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 .
Response to Amendments
This is a final office action in response to applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 03/16/2026.
Status of Rejections
The objections to the drawings and claims are withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
The rejection of claim(s) 6-7 and 16 under 35 USC 112(b) is/are withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment.
All other previous rejections are maintained and modified only in response to the amendments to the claims.
Claims 1-21 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 11, line 18, “detecting the” should read “detect. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D’Astolfo et al. (U.S. 2014/0048421).
Regarding claim 1, D’Astolfo discloses a method for detecting a thermite reaction in an electrolytic cell (see e.g. Paragraph 0004) comprising at least one anode assembly of one or more metal-oxide-containing anodes (see e.g. Figs. 1A and 7, electrolytic cell 1 including one or more anode assemblies 101 including one or more groups of anodes 2 comprising metal oxides; Paragraphs 0083 and 0070), at least one cathode (see e.g. Fig. 1A, at least one cathode 3; Paragraph 0071, lines 3-4, and Paragraph 0040, lines 3-4), an electrolytic bath (see e.g. Fig. 1A, electrolytic bath 5; Paragraph 0071, lines 3-4), and a current supply buss configured for providing a current to the at least one anode assembly through a distinct anode rod for each anode assembly (see e.g. Figs. 7-8, current supply, i.e. buss, 290 providing current to each group of anodes 2 via a distinct current supply stub, i.e. rod, 295; Paragraph 0086, lines 1-6), the method comprising:
measuring a voltage drop using at least one pair of voltage probes located on the anode rod of each anode assembly, the voltage drop corresponding to a current flow in each anode assembly (see e.g. Paragraph 0086, lines 8-13, and Paragraph 0087, voltage probes provided along current supply stub, i.e. rod, to measure voltage drop associated with anode assembly indicative of the current through the anodes);
computing from the measured voltage a voltage drop derivative (see e.g. Paragraph 0100, lines 5-10, determined average voltage drop signal, rate of change in voltage drop signal or rate of voltage drop increase or decrease), wherein the voltage drop derivative is computed when the electrolytic cell comprises a plurality of anode assemblies (see e.g. Figs. 1A and 7, electrolytic cell 1 including one or more anode assemblies 101 including one or more groups of anodes 2); and
detecting the thermite reaction upon occurrence of one or more of: a voltage drop exceeding at least one voltage threshold level (see e.g. Paragraph 0098, lines 1-6, and Paragraph 0100, lines 1-8, thermite response signal indicative of thermite reaction generated when voltage drop signal exceeds voltage drop threshold such as an acceptable or upper range of voltage drop signals), wherein each voltage threshold level is a predetermined voltage drop previously associated with a thermic reaction (see e.g. Paragraph 0102); and a variation in the voltage drop derivative (see e.g. Paragraph 0100, lines 5-10, rate of voltage drop increase or decrease as the predetermined voltage drop threshold value).
Regarding claim 2, D’Astolfo discloses, upon detection of the thermite reaction, adjusting at least one operation parameter of the electrolytic cell to mitigate and/or suppress the thermite reaction (see e.g. Paragraphs 0106-0107).
Regarding claim 3, D’Astolfo discloses sending a signal to an operator of the electrolytic cell upon detection of a thermite reaction (see e.g. Paragraph 0035).
Regarding claim 4, D’Astolfo discloses the threshold voltage levels being based on past operational data of the electrolytic cell (see e.g. Paragraphs 0025 and 0102).
Regarding claim 5, D’Astolfo discloses the threshold voltage levels computer derived threshold levels derived from at least one of past operational data of the electrolytic cell, operation parameters, and composition of the electrolytic cell (see e.g. Paragraphs 0028 and 0101).
Regarding claim 6, D’Astolfo discloses the thermite reaction being detected when a variation in the voltage drop exceeds a threshold variation and/or the variation in the voltage drop derivative exceeds the threshold variation (see e.g. Paragraph 0098, lines 1-6, and Paragraph 0100, thermite reaction indicated by exceeding voltage drop threshold value which may be a rate of change in voltage drop signal and/or rate of change in voltage drop increase or decrease).
Regarding claim 7, D’Astolfo discloses adjusting the at least one operational parameter of the electrolytic cell to mitigate and/or suppress the thermite reaction comprising one or more of: changing an anode to cathode overlap (ACO) of one or more anode assemblies, removing one or more anode assemblies from the electrolytic bath, changing the current supplied to the one or more anode assemblies or the electrolytic cell, changing a temperature of the electrolytic bath, and changing a chemistry of the electrolytic bath (see e.g. Paragraphs 0037 and 0106).
Regarding claim 8, D’Astolfo discloses, when the voltage drop of the one or more anode assemblies exceeds the at least one voltage threshold level, adjusting at least one operational parameter of the electrolytic cell by taking into account one or more of the exceeded voltage threshold values (see e.g. Paragraphs 0104-0106, changes determined to be needed and effected by the control system upon the monitored voltage drop signal exceeding the voltage drop threshold).
