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 .
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, the process chamber of the first cooling zone, recites in claim 1 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
3. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the
specification is informal in it’s arrangement and should be amended to place the
specification in a form more in accordance with current U.S. practice. The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A COMPACT DISC OR AS A TEXT FILE VIA THE OFFICE ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM (EFS-WEB).
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR
A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37
CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
The disclosure is also objected to because of the following informalities:
(i) the specification in page 1, makes reference to specific claim number (i.e., claim 1), however, during prosecution, claim numbers do change due to amendment.
(ii) in the specification, page 8, lines 16-17, “a temperature level of the deflection device 9” should be a temperature level of the deflection device 6”, for structure labelling consistency with the rest of the specification.
(iii) in the specification page 9, line 20, “at least one sealing device 24 and/or 8” is in error because the label “8” is used in already used in the rest of the specification to designate “outlet zone 8”.
(iv) in the specification page 9, lines 16 and 23 “the outlet zone 4” should be “the outlet zone 8”, for structure labelling consistency with the rest of the specification.
(V) in the specification page 11, line 20, line 6, “the deflection device 10” should
be “the deflection device 6” because the label “10” is already used in the rest of the
specification to designate “housing 10” of the deflection device. Appropriate correction is
required.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 1-2, it is suggested to replace “the continuous heat treatment” with --a continuous heat treatment--.
In claim 1, lines 13 and 15, it is suggested to replace “the first cooling zone (5)” with --the at least one first cooling zone (5) --; for claim language consistency.
In claim 1, lines 15-17, it is suggested to replace “wherein a lateral surface, which faces the cooling/heating chamber (28), of a wall (29) surrounding the process chamber is acted upon by the cooling fluid (27)” with -- wherein a lateral surface, which faces the cooling/heating chamber (28), of a wall (29) enclosing the process chamber is acted upon by the cooling fluid (27)--, in that the word “surrounding” is very broad and could mean a nearby wall of the process chamber, which changes the meaning of the claim.
Claim 14, recites the limitation “and at least one temperature measuring device (35) for measuring the cooling fluid (27) flowing into the cooling/heating chamber (28)” in lines 4-6. It appears this limitation was intended to be -- and at least one temperature measuring device (35) for measuring a temperature of the cooling fluid (27) flowing into the cooling/heating chamber (28) --. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
6. Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ),
second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 18 and 28, the term "in particular" in claim 1 renders the claims indefinite since a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) is considered indefinite, since the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In this instant case, as in:
Claim 1: “a metal strip (2), in particular an electrical steel strip”.
Claim 3: “at least one process chamber, in particular a metallically encapsulated process chamber”.
Claim 7: “a gas or a gas mixture, in particular air”.
Claim 9: “fresh cooling fluid, in particular fresh air”.
Claim 11: “one flow machine (32), in particular a blower”.
Claim 18: “an inert gas, in particular H2”.
Claim 28: “an inert gas atmosphere, in particular a hydrogen and/or nitrogen
atmosphere”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the process chamber" in line 15. There is
insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because
it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed
invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the temperature" in line 3. There is insufficient
antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the temperature" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the temperature3" at the beginning of line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because claim 13 from which this claim depends from does not recite “a temperature of the cooling medium (27)”.
Claim 15, recites the limitation “wherein the vertical furnace is configured to change the temperature of the cooling medium (27) flowing into the cooling/heating chamber (28)”. The claim is indefinite in that it recites the phrase “configured to change the temperature” without reciting how and what manner said temperature is change. Furthermore, by what structure said temperature change is executed, particularly since the term “configured” does not necessarily provide sufficient structure for carrying out said claimed temperature change of the cooling medium (27).
Claim 23, recites the limitation “wherein at least one roller arrangement (7) of the deflection device (6) is configured for center control of the metal strip”. it is unclear what “center control” means; particular since said phrase is not clearly define in the specification, thereby rendering the scope of the claim indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 1-30 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the
rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
8. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Kajima et al. (JPH04311537, also see the Espacenet English Machine Translation Version (EEMTV): Abstract and Description) is the closest prior art directed to a vertical annealing furnace. Kajima et al. teaches vertical furnace (see figure 1 and EEMTV: English abstract) for the continuous heat treatment of a metal or steel strip (see figure 1 and EEMTV: abstract), wherein the vertical furnace, as seen in a conveying direction of the metal strip, comprises: an inlet zone (see figure 1) for the metal strip; a heating/holding zone (21, see figure 1 and EEMTV: abstract and Description, para [0007], [0009]) with an annealing chamber for heating and holding the metal strip at a certain temperature; at least one first cooling zone (20, see figure 1 and EEMTV: abstract and Description, para [0007], [0009]) for cooling the metal strip; - at least one deflection device (i.e., the non-contact floating device 13 reads on the deflection device since it turns the upwardly moving steel strip downwardly in the direction of the outlet zone of the vertical furnace see figure 1 and EEMTV: abstract and Description, para [0007], [0009]) arranged downstream of the first cooling zone (20) for deflecting the metal strip in the direction of an outlet zone (see figure 1) for the metal strip, and wherein at least one second cooling zone (22a, see figure 1 and EEMTV: abstract and Description, para [0007], [0009]) is arranged downstream of the deflection device 13) with respect to the conveying direction (see figure 1).
Kajima et al., however differs from the instant claimed invention by failing to teach and/or adequately suggest a first cooling zone that is configured as a radiation cooling zone for the metal strip, wherein a cooling/heating chamber through which a cooling fluid flows is arranged around a process chamber of the first cooling zone, and wherein a lateral surface, which faces the cooling/heating chamber, of a wall enclosing the process chamber is acted upon by the cooling fluid; and other claimed features.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nagata et al. (US 5,588,828), Sato (US 9,713,823), Raick et al. (US 7,384,489), Takeda et al. (US 12,031,192) and Ebner et al. (US 11,578,921) are also cited in PTO-892.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ABOAGYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8165. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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.A/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/JESSEE R ROE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759