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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09 JANUARY 2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Rejected Claims: 8-11, 15-16, 19, 21-26, and 31-37
Cancelled Claims: 1-7, 12-14, 17-18, 20, and 27-30
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 09 JANUARY 2026 has been entered.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the amendment of claim 8 has been acknowledged.
In view of the amendment to claim 8, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been modified to show in the currently cited prior art where the amended limitations are made obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 09 JANUARY 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, regarding Claim 8 and Hansen, that Hansen teaches the use of collectors for floating valuable minerals, and not for floating gangue, during froth flotation and thus teaches the opposite process as described in the instant claim (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 12 to Page 16, Paragraph 3).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Hansen teaches froth flotation which can be applied to iron ores and then teaches that depressants are known for ensuring minerals are prevent from adsorbing to collectors to improve their retention in the liquid rather than in the froth (Page 2, Lines 1-16). Additionally, it is well known that the selection of flotation or sinking in the process is binary and both valuable minerals and gangue can be directed to either the froth or the liquid portion depending upon the input ore and the chemicals available to the user. The process is the same. If a given collector is added to the same raw ore, the same results will occur. Hansen teaches the use of a chemical that falls into the formula of instant claim 8 as a collector in light of purifying iron ore. It is not inventive to use the same collector as taught by Hansen but to focus on the iron in the liquid portion instead of the froth, especially given that there are usually multiple chemicals being used together to enhance or suppress the varying impurities or valuable minerals that are co-located in the same raw ore.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 8 and Hansen, that the specific compound taught by Hansen is not taught to float silica-containing gangue from an iron oxide ore (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 16, Paragraph 4 to Page 20, Paragraph 2 and Page 24, Paragraph 6 to Page 25, Paragraph 3).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Hansen teaches the use of the chemical in instant claim 8 for the flotation of iron ores, where silica is common and the selectivity of the chemical for varying materials is an inherent property of the chemical. Furthermore, Wilson teaches the use of similar chemicals, ether diamines, for the explicit separation of iron from silica gangue. Therefore, in combination, Hansen in view of Wilson makes obvious the use of the chemical taught by Hansen to be used specifically for the separation of iron from silica gangue with the flotation of the silica and retention of the iron in the liquid. The claiming of an unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977)).
Applicant argues, regarding claim 8 and Wilson, that Wilson teaches unhydroxylated ether diamines for use in reverse froth flotation of silicates from iron ores which would not suggest the use of hydroxylated ether diamines for the same use (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 20, Paragraph 3 to Page 23, Paragraph 3).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Hansen teaches the same chemical as in the instant claim 8 for flotation processes involving iron ore, while Wilson teaches similar chemicals and flotation, specifically for the flotation of silica gangue and retaining of iron ore in the liquid. While Wilson does not teach the explicit chemical of instant claim 8, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to read Hansen and Wilson and come to the conclusion that the hydroxylated ether diamine may be usable for the separation of iron ore from silicates, which would lead to the same results as the instant application.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 8 and Bittner, that Bittner teaches unhydroxylated ether diamines for use in reverse froth flotation of silicates from iron ores which would not suggest the use of hydroxylated ether diamines for the same use (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 23, Paragraph 4 to Page 24, Paragraph 5).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Hansen teaches the same chemical as in the instant claim 8 for flotation processes involving iron ore, while Bittner teaches similar chemicals and flotation, specifically for the flotation of silica gangue and retaining of iron ore in the liquid. While Bittner does not teach the explicit chemical of instant claim 8, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to read Hansen and Bittner and come to the conclusion that the hydroxylated ether diamine may be usable for the separation of iron ore from silicates, which would lead to the same results as the instant application.
Applicant argues, regarding the combination of Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner, that the combination would not arrive at the claimed invention because Hansen teaches that iron ores would float with the collector in the froth (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 26, Paragraphs 1-5).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, the interaction of the disclosed chemicals is an inherent feature of the chemicals. One user performing flotation on iron ore with the hydroxylated ether diamine taught by Hansen would have the same results as another user performing flotation with the same hydroxylated ether diamine on iron ore. Wilson and Bittner describe that similar chemicals can be used to float silica gangue in order to purify iron and so it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process taught by Hansen by applying the collector to silica bearing iron ore as taught by Wilson in view of Bittner because similar chemical compounds are known to float silica bearing gangue for improving iron flotation effectiveness.
Applicant argues that the inherent properties of the hydroxyl ether diamine taught by Hansen is contrary to the teachings of the primary reference Hansen (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 26, Paragraph 6, to Page 27).
Regarding Applicant’s arguments, the inherent property of a chemical is not a disputable piece of information. As mentioned in Applicant’s arguments, Hansen does not explicitly teach the flotation of iron or silica gangue in the process of mineral flotation. Applicant is supposing that, because Hansen is mostly teaching the collection of valuable minerals in the froth, that iron must be collected in the froth as well. Hansen rather teaches that the hydroxyl ether diamine can be used in forth flotation processes involving iron ores. Then, Wilson and Bittner both teach that similar chemicals are well known for floating silica gangue in iron ore flotation. As such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try the hydroxyl ether diamine as taught by Hansen to float silica gangue in iron ore as taught by Wilson in view of Bittner because similar chemicals are known in the art for the same process.
Applicant argues that normal and reverse flotation processes operate under different principles of operation (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 28 to Page 29, Paragraph 4).
Regarding Applicant’s arguments, reverse flotation and flotation are identical processes. The “reverse” or lack thereof is simply used to describe where the valuable minerals are intended to be enriched. The principle of operation is that air is bubbled through a pulp of ore and gangue and hydrophobic materials attach to the air bubbles and float into the froth while hydrophilic materials remain in the liquid. As the processes are identical, there cannot be an impermissible changing of the principle of operation, simply the addition of chemicals which change the properties of various materials to make them more or less attracted to the air bubbles to enhance the separation of desirable materials from non-desirable materials.
Applicant argues that hydroxy ether diamines unexpectedly improve performance of the separation of iron ore and silica gangue and thus demonstrates patentability (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 29, Paragraph 5 to Page 32, Paragraph 2).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Hansen teaches a hydroxy ether diamine for froth flotation of iron ores and Wilson and Bittner teach that ether diamines are known for floating silica gangue in iron flotation processes. The results of mixing the hydroxy ether diamine with iron ore containing silica gangue would necessarily be the same as the instant application because the chemical property of the hydroxy ether diamine to attach to silica gangue and then float with the air bubbles is an inherent property of the chemical, so the results are not unexpected.
Applicant argues the same points used for claim 8 above for claim 32 and Hansen in view of Grannen, where Hansen teaches collecting valuable metals in the froth with the hydroxyl ether diamine and so is the opposite process of flotation instead of reverse flotation. Grannen teaches ether diamines, which are not hydroxylated, for use in floating silica gangue to separate it from phosphate ore. Thus the two sources are not combinable because they do two different processes and there are unexpected results of the hydroxylated ether diamine floating silica gangue (Arguments filed 09 JANUARY 2026, Page 32, Paragraph 3 to Page 37, Paragraph 2).
Regarding Applicant’s arguments, the same arguments above apply to these claims. Hansen teaches a chemical of instant claim 32 used for flotation processes. Grannen further teaches that ether diamines are known to be used for phosphate ore beneficiation by collecting silica gangue and carrying it into the froth. Combined with the above prior art of Wilson and Bittner, there are several sources showing that similar compounds to the hydroxyl ether diamines are all known for floating silica gangue in different froth flotation ore beneficiation processes. It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the same base chemical taught in Hansen to be used for silica gangue floating because the ether diamines are known to be attracted to silica gangue as taught by Grannen. Essentially, the instant application is claiming a new property for hydroxyl ether diamines, when it is already known to use hydroxyl ether diamines for ore beneficiation. The claiming of an unknown property which is inherently present in the prior art does not necessarily make the claim patentable (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The 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.
Claims 8-11, 15-16, 19, 21-26, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen et al European Patent No. EP 174866 A2 (hereinafter Hansen) in view of Wilson et al US Patent Application No. 20180036743 A1 (hereinafter Wilson) in view of Bittner et al US Patent Application No. 20140048455 A1 (hereinafter Bittner).
