DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/12/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 17, 20-21 and 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takechi (JP S5585441 A) in view of Laux (US 20080090194 A1) and Penfornis (US 20090130615 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Takechi teaches of:
A cement production plant comprising:
a preheater configured to preheat raw meal (Fig. 1, 2a-2c);
a calciner configured to calcine the raw meal that has been preheated (Fig. 1, 3);
a furnace with a furnace burner configured to fire the raw meal to form cement clinker, wherein the furnace has a combustion gas inlet configured to admit a combustion gas (Fig. 1, 7 has a burner 12 which must also have a combustion has inlet in order to operate); and
a cooler configured to cool the cement clinker (Fig. 1, 11);
wherein the furnace has a fuel inlet configured to admit fuel into the furnace (Fig. 1, furnace 7 has burner which would have an inlet for fuel)
wherein the calciner includes a riser and a plurality of fuel charging apparatuses that each include a respective fuel inlet (Fig. 1, calciner 3 has vertical sides where burners 6a and 6b are located which function as the fuel chagrining apparatuses, further 6a and 6b are separate and offset burner and therefore would have their own fuel inlets)
Takechi fails to explicitly teach:
with an oxygen content of 30% to 100% into the furnace
wherein the furnace has an inert gas inlet for admitting inert gas into the furnace
wherein the calciner includes a riser and a plurality of fuel charging apparatuses that each include a respective fuel inlet and a respective inert gas inlet;
wherein the fuel charging apparatuses are arranged angularly offset from each other about a cross-section of the riser at an angle between 60° and 270°.
However, it would have been obvious to modify Takechi to have chagrining apparatuses arranged angularly offset from each other about a cross-section of the riser at an angle between 60° and 270° based on the following rationale:
It has been found that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Takechi would not operate differently with the claimed angular offset of the fuel chargers since the fuel chargers are already shown to be angularly offset from one another on opposite sides of the calciner riser and further applicant has placed no criticality on the range claimed.
Laux teaches of:
with an oxygen content of 30% to 100% into the furnace (¶ [0007], wherein all oxygen entering said kiln from all sources constitutes 27.5 vol. % to 72.5 vol. % of all gas entering said kiln)
The primary reference can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify the oxygen content of gas entering 7 for combustion at burner 12 of Takechi to have a total combined oxygen content of 30% to 72.5% so that the oxygen content of the combustion gas for fuel for 9 is 30% to 72.5%
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Increasing the oxygen content of the combustion gas reduces NOx formation and increases productivity of the plant (Laux, abstract, In a kiln whose interior is heated by combustion with oxidant having a higher oxygen content than air, streams of staging oxidant are fed into the space between the combustion zone and the inner surface of the kiln, and the stoichiometric ratios and amounts of oxygen in the combustion zone and in the overall operation of the kiln are adjusted to provide control or reduction of NOx formation while maintaining or increasing productivity of the kiln.)
Penfornis teaches of:
wherein the calciner and the furnace have a respective inert gas inlet for respectively admitting inert gas into the calciner and the furnace (Fig. 1, see burner 1a surrounded by inert gas lances 2 with inert gas inlets 2a)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify the primary reference so the burners 12 and 6a and 6b are surrounded by at least 2 inert gas lances which have inert gas inlets so that both the calciner and the furnace of the primary reference has an inert gas inlet
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would allow for the size of the flame to be controlled resulting in greater thermal energy absorption in the second combustion zone, reducing the temperature of the flames in the second combustion zone and therefore reducing NOx formation (Penfornis, ¶ [0020], The boundary between the first and second combustion zones is set at the point where the flame temperature exceeds 1500.degree. C., above which temperature the rate of thermal NOx formation significantly increases.; ¶ [0024], The injection of at least one flow of at least one inert gas at the point where the second combustion zone starts makes it possible, while maintaining as high a temperature as possible in the first combustion zone, to absorb thermal energy released during the combustion of the fuel with the secondary air in the second combustion zone. Thus, the flame temperature drops in the second combustion zone.)
Regarding claim 20, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the furnace has multiple inert gas inlets (Penfornis, Fig. 1, there are multiple inert gas inlets formed by 2).
Regarding claim 21, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the calciner has a raw meal inlet configured to admit raw meal into the calciner (Takechi, Fig. 2, 5b), wherein the raw meal inlet is arranged upstream of the fuel inlets and the inert gas inlets in a direction of flow of gas within the calciner (Takechi, Fig. 2, burners 6a and 6b which have respective fuel inlets are downstream from the inlet 5b in relation to the flow of gas within 3).
Regarding claim 25, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein at least one cross- sectional constriction of a calciner cross section is configured within the calciner (Takechi, Fig. 2, the calciner constricts from sections 3b to 3c).
Regarding claim 26, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
comprising a guide element for guiding at least one of gas flow or fuel within the calciner.
However, Penfornis in a further embodiment teaches of:
comprising a guide element for guiding at least one of gas flow or fuel within the calciner (Fig. 3, 4 guides fuel and gas).
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
add 4 to the outlet of each of the burners with the calciner and the furnace of the combined teachings
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
adding 4 to each of the burners of the combined teachings allows for more rapid and complete combustion (Penfornis, ¶ [0040], The flaring of the inner edges of this appendage increases the gas recirculation in the flame at the outlet of the burner. What is thus obtained is more rapid and complete combustion.)
Regarding claim 27, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 26, and the combined teachings further teach:
comprising multiple of the guide element (see rejection of claim 26 above, there is a guide element on each of the burners), wherein one of the guide elements is assigned to each fuel charging apparatus (see rejection of claims 17 and 26 above, the burners of the calciner are fuel charging apparatuses as they supply or charge fuel into the calciner where it is subsequently combusted, Penfornis as applied in 17 provided an inert gas inlet for each of the burner of the primary reference, each of the burners or fuel charging apparatuses have a guide element 4 from Penfornis as applied in 26).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takechi (JP S5585441 A) in view of Laux (US 20080090194 A1) and Penfornis (US 20090130615 A1) as presented in claim 17, and in further view of Periasamy (US 20120304905 A1).
Regarding claim 19, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
wherein for the furnace, the fuel inlet and the inert gas inlet together form an inlet.
Periasamy teaches of:
wherein for the furnace, the fuel inlet and the inert gas inlet together form an inlet (¶ [0013], the carrier gas is industrially pure CO.sub.2.;Fig. 1, burner 1 has fuel inlet 7 which utilizes pulverized solid fuel conveyed through a carrier gas which is made up of industrially pure CO2 which according to applicant’s specification is an inert gas (see page 6, line 10 of applicant’s specification))
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify the burners of the primary reference so that its solid fuel is provided with a carrier gas of industrially pure CO2 so that the fuel and inert gas inlets together form an inlet
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Takechi teaches that its cement production plant is especially suited for solid fuel (Takechi, pages 6-7, Furthermore, since the fuel combustion efficiency in the calciner of the apparatus of the present invention is very high as described above, it is particularly suitable for using solid fuels such as coal) and therefore requires a carrier gas to convey the solid fuel through the burners, the use of industrially pure CO2 as the carrier gas allows for variations in the amount of carrier gas provided into the system to not affect the overall oxygen concentration of the combustion air (Periasamy, ¶ [0039], While the amount of carrier gas may be varied, typically it is driven by the amount of particulate fuel used, so the overall oxygen concentration [O.sub.2].sub.ov or [O.sub.2].sub.om largely depends upon how much recycled flue gas is in the secondary oxidant.)
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takechi (JP S5585441 A) in view of Laux (US 20080090194 A1) and Penfornis (US 20090130615 A1) as presented in claim 17, and in further view of Rohloff (WO 2017220457 A1).
Regarding claim 24, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
comprising a control device that is connected to a temperature measuring device within the calciner and that is configured to regulate a quantity of at least one of raw meal, inert gas, or fuel in the calciner based on a temperature ascertained by the temperature measuring device.
Rohloff teaches of:
comprising a control device that is connected to a temperature measuring device within the calciner and that is configured to regulate a quantity of at least one of raw meal, inert gas, or fuel in the calciner based on a temperature ascertained by the temperature measuring device (Fig. 2, temperature measuring device 66; ¶ [0021], a temperature measuring device for determining the temperature within the line is arranged on the line and/or on at least one treatment area for the fuel and/or the preheating device for the raw material, and a control/regulation device is provided which is connected to the temperature measuring device and is designed such that it controls/regulates the supply of raw material and/or the supply of fuels and/or the supply of oxygen-containing combustion air and/or the supply of hot gases into the system as a function of a temperature determined by the temperature measuring device)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
add a temperature measuring device to the calciner of the primary reference and further include a control device that is connected to the temperature device and is capable of controlling the supply of raw meal, fuel and combustion air within the combined teachings to control the temperature within the calciner
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would allow for the temperature within the calciner to be controlled in order to prevent damage to the plant (Rohloff, ¶ [0021], Depending on the temperature inside the line measured by the temperature measuring device, the raw material-hot gas mixture is discharged from the line. This prevents, in particular, damage to the line of the following components of, for example, the cement production plant due to excessive temperatures.)
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takechi (JP S5585441 A) in view of Laux (US 20080090194 A1) and Penfornis (US 20090130615 A1) as presented in claim 17, and in further view of Bellwinkel (WO 2005024328 A2).
Regarding claim 28, the combined teachings teach of the cement production plant of claim 17, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
comprising a combustion chamber disposed between the furnace and the calciner, the combustion chamber having a raw material inlet, a fuel inlet, and an inert gas inlet.
Bellwinkel teaches of:
comprising a combustion chamber disposed between the furnace and the calciner, the combustion chamber having a raw material inlet, a fuel inlet, and an inert gas inlet (Fig. 1, 1b is an additional combustion zone chamber between the furnace and the calciner)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
include a combustion chamber in between the calciner and the furnace of the primary reference so the combustion chamber is positioned as it is shown in Bellwinkel, further include a burner within the combustion chamber and supply it with fuel and inert gas as described by Penfornis in claim 17 above
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
having an additional combustion chamber between the calciner and the furnace allows for the combustion to occur at the inlet of the furnace in a reducing atmosphere therefore reducing NOx emissions (Bellwinkel, Pg. 2, lines 38-39, Additional combustion points are provided at the kiln inlet and the connecting line between the combustion chamber and the calciner in order to create a reducing atmosphere in this area)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J GIORDANO whose telephone number is (571)272-8940. The examiner can normally be reached M-Fr 8 AM - 5 PM 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, Steve McAllister can be reached at (571) 272-6785. 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.
/M.J.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/STEVEN B MCALLISTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762