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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/03/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/03/2025 has been acknowledged and entered. Claims 18-32 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/03/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant's argument, on pages 6-9, that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, in particular, “determining at least one quantile of the particle size distribution from the at least two measured values” where a quantile is a characterization of a particle size distribution and defines a threshold value of which a certain portion of the particles have sizes that are smaller than the quantile and a certain portion of the particles have sizes that are larger than the quantile. However, Natsuyama, in Fig. 7, does show D10, D50, and D90 which are percentile measurements in a particle size distribution that define the size threshold for a specific percentage of a sample (this is a known definition/parameter for a particle size distribution in the field of endeavor). D10, D50, and D90 corresponds to 10%, 50%, and 90% of particles under a reported particle size, respectively. A percentile is a type of quantile where a set of values is divided into 100 parts (see sciencedirect for definition of quantile: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/mathematics/quantile. A quantile is defined as “a portion of the total number of observations. Quantiles are usually named according to the number of portions into which the range is divided.”) A quartile, quintile, decile, and percentile are types of quantiles with four, five, ten, and one-hundred portions, respectively. Therefore, altogether, D10, D50, and D90 represent a quantile with 100 values (percentile).
On page 7 of the Applicant’s argument, the Applicant provides examples of the at least two measured values and points to Figs. 1-2 and [0031] of the specification where the measured values are “A for the resonance frequency shift of a resonance mode in MHz”, “B for a broadening of the resonance curve of the same resonance mode in MHz”, “L is the amount of air supplied to the fluidized bed in m^3/h”, “T is the product temperature in degrees Celsius”, and “F is the fill level of the fluidized bed system in kg.” However, the measured values (A, B, L, T, and F) upon which the Applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
On page 8-9 of the Applicant’s arguments, the Applicant argues that Clark does not teach “different particle size distributions are measured” and that instead Clark teaches “that for different particle size distributions an average size is measured.” However, Clark does teach that different particle size distributions are measured (see Figs. 6 and 9 and page 541, Col. 1, paragraph 3 which recites “Fig. 9 shows the measurement traces taken from the network analyser from the four fractioned samples for one of the measurement modes (TE011). The resonant frequency can be seen to shift upwards with increasing mean particle size and the peaks broaden (with
increased insertion loss at resonance) due to the increased absorption. Exacting the real and imaginary permeability using cavity perturbation (Eqs. (3) and (4)) and plotting against the theoretical expectation generates Figs. 10 and 11. Considering first the real permeability, clear correlation is shown between the measured values and theoretical prediction, the latter produced assuming a single particle size. This data shows that the average particle size is sufficient itself, in this instance, to predict the permeability of the powder sample as a whole. The PSDs encountered here have not significantly affected the magnetic microwave response.), which further provides motivation for combining Clark with Natsuyama.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 18-32 are maintained.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a device for generating a moving flow of particles, comprising a measuring apparatus comprising at least one microwave resonator configured to determine at least two measured values for the flow of particles, wherein the measuring apparatus is configured to evaluate at least one quantile of a particle size distribution from the at least two measured values of the microwave resonator” (from claim 26) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0013] of the specification recites “The object according to the invention is also achieved by a device for generating a moving flow of particles having the features of claim 10.” The specification should not refer to claims by number as an amendment to the claims leads to an amendment of the specification by default, and whatever was original claim 10 may not be claim 10 on any patent that issues off of this application. Therefore, the specification should be amended to delete the reference to claim 10.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 18-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Natsuyama (JP 4230058 B2, provided by the IDS with portions of the translation cited) and further in view of Clark (“Particle size characterization of metal powders for Additive Manufacturing using a microwave sensor”, which was provided by the IDS dated 11/30/2022).
Regarding Claim 18, Natsuyama teaches a method for determining at least one characteristic variable (average particle diameter from [0048]) of a particle size distribution in a moving flow of particles (fluidized granulating device from [0019] where the particle size distribution is measured from a moving flow of particles), comprising:
structuring at least one measuring device (laser type particle size distribution measuring device from [0015]) to determine at least two measured values (average particle diameter from [0015] and frequency of particles from [0015]) for the moving flow of particles;
and determining at least one quantile of the particle size distribution from the at least two measured values (Shown in Fig. 7 where D10, D50, and D90 are percentile measurements in a particle size distribution that define the size threshold for a specific percentage of a sample (this is a known definition/parameter for a particle size distribution in the field of endeavor). D10, D50, and D90 corresponds to 10%, 50%, and 90% of particles under a reported particle size, respectively. A percentile is a type of quantile where a set of values is divided into 100 parts (see sciencedirect for definition of quantile: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/mathematics/quantile. A quantile is defined as “a portion of the total number of observations. Quantiles are usually named according to the number of portions into which the range is divided.”) A quartile, quintile, decile, and percentile are types of quantiles with four, five, ten, and one-hundred portions, respectively. Therefore, altogether, D10, D50, and D90 represent a quantile with 100 values (percentile).
Natsuyama does not teach structuring at least one microwave resonator to determine measured values for the moving flow of particles.
Clark, related particle size characterization, does teach the measurement of particles using at least one microwave resonator (Page 537, Sec. 2.1. Microwave cavity perturbation, first paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Natsuyama to incorporate at least one microwave resonator, as disclosed by Clark. It would be advantageous to incorporate a microwave resonator for particle characterization as microwave resonators are known in the field of endeavor for being able to deduce resonant frequency, quality factors, and electromagnetic properties of the material being analyzed (Clark, Page 537, Sec. 2.1. Microwave cavity perturbation, first paragraph).
Regarding Claim 19, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 18.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches at least two measured values (Natusyama, average particle diameter from [0015] and frequency of particles from [0015]) of the microwave resonator (Clark, Page 537, Sec. 2.1. Microwave cavity perturbation, first paragraph) and a calculation of the frequency of the fine particles (Natsuyama, [0015] and [0029]).
Natsuyama modified by Clark does not teach at least two measured values of the microwave resonator correspond to a resonance frequency shift (A) and a broadening of a resonance curve (B).
Clark does teach that at least two measured values of the microwave resonator correspond to a resonance frequency shift (A) and a broadening of a resonance curve (B) (Shown in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Natsuyama combined with Clark (for Claim 18) where at least two measured values of the microwave resonator correspond to a resonance frequency shift (A) and a broadening of a resonance curve (B), as disclosed by Clark. Observing a resonance frequency shift and broadening of a resonance curve of particles is known in the field of endeavor. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have known to apply a known technique (observing a resonance frequency shift and broadening of a resonance curve of particles) to a known method (particle characterization) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (independent measurement of permittivity or permeability (Clark, Page 537, Col. 2, Paragraph 2)) (MPEP 2143 (I)(D)).
Regarding Claim 20, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 18.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches evaluating at least one temperature of the moving flow of particles (Natsuyama, Temperature of operating conditions which includes air flow of the moving particles, from [0022] and [0047]).
Regarding Claim 21, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 18.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches the moving flow of particles is present in a fluidized bed (Natsuyama, granular material in a fluidized bed process from [0015]).
Regarding Claim 22, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 21.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches evaluating at least one of:
(i) an amount of air supplied to the fluidized bed (Natsuyama, amount of air is an operating condition defined by the user from [0023]); and
(ii) a fill level of the fluidized bed (Natsuyama, [0019]: amount of fluidizing air, which is defined by the user, is used to form a fluidized bed).
Regarding Claim 23, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 18.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches determining at least one of:
a fineness characteristic (Natsuyama, Fig. 7 shows particle size distribution; [0050]); and
a quantile is approximated using the at least two measured variables (Natsuyama, Shown in Fig. 7 which displays particle size distribution wherein the at least two measured variables are average particle diameter from [0015] and frequency of particles (shown in Fig. 4) from [0015])).
Natsuyama modified by Clark (for claim 18) appears to be silent to a quantile being linearly approximated using the at least two measured variables.
Clark, related to particle size characterization, does teach linear approximations related to measured variables associated with particle characteristics (Fig. 12 shows raw measurement data plotted against the average particle size for mixed powdered samples wherein the relationship between particle size and the raw measurement parameter is linear (page 541, Col. 2, para. 2)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Natsuyama combined by Clark (for claim 18) where a quantile is linearly approximated using at least two measured variables, as disclosed by Clark. Linear approximations are well-known in the field of endeavor. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have known to apply a known technique (linear approximation) to a known method (particle characterization) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (data analysis) (MPEP 2143 (I)(D)).
Regarding Claim 24, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 23.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches that the quantile relates to one of a number distribution sum (Natsuyama, Fig. 7 shows average particle diameter as described in [0050]), a length distribution sum, an area distribution sum, a volume distribution sum, or a mass distribution sum.
Regarding Claim 25, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 23.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches that multiple quantiles are recorded over time (Natsuyama, Shown in Fig. 7 where the multiple quantiles are D10, D50, and D90).
Regarding Claim 26, Natsuyama teaches a device for generating a moving flow of particles ([0036]: fluidizing air moves the particles), comprising:
a measuring apparatus (laser type particle size distribution measuring device from [0015]) configured to determine at least two measured values (average particle diameter from [0015] and frequency of particles from [0015]) for the flow of particles,
wherein the measuring apparatus is configured to evaluate at least one quantile of a particle size distribution from the at least two measured values (Shown in Fig. 7 where D10, D50, and D90 are percentile measurements in a particle size distribution that define the size threshold for a specific percentage of a sample (this is a known definition/parameter for a particle size distribution in the field of endeavor). D10, D50, and D90 corresponds to 10%, 50%, and 90% of particles under a reported particle size, respectively. A percentile is a type of quantile where a set of values is divided into 100 parts (see sciencedirect for definition of quantile: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/mathematics/quantile. A quantile is defined as “a portion of the total number of observations. Quantiles are usually named according to the number of portions into which the range is divided.”) A quartile, quintile, decile, and percentile are types of quantiles with four, five, ten, and one-hundred portions, respectively. Therefore, altogether, D10, D50, and D90 represent a quantile with 100 values (percentile).).
Natsuyama does not teach that the measuring apparatus comprises at least one microwave resonator configured to determine the measured values for the flow of particles.
Clark, related particle size characterization, does teach the characterization of particles using at least one microwave resonator (Page 537, Sec. 2.1. Microwave cavity perturbation, first paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Natsuyama to incorporate at least one microwave resonator configured to determine at least two measured values for the flow of particles, wherein the measuring apparatus is configured to evaluate at least one quantile of a particle size distribution from the at least two measured values of the microwave resonator, as disclosed by Clark. It would be advantageous to incorporate a microwave resonator for particle characterization as microwave resonators are known in the field of endeavor for being able to deduce resonant frequency, quality factors, and electromagnetic properties of the material being analyzed (Clark, Page 537, Sec. 2.1. Microwave cavity perturbation, first paragraph).
Regarding Claim 27, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the device according to claim 26.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches that the measuring apparatus (fluidized granulating device from Natsuyama’s [0019]) is further configured to measure a temperature of the flow of particles (Natsuyama, Temperature of operating conditions which includes air flow of the moving particles, from [0022] and [0047]).
Regarding Claim 28, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the device according to claim 26.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches at least two measured values (Natsuyama, average particle diameter from [0015] and frequency of particles from [0015]) are measured in a fluidized bed (Natsuyama, granular material in a fluidized bed process from [0015]).
Regarding Claim 29, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the device according to claim 28.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches the measuring apparatus (Natsuyama, fluidized granulating device from [0019]) is configured to evaluate at least one of:
an amount of air supplied to the fluidized bed (Natsuyama, amount of air is an operating condition defined by the user from [0023]); and
a fill level of the fluidized bed (Natsuyama, [0019]: fluidizing air, which is defined by the user, is used to form a fluidized bed).
Regarding Claim 30, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the device according to claim 29.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches the measuring apparatus (Natsuyama, fluidized granulating device from [0019]) is configured to approximate the quantile using:
the amount of air supplied to the fluidized bed (Natsuyama, amount of air is an operating condition defined by the user from [0023]); and
the fill level of the fluidized bed (Natsuyama, [0019]: fluidizing air, which is defined by the user, is used to form a fluidized bed).
Natsuyama modified (for claim 29) by Clark appears to be silent to the measuring apparatus being configured to linearly approximate the quantile.
Clark, related to particle size characterization, does teach linear approximations related to measured variables associated with a particle characteristic (Fig. 12 shows raw measurement data plotted against the average particle size for mixed powdered samples wherein the relationship between particle size and the raw measurement parameter is linear (page 541, Col. 2, para. 2)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Natsuyama combined by Clark (for claim 29) where a quantile is linearly approximated using at least two measured variables, as disclosed by Clark. Linear approximations are well-known in the field of endeavor. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have known to apply a known technique (linear approximation) to a known method (particle characterization) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (data analysis) (MPEP 2143 (I)(D)).
Regarding Claim 31, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 26.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches that the measuring apparatus (Natsuyama, fluidized granulating device from [0019]) is configured to determine the quantile for one of:
a number distribution sum (Natsuyama, Fig. 7 shows average particle diameter as described in [0050]), a length distribution sum, an area distribution sum, a volume distribution sum, or a mass distribution sum.
Regarding Claim 32, Natsuyama modified by Clark teaches the method according to claim 26.
Natsuyama modified by Clark further teaches that the measuring apparatus (Natsuyama, fluidized granulating device from [0019]) is configured to record multiple quantiles over time (Natsuyama, Shown in Fig. 7 where the multiple quantiles are D10, D50, and D90).
Other References Considered but not Cited
Herrmann (US 9,377,417 B2), which is related to a device and method for measuring a moisture values F of dielectric materials using at least one microwave resonator.
Hermann (US 7,337,074 B2), which is related to a method and apparatus for particle analysis using a microwave resonator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUDY DAO TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0085. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9:30am-5:00pm 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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached on (571) 270-5789. 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.
/JUDY DAO TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877