Regarding Claim 8, Hansen teaches that the process of flotation is to treat a mixture of pulverulent ore which includes iron oxide ores (i.e., a crude iron oxide ore; Page 12, Paragraph 2) suspended in a liquid (i.e., aqueous pulp; water in example 1 Page 16, Lines 11-25) whereby a portion of the solids is separated from other finely divided mineral solids, for example clays and other like materials, by introducing a gas to produce a frothy mass containing certain solids on the top of the liquid (i.e., a process for the froth flotation; foaming a mixture of aqueous pulp of the crude iron oxide ore; Page 1, Lines 4-19)
with various agents admixed with the suspension to improve the process, such as collectors and depressants, wherein the depressants are used to prevent collectors from attaching to minerals that are desired to be retained in the liquid, (i.e., the process comprising foaming a mixture of an aqueous pulp of the crude iron oxide ore, a collector composition, and one or more depressants to provide a foamed mixture; Page 2, Lines 1-16).
Hansen further discloses an example hydroxyl ether amine (i.e., where the collector composition comprises adding at least one hydroxyl ether diamine Page 29, Lines 11-12; #30 chemical structure in the list) used in the process of recovering mineral ores from a froth pulp (i.e., to a froth pulp of a mineral ore; Page 1, Lines 1-12).
The instant application claims a chemical structure and details the substitution groups as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
316
641
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hansen discloses the following compound for froth flotation on Page 29, Lines 11-12:
PNG
media_image2.png
106
468
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The related sections have been designated by R1 with the box labeled 1, R2 with the box labeled 2, R3 with the box labeled 3, R4 with the box labeled 4, and “n” with the box labeled 5. R1 of Hansen contains a branched alkyl chain containing 8 carbon atoms (i.e., a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C6 - C24 carbon atoms). R2 contains a linear alkyl group containing 1 carbon atom (i.e., are H or a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C1 - C5 carbon atoms). R3 contains a Hydrogen (i.e., are H or a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C1 - C5 carbon atoms). R4 contains a linear alkyl group containing 1 carbon atom (i.e., are H or a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C1 - C5 carbon atoms). The variable “n” for the CH2 group repeats is 2 (i.e., n is an integer 2-5). The disclosure of the above chemical structure addresses the instant claim language of “wherein the at least one hydroxyl ether diamine is according to Formula (1) or is a salt of the at least one compound of Formula (1) formed by neutralization with formic, acetic, propionic or hydrochloric acid”. Furthermore, Hansen discloses an example froth flotation in which the pH is adjusted to 10.5 by the addition of further lime (i.e., the process is performed at a pH of between 7.0 and 12.0; Page 16, Lines 11-25) with a separation of valuable minerals from gangue (i.e., silicates; Page 11, Lines 16-23) with the table for example 1 demonstrating gangue in the froth (i.e., the silicates are selectively floated in a froth; Page 18, Table 1).
Hansen does not teach wherein the crude mineral ore is an iron oxide ore that contains at least 3 wt.-% of silicates, based on the total weight of the crude iron oxide ore and does not explicitly teach separating and removing a silicate-enriched froth from the mixture, and recovering an iron oxide-enriched concentrate as a bottom fraction of the mixture.
However, Wilson teaches an example performing a flotation process on iron ore with an ore containing 5-12% SiO2 (i.e., containing 3 wt.-% to 50 wt.-% of silica) with varying recovery rates of iron (i.e., an iron ore; Paragraph 0009; Fig. 1) in which iron ore is often upgraded by a reverse flotation process wherein the impurities such as silica are floated and depressants can be used to minimize iron loss by blocking collecting agent adsorption onto the iron mineral and mitigate an collecting agent that does adsorb (i.e., foaming a mixture of an aqueous pulp of the crude iron oxide ore, a collector composition, and one or more depressants to provide a foamed mixture; separating and removing a silicate-enriched froth from the mixture, and recovering an iron oxide-enriched concentrate as a bottom fraction of the mixture; Paragraph 0005) with the process being particularly effective in the presence of multivalent ions such as iron (Paragraph 0024). Wilson further teaches that exemplary collecting agents includes diamines, compounds containing oxygen, and, more specifically, ether diamines (Paragraph 0049).
Wilson is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a process for enriching a desired mineral from an ore comprising the desired mineral and gangue (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the method taught by Hansen with the iron ore containing 5-12% SiO2 as taught by Wilson because the process would be particularly effective in the presence of multivalent ions such as iron.
In support of Hansen and Wilson, Bittner teaches the use of alkyl ether diamines for the enrichment of iron from a silicate containing iron ore by the process of inverse ore flotation (Paragraph 0001) and that it is well known to remove silicate from different ores by using froth flotation and hydrophobic amines (Paragraph 0002). As such, utilizing collectors, especially ether diamines, for the flotation of silicates is well known in the art of ore beneficiation.
Bittner is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to flotation collectors for the separation of iron minerals from silicates (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 9, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy-/decyloxy)propan-2-ol, 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3-(decyloxy)propan-2-ol, 1- (2-aminoethylamino)-3-(dodecyloxy-/tetradecyloxy)propan-2-ol , 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol, 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3-(octyloxy- )propan-2-ol and mixtures thereof. However, using the chemical structure the 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 9 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 10, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the wherein the R1 is a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C8 or C9 carbon atoms, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. R1 section of the chemical structure in the instant application is entirely described by R1 taught by Hansen where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl with 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy and alkoxy groups (above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure of 9 carbon atoms from the instant claim. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 10 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 11, Hansen further teaches the following compound for froth flotation on Page 29, Lines 11-12 below (the same image used in the rejection for claim 8):
PNG
media_image2.png
106
468
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Where the number 1 (i.e., wherein R1 is a branched alkyl group) designates a branched alkyl group corresponding to R1 of the instant application.
Regarding Claim 15, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the wherein the R1 is an isononyl group, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formula with the structure and details shown above. R1 section of the chemical structure in the instant application is entirely described by R1 taught by Hansen where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl with 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy and alkoxy groups (above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure of an isononyl group from the instant claim. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 15 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 16, Hansen further teaches that the process may be used for oxide ores such as iron oxide-, iron titanium oxide-, and iron chromium oxide-, among others with example mineral ores as hematite and magnetite (i.e., wherein the crude iron oxide ore is selected from magnetite, hematite; Page 12, Lines 14-33).
Regarding Claim 19, Hansen further teaches that the process may be used for oxide ores such as iron oxide-, iron titanium oxide-, and iron chromium oxide-, among others with example mineral ores as hematite and magnetite (i.e., wherein the crude mineral ore is iron ore; Page 12, Lines 14-33). Hansen also teaches the same froth flotation process and that various agents are admixed with the suspension to improve the frothing and collection process, including depressants that prevent a collector from functioning on a mineral which it is desired to retain in the liquid and pH regulators to produce optimum metallurgical results and that these additives are selected based on the nature of the ore and the mineral sought to be recovered (Page 2, Lines 1-21). Additionally, Hansen teaches that collectors can be used in any concentration which gives the desired recovery of the desired metal values, specifically focusing on the grade of the ore and the particular metal value for recovery (Page 13, Lines 14-25). Hansen does not explicitly teach wherein greater than 65 wt.-% of the total weight of the mineral enriched concentrate is iron, and less than 3 wt.-% of the total weight of the mineral-enriched concentrate is SiO2. However, Hansen teaches many techniques for routine optimization of the given steps via additives, collector concentration adjustments, and pH adjustments that all impact the resulting iron and silica values in both the froth and the liquid portions of the flotation process. Generally, 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 and where 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 (In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)). See MPEP 2144.05(II). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to optimize the froth flotation process for the recovery of iron to be a maximum and the silica or gangue to be a minimum in the mineral-enriched stream by varying the additives, collector concentrations, and from the teachings of Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner.
Regarding Claim 21, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy)propan-2-ol and 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl of 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 21 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 22, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy)propan-2-ol and 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl of 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 22 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 23, Hansen further teaches a that the collectors of the invention can be used in mixtures with other collectors (i.e., the collector composition further comprises; Page 13, Lines 26-30 to Page 14, Lines 1-2) and a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3-(decyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(decyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl of 13 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., decyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 23 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 24, Hansen further teaches a that the collectors of the invention can be used in mixtures with other collectors (i.e., the collector composition further comprises; Page 13, Lines 26-30 to Page 14, Lines 1-2) and a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy)propan-2-ol and 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl of 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 24 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 25, Hansen further teaches a that the collectors of the invention can be used in mixtures with other collectors (i.e., the collector composition further comprises; Page 13, Lines 26-30 to Page 14, Lines 1-2) and a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy)propan-2-ol and 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol and 3-(octyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl of 11 or 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy/octyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structures from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 25 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 26, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the wherein R2, R3, and R4 are H from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Wilson and Bittner teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 26 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Wilson in view of Bittner for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 31, Bittner further teaches that the invention is suitable for the processing of iron ores containing high silica contents of at least 20% by weight of iron ore (Paragraph 0057) for the purpose of gathering a pure enough iron mineral from iron ore to make high quality steel (Paragraph 0003).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the flotation process made obvious by Hansen in view of Wilson to input iron ore with a high silica content as taught by Bittner because the high silica content ore would generate iron mineral at sufficient purity to make high quality steel.
Claims 32 and 34-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen in view of Grannen US Patent No. 3768646 A (hereinafter Grannen).
Regarding Claim 32, Hansen teaches that the process of flotation is to treat a mixture of pulverulent ore which includes iron oxide ores (i.e., a crude iron oxide ore; Page 12, Paragraph 2) suspended in a liquid (i.e., aqueous pulp; water in example 1 Page 16, Lines 11-25) whereby a portion of the solids is separated from other finely divided mineral solids, for example clays and other like materials, by introducing a gas to produce a frothy mass containing certain solids on the top of the liquid (i.e., a process for the froth flotation; foaming a mixture of aqueous pulp of the crude iron oxide ore; Page 1, Lines 4-19) with various agents admixed with the suspension to improve the process, such as collectors (i.e., the process comprising the step of bringing an aqueous pulp of the crude mineral ore into contact with a collector composition; Page 2, Lines 1-16). Hansen further discloses an example hydroxyl ether amine (i.e., adding at least one hydroxyl ether diamine Page 29, Lines 11-12; #30 chemical structure in the list) used in the process of recovering mineral ores from a froth pulp (i.e., to a froth pulp of a mineral ore; Page 1, Lines 1-12).
The instant application claims a chemical structure and details the substitution groups as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
316
641
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hansen discloses the following compound for froth flotation on Page 29, Lines 11-12:
PNG
media_image2.png
106
468
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The related sections have been designated by R1 with the box labeled 1, R2 with the box labeled 2, R3 with the box labeled 3, R4 with the box labeled 4, and “n” with the box labeled 5. R1 of Hansen contains a branched alkyl chain containing 8 carbon atoms (i.e., a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C6 - C24 carbon atoms). R2 contains a linear alkyl group containing 1 carbon atom (i.e., are H or a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C1 - C5 carbon atoms). R3 contains a Hydrogen (i.e., are H or a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C1 - C5 carbon atoms). R4 contains a linear alkyl group containing 1 carbon atom (i.e., are H or a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C1 - C5 carbon atoms). The variable “n” for the CH2 group repeats is 2 (i.e., n is an integer 2-5). The disclosure of the above chemical structure addresses the instant claim language of “wherein the at least one hydroxyl ether diamine is according to Formula (1) or is a salt of the at least one compound of Formula (1) formed by neutralization with formic, acetic, propionic or hydrochloric acid”. Furthermore, Hansen discloses an example froth flotation in which the pH is adjusted to 10.5 by the addition of further lime (i.e., the process is performed at a pH of between 7.0 and 12.0; Page 16, Lines 11-25) with a separation of valuable minerals from gangue (i.e., silicates; Page 11, Lines 16-23) with the table for example 1 demonstrating gangue in the froth (i.e., the silicates are selectively floated in a froth; Page 18, Table 1).
Hansen does not teach a crude phosphate ore and does not explicitly teach separating and removing a silicate-enriched froth from the mixture, and recovering a phosphate-enriched concentrate as a bottom fraction of the mixture.
However, Grannen teaches the use of alkylene diamines for the removal of siliceous materials from mineral ores (Col. 1, Lines 10-40) with specific mention of phosphate rock (i.e., a crude phosphate ore) for separation by flotation (i.e., recovering a phosphate-enriched concentrate as a bottom fraction of the mixture; Col. 2, Lines 38-45) where the alkylene diamines are unusually selective for the separation of siliceous materials (i.e., separating and removing a silicate-enriched froth from the mixture; Col. 1, Lines 5-10).
Grannen is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the flotation separation of ore values from siliceous materials (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to utilize the hydroxyl ether diamine compound as taught by Hansen to float siliceous for phosphate rocks because alkylene diamines are unusually selective for siliceous materials.
Regarding Claim 34, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy-/decyloxy)propan-2-ol, 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3-(decyloxy)propan-2-ol, 1- (2-aminoethylamino)-3-(dodecyloxy-/tetradecyloxy)propan-2-ol , 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol, 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3-(octyloxy- )propan-2-ol and mixtures thereof. However, using the chemical structure the 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Grannen teaches that the core type of compound of the instant application, alkylene diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 34 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Grannen for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 35, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the wherein the R1 is a linear or branched alkyl or alkenyl group having C8 or C9 carbon atoms, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. R1 section of the chemical structure in the instant application is entirely described by R1 taught by Hansen where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl with 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy and alkoxy groups (above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure of 9 carbon atoms from the instant claim. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Grannen teaches that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 35 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Grannen for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 36, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the wherein the R1 is an isononyl group, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formula with the structure and details shown above. R1 section of the chemical structure in the instant application is entirely described by R1 taught by Hansen where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl with 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy and alkoxy groups (above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure of an isononyl group from the instant claim. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Grannen teaches that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 36 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Grannen for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Regarding Claim 37, Hansen further teaches a chemical structure (Page 8, Lines 15-20) and substitution groups (Page 5, Lines 1-21) as follows following formula and description:
PNG
media_image3.png
135
431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
489
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where specifically the following two chemicals have been detailed with #8 demonstrating the 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section (Page 28, Lines 1-5; #8) and #30 demonstrating the alkoxy and hydroxy groups attached to a diamine portion of the chemical structure (Page 29, Lines 11-12).
PNG
media_image5.png
61
179
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
63
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Hansen does not explicitly teach the group consisting of 1-(2-aminoethylamino)-3- (octyloxy)propan-2-ol and 1-(2- aminoethylamino)-3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol from the instant claim, but it can be shown that Hansen teaches the chemical formulas with the structure and details shown above. The 1-(2- aminoethylamino) section of the chemical structure refers to the R groups R2 and R3 and the subscript variables “a”, “b”, and “n”, where R3 is hydrogen (above and Page 5, Line 13), R2 can be anything because the “a” value is 0 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-9 and 13), the “b” value is 2, indicating that R2 is actually an additional hydrogen (above and Page 5, Lines 14-15) , and the “n” value is 2 which falls within the range of 1-6 listed above (above and Page 5, Line 3). The 3-(isononyloxy)propan-2-ol section of the chemical structure is entirely described by R1, where R1 selects a hydrocarbyl of 12 carbon atoms, which falls in the range of C1-22 (above and Page 5, Lines 4-5), and is substituted with one or more hydroxy (i.e., propan-2-ol) and alkoxy groups (i.e., isononyloxy; above and Page 5, Lines 6-7) to form the exemplary chemical structure from the instant application. According to case law, the species claim is rendered obvious no matter how many other species are additionally named (Ex parte A 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990)) and a prior art’s disclosure of possible combinations renders all combinations obvious (See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (holding that the prior art’s disclosure of over 1200 possible combinations rendered all possible formulations obvious)). Additionally, Grannen teach that the core type of compound of the instant application, ether diamines, is a well-known collector for the flotation of silicates. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to try the chemical structures listed in the instant application’s claim 37 because the chemical structures are described by Hansen in view of Grannen for froth flotation and they are known for the flotation of silicates.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen in view of Grannen in view of Kerns et al US Patent No. 20140110621 A1 (hereinafter Kerns).
Regarding Claim 33, Hansen in view of Grannen does not teach wherein the crude phosphate ore is apatite.
However, Kerns teaches that one example of a separation process including froth flotation and reverse froth flotation using substances identified as collectors (Paragraph 0005) includes the purification of phosphate ores where clay, sand, and/or other contaminants are suspended in water to form a slurry or suspension (Paragraph 0034) where the one or more ores includes one or more apatite rocks (Paragraph 0027) with collectors including alkyl ether diamines (Paragraph 0042), describes the preferential flotation of contaminants in the process of reverse flotation (Paragraph 0037) and the collector will absorb preferentially onto a substance and render the substance more hydrophobic and amenable to flotation (Paragraph 0005).
Kerns is analogous to the claimed invention to because it pertains to the separation of ores into a purified ore and gangue (Paragraph 0003). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to change the input of phosphate rocks as made obvious by Hansen in view of Grannen to use apatite as taught by Kerns because the gangue part of the apatite would be preferentially absorbed by alkyl ether diamine collectors to render the gangue more amenable to flotation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ADRIEN GERMAIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5499. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30-4:30.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571)272-5954. 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.
/A.A.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/IN SUK C BULLOCK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights