pipes).
Regarding claim 26, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is a plate (article 5) (Van den Sype ‘479, 4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1; Gao Figs. 1, 10, 11; Schmidt [0001], [0025]).
Regarding claim 28, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses the solid particles (alumina) have a heat capacity (heat transfer coefficient) comprised between 500 and 2000 J/kg/K (2:60-63, 3:27-42, 4:31-33, 7:46-57, Fig. 3). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
In the event it is determined that the heat transfer coefficient of Van den Sype ‘479 does not overlap with the claimed heat capacity, then the below rationale is applied.
Heat capacity is a physical property of matter. Van den Sype ‘479 discloses solid particles (matter) with a substantially similar composition (alumina) (2:51-63, 4:53-61, Figs. 3-5), average particle size (4:43-61, 7:45-68, 8:1-12,Tables I-III), and powder bed density (4:38-40, 9:28-45, Fig. 5), such that it appears the physical properties of the matter, including the heat capacity, naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art. Differences in concentration or temperature (or heat capacity) will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature (or heat capacity) is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Regarding claim 29, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses the density of the solid particles in the fluidized bed is comprised between 1400 and 4000 kg/m3 (2.0 g/cm3 is 2000 kg/m3) (4:38-40, 9:28-45, Fig. 5). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 30, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao discloses the solid particles are made of alumina, SiC or steel slag (aluminum oxide, alumina) (Van den Sype ‘479 2:51-63, 4:53-61, Figs. 3-5; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Powder: Fluidized Particles).
Regarding claim 31, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses the solid particles (alumina) have an average size between 30 and 300 um (a particle size distribution of fine alumina with a mean particle size of 45 um and coarse alumina with a mean particle size of 280 um with 0, 10, 20, 36, or 100 wt% fine particles overlaps with the claimed range) (4:43-61, 7:45-68, 8:1-12,Tables I-III). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 32, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao discloses the gas is injected at a velocity between 5 and 30 cm/s (0.05 to 0.08 m/s, 5 to 8 cm/s) (Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Fluidization Velocity). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 33, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao discloses the gas is air (Van den Sype ‘479 3:6-9, 4:31-33, 5:37-40, 7:46-57, Fig. 3; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Fluidizing Gas).
Regarding claim 34, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is a slab (article 5) and the slab is placed on a support (means for immersion 4) within the fluidized bed so that an edge of the slab is parallel to a floor of the fluidized bed (Van den Sype ‘479, 4:62-68, Fig. 1; Gao Fluidized-Bed Quenching Processes: Continuous Quenching, Figs. 1, 10, 11, 14; Schmidt [0001], [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding claim 36, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses cooling (quench hardening) with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F (818°C to 927°C) (5:22-28) with reference to a time-temperature-transformation diagram for a steel alloy (5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2), including cooling from 900 to 350°C (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37) in less than 60 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 37, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is a slab (article 5) (Van den Sype ‘479, 4:62-68, Fig. 1; Gao Figs. 1, 10, 11; Schmidt [0001], [0025]).
Regarding claim 40, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao discloses the temperature is 800°C (1500°F to 1700°F, 816°C to 927°C) (Van den Sype ‘479, 5:22-28; Gao, Quenching Powder: Heat-Transfer Characteristics: Cooling Rates, Fig. 3). A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap but are close. “The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties.” MPEP 2144.05(I).
Further, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses cooling from line 6, a high temperature at which a steel alloy is substantially transformed into the austenite phase (5:53-55, Fig. 2). Differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Regarding claim 46, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product (article 5) is placed on a support (means for immersion 4) within the fluidized bed (heat treating bed 1) so that its edge is parallel to the floor while the flat metal product is cooled (Van den Sype ‘479, 4:43 to 5:6, Fig. 1; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11l Schmidt [0001], [0024]-[0025]) from 900 to 350°C (quenching hardening with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F, 818°C to 927°C, to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature) (Van den Sype ‘479, 5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2) for longer than 7 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates, p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]) according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479, 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 49, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses a method of cooling (quench hardening) (1:5-10) of a flat metal product having a broad face (article 5) (4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1) and a temperature above 400°C (1500°F to 1700°F, 816°C to 927°C) (5:22-28), the method comprising:
putting (immersing) the flat metal product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles (4:43-68, Fig. 1), the solid particles having a direction of circulation (flow of fluid) (5:2-3, Fig. 1) and capturing (transferring) heat released by the flat metal product (heat transfer dominated by properties of particles) (1:59-61, 2:38-50) and transferring said captured heat to a transfer medium to cool the flat metal product (heat removed from the bed by auxiliary heat transfer means) (6:18-22) from 900 to 350°C (quenching hardening with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F, 818°C to 927°C, to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature) (5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2) according to a predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2), the flat metal product (article 5) being put in contact with the solid particles so that the broad face is parallel to the direction of circulation (flow of fluid) of the solid particles (4:43-58, 2:1-6, Fig. 1);
injecting a gas for fluidizing the solid particles in a bubbling regime (bubbly character) (2:38-50, 3:16-26), an injection flow rate of the gas being controlled (tailored) to match the predefined cooling curve (particular application, time-temperature-transformation diagram) of the flat metal product (4:12-16, 5:41-52, Fig. 2); and
wherein the broad face defines a length and a width of the flat product and a small face defines a thickness of the flat product, wherein the direction of circulation is vertical and the broad face of the flat product is parallel to the vertical direction and the small face of the flat product is perpendicular to the vertical direction (Fig. 1);
wherein the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) includes different portions (Line 7), each of the different portions having a given cooling rate (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2); and
wherein the flat metal product is a slab (article 5), and is placed on a support (means for immersion 4) within the fluidized bed so that its edge is parallel to the floor while the flat metal product is cooled (4:62-68, Fig. 1) from 900 to 350°C (quenching hardening with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F, 818°C to 927°C, to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature) (5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2) according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
613
721
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to cooling for longer than 3 minutes and less than 60 minutes, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses adjusting the quenching rate of the fluidized bed so that stresses and distortion do not develop in the article (6:23-33). While the Fig. 2 time-temperature-transformation diagram of Van den Sype ‘479 indicates x-axis units of time and y-axis units of temperature, the values are not indicated.
Bates discloses the flat metal product is cooled from 900 to 350°C in less than 60 minutes (p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37).
Schmidt discloses cooling (quenching) a flat metal product (slab) for longer than 3 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 to cool from 900 to 350°C for longer than 30 minutes to quench the steel and transform the microstructure to the desired austenite (A), ferrite (F), pearlite (P), bainite (B), martensite (M), and/or cementite (C) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37), which are within the scope of the disclosure of Van den Sype ‘479 (Van den Sype ‘479, 5:53-65, austenite, ferrite, and pearlite are softer phases and martensite and bainite are harder phases), where quenching the slab upright, maintained on the edge (Schmidt [0001]) results in better quality product that avoids waviness and unevenness (Schmidt [0003]-[0005]).
Van den Sype ‘479 discloses transferring said captured heat to a transfer medium to cool the flat metal product (heat removed from the bed by auxiliary heat transfer means) (6:18-22), wherein the transfer medium (bed temperature) is adjusted (tailored) so as to reach the respective given cooling rate of the portions (particular application) (4:12-16).
Van den Sype ‘479 is silent to the heat transfer medium having a flow rate that is adjusted so as to reach the respective given cooling rate of the portions.
Gao discloses a method of cooling (quenching) (Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds) with a fluidized bed of solid particles (Fig. 1), the solid particles capturing heat released by the flat metal product and transferring said captured heat to a transfer medium (cooling jacket or cooling pipes or tubes with cooling-fluid, such as water) to cool the product, the flow rate of the transfer medium is adjusted (controlled) so as to reach (adjust) the respective given cooling rate (temperature) of the portions (bed) (Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 to tailor (control) the cooling (temperature) of the (fluidized) bed by adjusting the flow rate of the transfer medium so that the heat-removal capability of the quenching fluidized bed is sufficient (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control) and a higher heat-transfer rate results, which provides a wide range of cooling rates (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control: Cooling Retort and Immersed Cooling Pipes).
Van den Sype ‘479 discloses a flat product having a broad face (article 5) (4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1).
Gao discloses a method of cooling (quenching) (Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds) of a flat metal product having a broad face, the method comprising: putting the flat metal product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles so that the broad face is parallel to the direction of circulation of the solid particles; wherein the broad face defines a length and a width of the flat product and a small face defines a thickness of the flat product, wherein the direction of circulation is vertical and the broad face of the flat product is parallel to the vertical direction and the small face of the flat product is perpendicular to the vertical direction (Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11).
PNG
media_image2.png
351
615
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 for the article 5 to be a flat metal product with a broad face oriented parallel to the vertical direction of circulation because it is the correct arrangement for cooling conditions (Gao Fig. 11) which prevents the “shield” effect caused by deposition of the bed material on the upper surface of the treated parts and in cavities and holes, which adversely affects the uniformity of cooling and thus the uniformed of hardness developed, where the shield acts like a thermal screen, hindering heat transfer (Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed).
Regarding claim 50, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Baes, and Schmidt discloses cooling the flat metal product according to the predefined cooling curve avoids vertical bending of the flat metal product (the fastest quench may not be desirable because distortion may develop in the article, where, according to Merriam-Webster distortion is altering something out of its original state, which encompasses bending) (Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33) while the flat metal product is cooled from 900 to 350°C (quenching hardening with an initial temperature of 1500°F to 1800°F, 818°C to 927°C, to the Ms temperature or preferably the Mf temperature) (5:22-28, 5:41 to 6:51, Fig. 2) for longer than 4 minutes and less than 60 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]) according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 51, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 4 minutes and less than 42 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 52, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 4 minutes and less than 40 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 53, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 4 minutes and less than 38 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 54, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 7 minutes and less than 60 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 56, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 7 minutes and less than 42 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 57, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 8 minutes and less than 40 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 58, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Bates and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is cooled according to the predefined cooling curve (time-temperature-transformation diagram) (Van den Sype ‘479 5:41-68, 6:1-9, Fig. 2) for longer than 10 minutes and less than 40 minutes (greater than 30 minutes) (Bates p. 83 TTT Diagrams, Figs. 29, 35, 37; Schmidt [0025]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists/ MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 59, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product is a slab (article 5) (Van den Sype ‘479, 4:62-68, Fig. 1; Gao Figs. 1, 10, 11; Schmidt [0001], [0025]).
Regarding claim 63, with respect to the fluidized bed of solid particles being at 400°C, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses cooling an article to a given temperature (1:12-18) by regulating the bed temperature by supplying fluidizing gas at an appropriate temperature (6:10-22) to achieve a desired temperature (4:6-11) and adjusting the quenching rate by adjusting the bed temperature (6:10-33). Therefore, it is within the scope of the disclosure of Van den Sype ‘479 to regulate or control the temperature of the fluidized bed of solid particles when the flat metal product is put in contact with the fluidized bed of solid particles. Generally, differences in temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such temperature is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of GB ‘386 (GB 730,386).
Regarding claim 22, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao is silent to the heat transfer medium being molten salts.
GB ‘386 discloses a method of cooling with a furnace that captures and transfers heat released to a transfer medium that is molten (fused) salts (2:9-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao for the transfer medium to be molten (fused) salts because it is a material of high boiling point that can be heated to high temperatures without developing high vapour pressures (GB ‘386 2:9-19). Further, a cooling medium of fused (molten) salts is an art recognized equivalent to a cooling medium of water (GB ‘386 2:9-19), the cooling medium in Gao (Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed Cooling and Temperature Control: Cooling Retort and Immersed Cooling Pipes). It is prima face obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP 2144.06(II).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Li (US 2006/0247322).
Regarding claim 23, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao is silent to the heat transfer medium containing nanoparticles.
Li discloses a (heat) transfer medium (fluid) ([0001]) that contains nanoparticles ([0002]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao for the transfer medium to contain nanoparticles to improve the heat transfer ability and anti-friction coefficient (Li [0002]).
Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Rydstad (WO 81/02585).
Regarding claim 24, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao is silent to the water producing steam.
Rydstad discloses a method of cooling (1:2-8) comprising putting the product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles (4:3-8) and capturing and transferring heat to a transfer (energy-absorbing) medium that is water that is used to produce steam (4:8-9, 10:8-11, Figs. 3, 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao for the water transfer medium to produce steam because recovering the energy emitting and converting it to steam allows for the production of electricity or hot water for room heating (Rydstad 1:22-25).
Regarding claim 25, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Rydstad discloses the method is performed within a plant having a steam network (steam for the production of electricity or for room heating) and the produced steam is injected in the steam network (1:2-8, 22-25).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Graf (CA 2316669).
Regarding claim 35, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao is silent to scale particles removed by the solid particles.
Grad discloses a method of cooling (quenching) comprising putting the metal product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles (p. 4 para. 2), wherein a surface of the metal product includes scale particles (oxide layer), the scale particles (oxide layer) being removed by the solid particles and the removed scale being regularly extracted from the fluidized bed (p. 4 para. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao for the process to remove scale particles (oxide layer) from the product surface because of the abrasive effect of the flowable material and regularly extracting the solid particles and removed scale from the fluidized bed prevents the scale remaining in the fluidized bed from having a negative effect on the quenching behavior (Graf p. 4 para. 3).
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Shibata ‘723 (JP 2001-316723 machine translation).
Regarding claim 39, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses the fluidized bed is contained within a chamber (vessel 2) (4:63-68, Fig. 1).
Van den Sype ‘479 discloses a means for immersion 4 of an article 5 (4:63-68, Fig. 1).
Van den Sype ‘479 is silent to the flat metal product being conveyed inside the chamber by a rolling conveyor.
Shibata discloses a method of cooling ([0005]) of a flat metal product (ductile cast iron 11) ([0011]), comprising: putting the flat metal product in contact with a fluidized bed of solid particles ([0006]) so that the broad face of the flat metal product is parallel to the direction of circulation of the solid particles (vertical position), wherein the fluidized bed is contained within a chamber, and the flat metal product is conveyed inside the chamber by a rolling conveyor ([0021]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 to convey the flat metal product in a vertical position inside the chamber on a rolling conveyor to prevent the problem of sand being blown up, making it impossible for the flat metal product (ductile cast iron) to be transported through the fluidized bed (Shibata [0021]). Further, transporting by a roller conveyor is an art recognized equivalent to hanging the flat metal product (ductile cast iron 33) on a hanging member (Shibata [0021]), which is the method of Van den Sype ‘479 (means for immersion 4, Van den Sype ‘479, 4:64-66). It is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP 2144.06(II).
Claims 41 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 37 above, and further in view of Shibata ‘609 (JP H07-100609 machine translation).
Regarding claim 41, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao is silent to the width, length, and thickness of the flat metal product (article 5, Van den Sype ‘479, 4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Powder: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11).
Shibata ‘609 discloses a method of cooling a flat metal product that is a slab ([0001], [0009]-[0011]), wherein the width is between 700 and 2,500 mm (1230 mm)), the length is between 5,000 and 15,000 mm (5.0 to 5.5 m, 5,000 to 5,500 mm), and the slab has a thickness between 150 and 350 mm (200 mm) ([0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao for the article 5 to be a slab with a width of 1,230 mm, length of 5,000 to 5,500 mm, and thickness of 200 mm because a slab of this size can be continuously cast and cooled in a tank (Shibata ‘609 [032]) with a highly adaptable (regulated) cooling rate (Shibata ‘609 [0034]; Van den Sype ‘479 1:12-18, 6:10-33; Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed cooling and Temperature Control) that produces high-quality slabs free from slab warping (distortion) stably and efficiently (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]; Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33).
Regarding claim 42, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Shibata ‘609 discloses the deformation is bending (the fastest quench may not be desirable because distortion may develop in the article, where, according to Merriam-Webster distortion is altering something out of its original state, which encompasses bending) (Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33) (slabs are free of warping) (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]).
Claims 43-45 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Shibata ‘609 (JP H07-100609 machine translation).
Regarding claim 43, according to MPEP 2111.01(IV), to act as their own lexicographer, the applicant must clearly set forth a special definition of a claim term in the specification that differs from the plain and ordinary meaning it would otherwise possess. Applicant’s specification at [00011] recites that “a flat product can be defined as a parallelepiped wherein the smallest dimension (e.g. the thickness T) is negligible compared to the others (e.g. the length L)”. Therefore, according to applicant’s specification “parallelepiped shape” is a flat product wherein the smallest dimension is negligible compared to the others.
Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt discloses the flat metal product has a parallelepiped shape (applicant’s specification [00011], the smallest dimension (e.g. the thickness T) is negligible compared to the others (e.g. the length L)) (Van den Sype ‘479 article 5, 4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11; Schmidt [0001], [0025]).
Van den Sype ‘479 is silent to a thickness of the parallelepiped being smaller than the length by at least a factor of 15 and is a smallest dimension of the parallelepiped.
Shibata ‘609 discloses a method of cooling a flat metal product that is a slab ([0001], [0009]-[0011]), wherein a thickness of the parallelepiped is smaller than the length by at least a factor of 15 and is a smallest dimension of the parallelepiped (thickness of 200 mm is smaller than 5,000 to 5,500 mm length by a factor of 25 to 27.5; 5,000/200 to 5,500/200) ([0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt for the article 5 to be a slab with a width of 1,230 mm, length of 5,000 to 5,500 mm, and thickness of 200 mm because a slab of this size can be continuously cast and cooled in a tank (Shibata ‘609 [032]) with a highly adaptable (regulated) cooling rate (Shibata ‘609 [0034]; Van den Sype ‘479 1:12-18, 6:10-33; Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed cooling and Temperature Control) that produces high-quality slabs free from slab warping (distortion) stably and efficiently (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]; Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33).