Regarding claim 9, D’Astolfo discloses, upon detection of the thermite reaction, adjusting at least one operational parameter of the electrolytic cell by taking into account: a magnitude of the voltage drop and/or a magnitude of the voltage drop derivative (see e.g. Paragraphs 0099 and 0108, severity of changes effected by control system upon receiving thermite response signal commensurate with magnitude of voltage drop or magnitude of voltage drop increase).
Regarding claim 10, D’Astolfo discloses filtering the voltage drop (see e.g. Paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 11, D’Astolfo discloses a system for detecting a thermite reaction in an electrolytic cell (see e.g. Paragraph 0004) comprising at least one anode assembly of one or more metal-oxide-containing anodes (see e.g. Figs. 1A and 7, electrolytic cell 1 including one or more anode assemblies 101 including one or more groups of anodes 2 comprising metal oxides; Paragraphs 0083 and 0070), at least one cathode (see e.g. Fig. 1A, at least one cathode 3; Paragraph 0071, lines 3-4, and Paragraph 0040, lines 3-4), an electrolytic bath (see e.g. Fig. 1A, electrolytic bath 5; Paragraph 0071, lines 3-4), and a current supply buss configured for providing a current to the at least one anode assembly through a distinct anode rod for each anode assembly (see e.g. Figs. 7-8, current supply, i.e. buss, 290 providing current to each group of anodes 2 via a distinct current supply stub, i.e. rod, 295; Paragraph 0086, lines 1-6), the system comprising:
a measurement module comprising, for each of the at least one anode assembly, a pair of voltage probes located on the anode rod of the anode assembly for measuring a voltage drop, the voltage drop corresponding to a current flow in the anode assembly (see e.g. Paragraph 0086, lines 8-13, and Paragraph 0087, voltage probes provided along current supply stub, i.e. rod, to measure voltage drop associated with anode assembly indicative of the current through the anodes),
a processor module (see e.g. Fig. 1A, monitoring device 200; Paragraph 0071, lines 5-6) configured to:
compute from the measured voltage drop a voltage drop derivative (see e.g. Paragraph 0100, lines 5-10, determined average voltage drop signal, rate of change in voltage drop signal or rate of voltage drop increase or decrease), wherein the voltage drop derivative is computed when the electrolytic cell comprises a plurality of anode assemblies (see e.g. Figs. 1A and 7, electrolytic cell 1 including one or more anode assemblies 101 including one or more groups of anodes 2); and
detect the thermite reaction upon occurrence of one or more of: a voltage drop exceeding at least one voltage threshold level (see e.g. Paragraph 0098, lines 1-6, and Paragraph 0100, lines 1-8, thermite response signal indicative of thermite reaction generated when voltage drop signal exceeds voltage drop threshold such as an acceptable or upper range of voltage drop signals), wherein each voltage threshold level is a predetermined voltage drop previously associated with a thermic reaction (see e.g. Paragraph 0102); and a variation in the voltage drop derivative (see e.g. Paragraph 0100, lines 5-10, rate of voltage drop increase or decrease as the predetermined voltage drop threshold value).
Regarding claim 13, D’Astolfo discloses the threshold voltage levels being based on past operational data of the electrolytic cell (see e.g. Paragraphs 0025 and 0102).
Regarding claim 14, D’Astolfo discloses the threshold voltage levels computer derived threshold levels derived from at least one of past operational data of the electrolytic cell, operation parameters, and composition of the electrolytic cell (see e.g. Paragraphs 0028 and 0101).
Regarding claims 15-16, D’Astolfo discloses the processor module being configured to detect the thermite reaction when a variation in voltage drop exceeds a threshold variation and/or the variation in the voltage drop derivative exceeds the threshold variation (see e.g. Paragraph 0098, lines 1-6, and Paragraph 0100, thermite reaction indicated by exceeding voltage drop threshold value which may be a rate of change in voltage drop signal and/or rate of change in voltage drop increase or decrease).
Regarding claim 17, D’Astolfo discloses a control module operatively connected to the processor module (see e.g. Fig. 1A, pot control system 300 with which the monitoring device 200 communicates; Paragraph 0072, lines 4-5) configured to adjust at least one operational parameter of the electrolytic cell to mitigate and/or suppress the thermite reaction comprising one or more of: changing an anode to cathode overlap (ACO) of one or more anode assemblies, removing one or more anode assemblies from the electrolytic bath, changing the current supplied to the one or more anode assemblies or the electrolytic cell, changing a temperature of the electrolytic bath, and changing a chemistry of the electrolytic bath (see e.g. Paragraphs 0037 and 0106).
Regarding claim 18, D’Astolfo discloses, when the voltage drop of the one or more anode assemblies exceeds the at least one voltage threshold level, the process module being configured to adjust at least one operational parameter of the electrolytic cell by taking into account one or more of the exceeded voltage threshold values (see e.g. Paragraphs 0104-0106, changes determined to be needed and effected by the control system upon the monitored voltage drop signal exceeding the voltage drop threshold).
Regarding claim 19, D’Astolfo discloses, upon detection of the thermite reaction, the process module being configured to adjust at least one operational parameter of the electrolytic cell by taking into account: a magnitude of the voltage drop and/or a magnitude of the voltage drop derivative (see e.g. Paragraphs 0099 and 0108, severity of changes effected by control system upon receiving thermite response signal commensurate with magnitude of voltage drop or magnitude of voltage drop increase).
Regarding claim 20, D’Astolfo discloses the process module being further configured to filter the voltage drop (see e.g. Paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 21, D’Astolfo discloses an electrolytic cell comprising the system for detecting a thermite reaction as claimed in claim 11 (see e.g. Paragraph 0004 and rejection of claim 11 cited above), the at least one anode assembly of the one or more metal-oxide-containing anodes (see e.g. Figs. 1A and 7, electrolytic cell 1 including one or more anode assemblies 101 including one or more groups of anodes 2 comprising metal oxides; Paragraphs 0083 and 0070), the at least one cathode (see e.g. Fig. 1A, at least one cathode 3; Paragraph 0071, lines 3-4, and Paragraph 0040, lines 3-4), the electrolytic bath (see e.g. Fig. 1A, electrolytic bath 5; Paragraph 0071, lines 3-4), and the current supply buss providing the current to the at least one anode assembly through the distinct anode rod for each anode assembly (see e.g. Figs. 7-8, current supply, i.e. buss, 290 providing current to each group of anodes 2 via a distinct current supply stub, i.e. rod, 295; Paragraph 0086, lines 1-6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Astolfo in view of Evans et al. (U.S. 2006/0176175).
Regarding claim 12, D’Astolfo teaches all the elements of the system of claim 11 as stated above. D’Astolfo further teaches the process module sending a signal to an operator of the electrolytic cell upon detection of the thermite reaction (see e.g. Paragraphs 0035 and 0118). D’Astolfo does not explicitly teach a network interface module operatively connected to the processor module for sending the signal.
Evans teaches a sensing system for sensing conditions or characteristics associated with an aluminum reduction process in a Hall-Heroult cell (see e.g. Paragraph 0007, lines 1-5) comprising a base station implemented via a computer which sends and receives signals among a network of nodes, i.e. as a network interface, and can provide data from the nodes and reports on condition to human operators (see e.g. Paragraph 0085, lines 1-13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the processor module of the system of D’Astolfo to comprise a base station which sends and receives signals, i.e. as a network interface, as taught by Evans as a particular suitable means of providing reports of cell condition, such as the signal indicating detection of the thermite reaction, to a human operator. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 9-11, Applicant argues that D’Astolfo does not disclose or suggest measuring a voltage drop using at least one pair of voltage probes on the distinct anode rod of each anode assembly, instead only teaching voltage probes being present on a distribution plate or on each individual anode within an anode group or generally disclosing locations where voltage probes may be. This is not considered persuasive. D’Astolfo discloses each group of anodes, i.e. anode assembly, comprising a current stub through which current is supplied, equivalent to the claimed anode rod (see e.g. Figs. 7-8, current supply, i.e. buss, 290 providing current to each group of anodes 2 via a distinct current supply stub, i.e. rod, 295; Paragraph 0086, lines 1-6). D’Astolfo then discloses that voltage probes, i.e. at least two, may be provided in one or more regions or the anode assembly, such as along the current supply stub, to measure the voltage drop in said region (see e.g. Paragraph 0086, lines 8-13, and Paragraph 0087, voltage probes provided along current supply stub, i.e. rod, to measure voltage drop associated with anode assembly indicative of the current through the anodes). Further supporting the presence of at least a pair of voltage probes, D’Astolfo discloses that voltage drop may be measured with probes between more than one, e.g. two, measuring points on a voltage drop measurement location (see e.g. Paragraph 0079). Though D’Astolfo described benefits arising from measuring voltage drop between different structures, that does not mean it teaches away from the other disclosed embodiments of two measurement points on the same structure, the measurement between different structures having its own drawbacks including more required signals and attachment sites (see e.g. Paragraph 0081).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Berry (U.S. Patent No. 3,871,984) discloses an apparatus for detection of an abnormal condition in an alumina reduction cell, wherein an anode current for the detection can be measured based on a voltage differential, i.e. voltage drop, across two measuring leads connected at separate points along an anode stem, i.e. rod.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOFOLUWASO S JEBUTU whose telephone number is (571)272-1919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.S.J./Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights