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 .
Examiner’s Note
Prosecution has been reopened after an internal review process discovered an applicable prior art reference. Included below is a non-final rejection including the restriction election filed 1/29/2026 and a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection over the elected claims.
Drawings
The replacement drawings were received on 4/29/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 6-18 in the reply filed on 1/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-5 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/29/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 6, 9-10, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Andritz (DE 19903526A1, hereinafter “Andritz”).
The Examiner is providing a machine translation of DE19903526A1.
PNG
media_image1.png
482
657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Andritz teaches a wear-resistant processing device that enables good separation of the materials contained in the devices or products (Andritz, [0005]). Andritz teaches the processing device has a digestion vessel in which a centrifugal tool is arranged in which a product can be broken down into its material components by the action of the centrifugal tool and the impacts and friction of the resulting fragments against each other (Andritz, [0007]). Andritz further teaches Figure 1 (shown to the left), in which the digestion vessel 3 is formed from a bottom part 5, a wall part 6 and a lid part 7, where an insertion opening 8 is formed, in the lid part 7, to which a sluice gate for feeding materials into the interior 2 is connected (Andritz, [0024]). Andritz also teaches on the bottom part 5, a hub 14 is arranged coaxially to a central axis 12 in which at least two diametrically opposed chain sections 17, 18 are held on the hub 14, extending radially away from the hub 14 as soon as the hub rotates and centrifugal force acts on the chain sections 17, 18 (Andritz, [0025-0026]). Andritz teaches an extraction opening 23 is closed by a closing device during operation of the centrifugal tool 4, but can be opened to remove the fragmented materials (Andritz, [0027]).
The processing device of Andritz corresponds to an apparatus for separating a solid fusion mix material into a collector material and a slag material of claim 6.
However, the recitation in the claims that the apparatus is “for separating a solid fusion mix material into a collector material and a slag material” is merely an intended use. Applicants’ attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that intended use statements must be evaluated to determine whether the intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
It is the examiner’s position that the intended use recited in the present claims does not result in a structural difference between the presently claimed invention and the prior art and further that the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use. Given that Andritz discloses the processing device as presently claimed, it is clear that the processing device of Andritz would be capable of performing the intended use, i.e. separating a solid fusion mix material into a collector material and a slag material, presently claimed as required in the above cited portion of the MPEP, and thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention.
The processing device having a digestion vessel, a bottom part, lid part, wall part, and interior od Andritz corresponds to the apparatus having a separating unit, the separating unit defining a central axis, and comprising a separation chamber having an inner surface and having a top portion and a bottom portion arranged with respect to the central axis, the top portion and the bottom portion separated by a chamber wall of claim 6.
The insertion opening of Andritz corresponds to an inlet at the top portion of the separation chamber, the inlet configured to allow entry of the solid fusion mix material of claim 6. Moreover, the inlet being “configured to allow entry of the solid fusion mix material” is merely an intended use as noted above, and the processing device of Andritz would be capable of allowing entry of the solid fusion mix material as claimed.
The hub and chain sections arranged coaxially to a central axis to rotate using centrifugal force of Andritz corresponds to an impact member located in the separation chamber at the bottom portion, wherein the impact member is configured to rotate around the central axis and adapted to contact the solid fusion mix material in the separation chamber while rotating, to dislodge the slag material and thereby separate the solid fusion mix material into the slag material and the collector material of claim 6. As noted above, the chain sections would be capable of rotating around the central axis and adapted to contact the solid fusion mix material in the separation chamber while rotating, to dislodge the slag material and thereby separate the solid fusion mix material into the slag material and the collector material.
The extraction opening of Andritz corresponds to at least one outlet located in the chamber wall, the at least one outlet allowing extraction of the slag material and/or the collector material from the separation chamber of claim 6.
Regarding claim 9, Andritz teaches in the transition between the wall part 6 and the cover part 7 or the bottom part 5, built-in parts 61 , 62 are arranged, in which these are ring-shaped and have a conical surface 63,64 facing the interior 2 (Andritz, [0042] and Figure 4). The conical surfaces of Andritz corresponds to wherein the bottom portion of the separation chamber has a tapered shape, the tapered shape including a conical shape or half spherical shape of claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, Andritz teaches the two diametrically opposed chain sections 17, 18 are formed by sections of a round link chain, the individual links 20, 21 of which pivotably interlock (Andritz, [0026] and Figures 1 and 3). The linked chains of Andritz corresponds to wherein the impact member comprising an impact head, a link piece, and a rotating element, said link piece being attached to the impact head in a first end and to a rotating member in a second end opposite the first end, and wherein the link piece is flexible, and wherein the link piece is a string, chain, wire or cable of claim 10.
Regarding claim 15, Andritz teaches a hub 14 is arranged coaxially to a central axis 12 in which at least two diametrically opposed chain sections 17, 18 are held on the hub 14, extending radially away from the hub 14 as soon as the hub rotates and centrifugal force acts on the chain sections 17, 18 (Andritz, [0025-0026]). The placement of the hub and chains with respect to the central axis within the digestion vessel of Andritz, corresponds to wherein the impact member rotates with respect to the separation chamber of claim 15.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Figure 1 shows the filling opening is located in the lid part, i.e., top of digestion vessel, and the extraction opening is located in the bottom of the wall part (Andritz, Figure 1). Therefore, the outlet is located on an opposite side of the separation chamber from the inlet as claimed in claim 16 and the at least one outlet is located closer to a periphery of the separation chamber than the inlet of claim 17.
Regarding claim 18, Andritz teaches a pulley 36 is fixed to rotation on the hollow shaft 35 and is driven by an electric motor via a belt to rotate the central hub part (Andritz, [0029] and Figure 2). The motor to drive the central hub of Andritz corresponds to further comprising a motor connected to the impact member to rotate the impact member, the motor having a variable frequency drive of claim 18.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 and 11-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE CARDA whose telephone number is (571)270-1240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:00 EST.
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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/DANIELLE M. CARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights