DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the amendments and arguments filed on 05/23/2025, and any subsequent filings.
Notations “C_”, “L_” and “Pr_” are used to mean “column_”, “line_” and “paragraph_”.
Claims 1 and 3-37 are pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/23/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 05/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC § have been fully considered and are persuasive (pg. 10, Pr1). Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’).
Response to Amendment
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 16-25 and 34 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 reads “wherein it further” and Claim 34 reads “so that it”. It is unclear to which component “it” refers to, rendering the claim indefinite.
Dependent claims not recited above require all of the limitations of Claims 16 and 34, and therefore are rejected for the same reasons set forth above.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-6, 11, 13, 16, 18, 22, 26-27 and 29-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claims 1, 3-6, 11, 13, 16, 18, 22, 26-27 and 29-36, Jameson teaches a flotation cell for treating particles suspended in slurry (abstract) and for separating the slurry into underflow and overflow (pg. 8, Pr3), the flotation cell comprising
a fluidized bed (Figs. 1-2, pg. 12, Pr2, fluidized bed/fluidization zone 22) formed by a fluid feed configured to supply a fluid to the flotation cell (pg.12, Pr2), and by a flotation gas feed configured to supply flotation gas, in which fluidized bed flotation gas bubbles adsorb to hydrophobic particles to form gas bubble-particle agglomerates that rise toward the top of the flotation cell (pg. 8, Pr3);
a recovery zone (Figs. 1-2, pg. 12, Pr4, froth layer 30) at an upper part of the flotation cell, configured to collect the gas bubble-particle agglomerates rising in the fluidized bed (pg. 16, Pr1);
a launder lip (Figs. 1-2, pg. 12, Pr4, lip 31) and a recovery launder (Figs. 1-2, pg. 12, Pr4, launder 32) arranged at the top of the flotation cell, and arranged to remove particles collected in the recovery zone from the flotation cell as overflow (pg. 12, Pr4);
a tailings outlet (Figs. 1-2, pg. 14, Pr2, exit pipe 28) arranged below the recovery launder, and arranged to remove non-collected particles descending from the recovery zone as underflow (pg. 14, Pr2); and
a first feed inlet (Figs. 1-2, pg. 12, Pr2, inlet pipe 21) arranged to supply a primary slurry feed comprising fresh slurry into the fluidized bed at a first position;
wherein the flotation cell has a height measured from the bottom of the flotation cell to the launder lip (Figs. 1-2),
wherein the flotation cell comprises an agitator (Figs. 1-2, pg. 11, last Pr-pg. 12, Pr2, impeller 2) arranged in the same flotation cell with the lauder lip and the recovery launder and adjacent to the bottom of the flotation cell (Figs. 1-2),
wherein the agitator is a non-aspirating agitator (pg. 15, Pr2, air inlet through duct 7 can be omitted), and
wherein the agitator is arranged to create a flow of slurry directed towards a perimeter of the flotation cell (pg. 13, Pr1), wherein the flow is substantially perpendicular to the supply of fluid from the fluid feed (Figs. 1-2).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 3: the agitator is a mechanical agitator comprising an impeller (pg. 6, Pr2).
Claim 4: the recovery zone is arranged above the fluidized bed (Figs. 1-2).
Claim 5: the recovery zone is arranged at an upper part of the fluidized bed (pg. 12, Pr4).
Claim 6: the recovery zone comprises a froth layer at the top of the flotation cell (Figs. 1-2, pg. 12, Pr4).
Claim 11: the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed so that the primary slurry feed has a flow direction counter-current to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates (Figs. 1-2).
Claim 13: the flotation gas feed comprises gas infeed spargers (Fig. 2, pg. 16, Pr1, aerator 55).
Claim 16: it further comprises a second feed inlet (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, re-entry port 53) arranged to supply a secondary slurry feed, comprising at least slurry recirculated from a flotation cell (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3 and pg. 16, Pr1, recycle stream through recycle pipe 51), into the fluidized bed at a second position below the first position, so as to contribute to the formation of the fluidized bed (pg. 17, Pr2).
Claim 18: the secondary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed from the perimeter of the flotation cell so that the secondary slurry feed has a flow direction substantially perpendicular to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates (Fig. 2).
Claim 22: the secondary slurry feed comprises slurry recirculated from the flotation cell via a recirculation circuit (Fig. 2, pg. 16, Pr3, recycle pipe 51), and obtained at a third position which is arranged lower than the first position (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, exit port 50).
Claim 26: the tailings outlet (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr2, tailings can be discharged through exit pipe 28) is arranged below a second feed inlet (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, re-entry port 53), arranged to supply a secondary slurry feed comprising at least slurry recirculated from a flotation cell into the fluidized bed, at a second position below the first position (Fig. 2).
Claim 27: A method for treating particles suspended in slurry (abstract) and for separating the slurry into underflow and overflow (pg. 8, Pr3) in a flotation cell according to claim 1 (see analysis of Claim 1), wherein the particles are a valuable material (pgs. 18-19).
Claim 29: A method for treating particles suspended in slurry (abstract) and for separating the slurry into underflow and overflow (pg. 8, Pr3) in a flotation cell according to claim 1 (see analysis of Claim 1), wherein the slurry below a fluidized bed is agitated (Figs. 1-2, pg. 15, Pr3, mixing zone 5).
Claim 30: wherein by agitating, a flow of slurry directed towards a perimeter of the flotation cell and substantially perpendicular to the supply of fluid from a fluid feed is created (Figs. 1-2).
Claim 31: wherein no flotation gas is supplied into the fluidization bed by the agitating pg. 15, Pr2, air inlet through duct 7 can be omitted).
Claim 32: feeding flotation gas (Fig. 2, pg. 16, Pr1, aeration device 54) into the flotation cell below the fluidized bed (Fig. 2, pg. 16, Pr1).
Claim 33: feeding flotation gas (Fig. 2, pg. 16, Pr1, aeration device 54) into the flotation cell at a height within the fluidized bed (Fig. 2, pg. 16, Pr1).
Claim 34: feeding the primary slurry feed into the fluidized bed so that it has a flow direction divergent from the rising bubble-particle agglomerates (Figs. 1-2).
Claim 35: the primary feed comprising at least 20 w-% particles having a size of at least 300 μm (pg. 19).
Claim 36: feeding a secondary slurry feed, comprising at least slurry recirculated from a flotation cell (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3 and pg. 16, Pr1, recycle stream through recycle pipe 51), into the fluidized bed (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, re-entry port 53), so as to contribute to the formation of the fluidized bed (pg. 17, Pr2).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of U.S. Patent US3828935A (‘Rovel’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 7, Jameson teaches the flotation cell of Claim 1, including that the recovery zone comprises no froth layer (pg. 12, Pr4, froth flows into launder 32 to discharge through exit pipe 33. Note that the specification dated 01/18/2022 teaches that an overflow flotation cell would operate with virtually no froth layer, pg. 9, lines 14-15), except that the flotation cell is arranged to be operated with constant slurry overflow.
Rovel also relates to flotation (abstract), wherein the flotation cell is arranged to be operated with constant slurry overflow (C4/L8-9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the flotation cell of Jameson to be arranged to be operated with constant slurry overflow, as demonstrated by Rovel, in order to continuously remove floated materials that are constant in quality and quantity (Rovel, C4/L8-9).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of Chinese Publication CN201366376Y (‘Lu’). Machine translations accompany this detailed action and the claims are mapped to those translations and the drawings in the original documents.
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claims 8-10, Jameson teaches the flotation cell of Claim 1, including that the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed at a first position higher than the tailings outlet (Figs. 1-2), except that the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed at a first position within an upper 50 % of the flotation cell height, the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the flotation cell at a first position within an upper 30 % of the flotation cell height and the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the recovery zone.
Lu also relates to a flotation cell ([0002]) for treating particles suspended in slurry and for separating the slurry into underflow and overflow ([0016]), the flotation cell comprising
a fluidized bed formed by a fluid feed configured to supply a fluid to the flotation cell ([0016]), and by a flotation gas feed configured to supply flotation gas, in which fluidized bed flotation gas bubbles adsorb to hydrophobic particles to form gas bubble-particle agglomerates that rise toward the top of the flotation cell ([0016]);
a recovery zone at an upper part of the flotation cell (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], upper cylinder/layer 1), configured to collect the gas bubble-particle agglomerates rising in the fluidized bed ([0016]);
a launder lip and a recovery launder (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], overflow trough 4) arranged at the top of the flotation cell, and arranged to remove particles collected in the recovery zone from the flotation cell as overflow ([0016]);
a tailings outlet (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], tailings pipe 9) arranged below the recovery launder, and arranged to remove non-collected particles descending from the recovery zone as underflow ([0016]); and
a first feed inlet (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], feed pipe 6) arranged to supply a primary slurry feed comprising fresh slurry into the fluidized bed at a first position;
wherein the flotation cell has a height measured from the bottom of the flotation cell to the launder lip (Fig. 1),
wherein the flotation cell comprises an agitator arranged in the same flotation cell with the lauder lip and the recovery launder and adjacent to the bottom of the flotation cell (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], lower cylinder 3 forms a mixing and stirring zone),
wherein the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed at a first position within an upper 50 % of the flotation cell height and higher than the tailings outlet (Fig. 1), the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the flotation cell at a first position within an upper 30 % of the flotation cell height (Fig. 1) and the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the recovery zone (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that, in the flotation cell of Jameson, the primary slurry feed can be arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed at a first position within an upper 50 % of the flotation cell height and higher than the tailings outlet, the primary slurry feed can be arranged to be fed into the flotation cell at a first position within an upper 30 % of the flotation cell height, and primary slurry feed can be arranged to be fed into the recovery zone, as demonstrated by Lu, due to similarities in the flotation cells of Jameson and Lu (see above). Furthermore, the particles can move downwards and be drawn in by a circulation pump (Lu, Fig. 1, [0016], circulation pump 11. Note that Jameson also has a pump 52 (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3)), so the slurry generates a jet and forms microbubbles, allowing bubbles to interact fully with particles, thereby increasing mineralization probability and separation selectivity (Lu, [0016]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of U.S. Publication US20160214036A1 (‘Bourke’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 12, Jameson teaches the flotation cell of Claim 1, except that the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed from a perimeter of the flotation cell so that the primary slurry feed has a flow direction substantially perpendicular to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates.
Bourke also relates to a flotation cell (abstract), wherein the primary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed from a perimeter of the flotation cell so that the primary slurry feed has a flow direction substantially perpendicular to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the flotation cell of Jameson to have primary slurry feed be arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed from a perimeter of the flotation cell so that the primary slurry feed has a flow direction substantially perpendicular to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates, as demonstrated by Bourke, because delivering the primary slurry feed in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the flow of the rising bubble-particle agglomerates produces a turbulent region thereby facilitating attachment to microbubbles to the solid particles of the primary slurry feed (Bourke, [0047]).
Claims 14-15 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of Chinese Patent CN108970813A (‘Sun’). Machine translations accompany this detailed action and the claims are mapped to those translations and the drawings in the original documents.
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus (Claims 14-15) and a method (Claim 28).
Regarding Claims 14-15, Jameson teaches the flotation cell of Claim 13, except that the gas infeed spargers are arranged radially around a perimeter of the flotation cell below the fluidized bed and the gas infeed spargers are arranged radially around a perimeter of the flotation cell at a height within the fluidized bed.
Sun also relates to a flotation cell ([0002]), wherein the gas infeed spargers (Fig. 1, [0041], bubble generator 14) are arranged radially around a perimeter of the flotation cell ([0044]) below the fluidized bed (Fig. 1, [0049]) and the gas infeed spargers are arranged radially around a perimeter of the flotation cell at a height within the fluidized bed (Fig. 1, [0044]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the flotation cell of Jameson to comprise gas infeed spargers arranged radially around a perimeter of the flotation cell below the fluidized bed and at a height within the fluidized bed, as demonstrated by Sun, for forming uniformly distributed and stable rising bubbles in the flotation column (Sun. [0045] and [0048]).
Regarding Claim 28, Jameson teaches the method of Claim 27, except that the valuable material is particles comprising Cu and the slurry is a low grade ore.
Sun also relates to a method for treating particles suspended in slurry and for separating the slurry into underflow and overflow in a flotation cell ([0002]), teaches that the valuable material is particles comprising Cu and the slurry is a low grade ore ([0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the flotation cell of Jameson can be used for treating particles suspended in slurry and for separating the slurry into underflow and overflow in a flotation cell to recover copper from low grade ores, as demonstrated by Sun, because the flotation cells of Jameson and Sun are both fluidized flotation cells (Lu, [0006] and Sun, [0002]).
Claims 17, 20-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of U.S. Patent US5167798A (‘Yoon’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claims 17, 20-21 and 23, Jameson teaches the flotation cell of Claim 16, except that the secondary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed (10) so that the secondary slurry feed has a flow direction counter-current to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates.
Yoon also relates to a flotation cell (abstract), wherein the slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed so that the slurry feed has a flow direction counter-current to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates (C4/L3-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the secondary slurry feed of Jameson to be fed into the fluidized bed so that the secondary slurry feed has a flow direction counter-current to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates, as demonstrated by Yoon, because bubble-particle collisions are better achieved when the feed enters the column counter-currently to the flow of bubbles (Yoon, C7/L61-65) as a countercurrent feeding arrangement is designed to promote an interceptional collision between the particles in the feed stream and bubbles (Yoon, C18/L34-36).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 20: the second feed inlet comprises the fluid feed (Jameson, pg. 17, Pr2).
Claim 21: the secondary slurry feed comprises slurry recirculated from the flotation cell via a recirculation circuit (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, recycle pipe 51), and obtained at a third position (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, exit port 50) which is arranged lower than the launder lip and higher than the first position (Fig. 2).
Claim 23: the recirculation circuit comprises a pump (Fig. 2, pg. 14, Pr3, pump 52) arranged to intake a slurry fraction from the third position and to forward the slurry fraction into the second feed inlet as secondary slurry feed.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of U.S. Publication US20100193408A1 (‘Jameson 2’) and in further view of U.S. Patent US5167798A (‘Yoon’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 19, Jameson teaches the flotation cell of Claim 16, except that the secondary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed so that the secondary slurry feed has a flow direction concurrent to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates.
Jameson 2 also relates to a flotation cell (Fig. 1), wherein the secondary slurry feed is arranged to be fed into the fluidized bed so that it has a flow direction concurrent to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates (Fig. 1, [0048], feed enters a base of the flotation cell through a distribution system 3 in a direction co-current with air being introduced through a duct 5).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the secondary slurry feed of Jameson to be fed into the fluidized bed so that it has a flow direction concurrent to the rising bubble-particle agglomerates, as demonstrated by Jameson 2, because such a concurrent feeding arrangement is effective for collecting very fine particles or middlings that are more difficult to recover (Yoon, C6, L25-31).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) and U.S. Patent US5167798A (‘Yoon’) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication US20180243757A1 (‘Jameson 3’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 24, the combination of Jameson and Yoon teaches the flotation cell of Claim 21, except that the recirculation circuit comprises a third feed inlet for introducing a feed of slurry into the secondary slurry feed prior to the secondary slurry feed being fed into the flotation cell via the second feed inlet.
Jameson 3 also relates to a flotation cell (abstract), wherein the recirculation circuit comprises a third feed inlet (Fig. 1, [0119], supply conduit feed line 60) for introducing a feed of slurry into the secondary slurry feed prior to the secondary slurry feed being fed into the flotation cell via the second feed inlet (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the recirculation circuit of the combination of Jameson and Yoon to comprise a third feed inlet for introducing a feed of slurry into the secondary slurry feed prior to the secondary slurry feed being fed into the flotation cell via the second feed inlet, as demonstrated by Jameson 3, so the flotation cell can be operated in a continuous manner (Jameson 3, [0019]) and to promote better flotation separation recovery and yield (Jameson 3, [0150]).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) and U.S. Patent US5167798A (‘Yoon’) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of International Publication WO2018150076A1 (‘Bourke 2’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 25, the combination of Jameson and Yoon teaches the flotation cell of Claim 21, except that the secondary slurry feed comprises slurry recirculated from a further flotation cell separate to the flotation cell.
Bourke 2 also relates to a flotation cell (abstract), wherein the secondary slurry feed comprises slurry recirculated from a further flotation cell separate to the flotation cell (Fig. 1a, pg. 43, L35-pg. 44, L9, underflow 42a is arranged to flow to the primary flotation cell 110a from which the primary overflow 51a was received).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the secondary slurry feed of the combination of Jameson and Yoon to comprise slurry recirculated from a further flotation cell separate to the flotation cell, as demonstrated by Bourke 2, for further treatment in order to recover any remaining mineral ore particles comprising valuable mineral, thus increasing the recovery rate for that mineral (Bourke 2, pg. 61, Pr4).
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International Publication WO2010135760A1 (‘Jameson’) in view of U.S. Patent US6210648B1 (‘Gathje’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 37, Jameson teaches the method of Claim 36, except that the secondary slurry feed comprising fine particles having a P80 50 % or less of the P80 of the primary slurry feed.
Gathje also relates to flotation (abstract), wherein a second fraction 280 from a size separation 274 along with a rougher scavenger concentrate 268 are comminuted to a smaller size, making a reground mineral material 286 that is sent to a second flotation stage 290 to concentrate minerals liberated from middling particles (Fig. 17, C20/L6-15).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the secondary slurry feed P80 relative to the P80 of the primary slurry feed in the flotation cell of Jameson so that middlings in the secondary slurry feed can be broken up to liberate minerals to be concentrated in subsequent flotation (Gathje, C20/L6-15).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-4613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8 am to 6 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779