Regarding claim 44, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Schmidt, and Shibata ‘609 discloses the broad faces are not the smallest dimension of the parallelepiped (Van den Sype ‘479 article 5, 4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Power: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11; Schmidt [0001], [0025]; Shibata ‘609 [0032]).
Regarding claim 45, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Schmidt and Shibata ‘609 discloses the deformation is bending (the fastest quench may not be desirable because distortion may develop in the article, where, according to Merriam-Webster distortion is altering something out of its original state, which encompasses bending) (Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33) (avoid waviness and unevenness, so that an additional straightening operation is not necessary after quenching) (Schmidt [0003]-[0005]) (slabs are free of warping) (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]).
Regarding claim 48, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Schmidt and Shibata ‘609 discloses the deformation is bending (the fastest quench may not be desirable because distortion may develop in the article, where, according to Merriam-Webster distortion is altering something out of its original state, which encompasses bending) (Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33) (avoid waviness and unevenness, so that an additional straightening operation is not necessary after quenching) (Schmidt [0003]-[0005]) (slabs are free of warping) (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]).
Claims 60-62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao, Bates, and Schmidt as applied to claim 59 above, and further in view of Shibata ‘609 (JP H07-100609 machine translation).
Regarding claim 60, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt is silent to the width, length, and thickness of the flat metal product (article 5, Van den Sype ‘479, 4:26-27, 43-45, 64-66, Fig. 1; Gao Fundamental Factors Affecting Quenching Powder: Geometry of Parts and Their Configuration in a Bed, Figs. 1, 10, 11; Schmidt [0001], [0025]).
Shibata ‘609 discloses a method of cooling a flat metal product that is a slab ([0001], [0009]-[0011]), wherein the width is between 700 and 2,500 mm (1230 mm)), the length is between 5,000 and 15,000 mm (5.0 to 5.5 m, 5,000 to 5,500 mm), and the slab has a thickness between 150 and 350 mm (200 mm) ([0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Gao and Schmidt for the article 5 to be a slab with a width of 1,230 mm, length of 5,000 to 5,500 mm, and thickness of 200 mm because a slab of this size can be continuously cast and cooled in a tank (Shibata ‘609 [032]) with a highly adaptable (regulated) cooling rate (Shibata ‘609 [0034]; Van den Sype ‘479 1:12-18, 6:10-33; Gao Design of Quenching Fluidized Beds: Bed cooling and Temperature Control) that produces high-quality slabs free from slab warping (distortion) stably and efficiently (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]; Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33; Schmidt [0003]-[0005], [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding claim 61, Van den Sype ‘479 in view of Schmidt and Shibata ‘609 discloses the deformation is bending (the fastest quench may not be desirable because distortion may develop in the article, where, according to Merriam-Webster distortion is altering something out of its original state, which encompasses bending) (Van den Sype ‘479 6:23-33) (avoid waviness and unevenness, so that an additional straightening operation is not necessary after quenching) (Schmidt [0003]-[0005]) (slabs are free of warping) (Shibata ‘609 [0008], [0031], [0034], [0036]).
Regarding claim 62, with respect to the fluidized bed of solid particles being at 400°, Van den Sype ‘479 discloses cooling an article to a given temperature (1:12-18) by regulating the bed temperature by supplying fluidizing gas at an appropriate temperature (6:10-22) to achieve a desired temperature (4:6-11) and adjusting the quenching rate by adjusting the bed temperature (6:10-33). Therefore, it is within the scope of the disclosure of Van den Sype ‘479 to regulate or control the temperature of the fluidized bed of solid particles when the flat metal product is put in contact with the fluidized bed of solid particles. Generally, differences in temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such temperature is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Related Art
Ozaki (JP 61-99621 machine translation)
Ozaki discloses a fluidized bed in which the cooling fluid medium circulates for rapidly cooling metal ([0001], Fig. 1).
Makino (JP S63-199817 machine translation)
Makino discloses cooling a high temperature cast product using a fluidized particle furnace (p. 2) in which the cast product is conveyed through the fluidized particle furnace main body (pp. 3-4, Figs. 1-2).
Ishiwata (JP S62-230932 machine translation)
Ishiwata discloses rapidly cooling a high-temperature metal ingot in a fluidized bed (pp. 2-3, Figs. 1-4).
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANI HILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday-Friday 7am-12pm.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached on 571-272-3458. 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.
/STEPHANI HILL/Examiner, Art Unit 1735