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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/30/2026 and 08/03/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final rejection on 05/28/2026. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 08/28/2026. These drawings are accepted.
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.
Claims 10-12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Astoria et al (US 2020/0385827 A1) in view of Rosenfellner (US 2001/0027700 A1).
Astoria et al in view of Rosenfellner is applied as discussed in the office action mailed 05/28/2026.
Regarding Claim 18, the limitation of “consisting essentially of carbon dioxide” is an intended use of the system as claimed. The manner of operating the device, or system as claimed, does not differentiate apparatus claims from the prior art. See MPEP § 2114.
Claims 10-12, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Astoria et al (US 2020/0385827 A1) in view of CN 205368416 U, based on the machine translation and the original document.
Astoria et al is applied as discussed in the office action mailed 05/28/2026. However, Astoria et al does not teach a source of carbon dioxide or that the charging arrangement comprises a pressurizable charge hopper as claimed.
CN 205368416 U (CN ‘416) teaches a loading installation for a shaft furnace as represented below in the annotated drawing:
PNG
media_image1.png
260
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The “pans” are high pressure batch cans as the transition apparatus at the hopper [0006], which reads on the claimed charging arrangement. The “pans” connects with the shaft furnace [0011]. The sealing gas fills the “pans” [0014]. The second stop valves read on the claimed seal gas inlet. The seal gas can be CO2 from an extraneous source of gas [0034], which reads on a fluid connection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the loading installation of CN ‘416 with the system of Astoria, since CN ’416 teaches a loading installation that avoids serviceability and reducing maintenance costs [0022].
Regarding Claim 12, neither Astoria et al nor CN ‘416 teaches a reformer.
Regarding Claim 13, neither Astoria et al nor CN ‘416 teaches a device for carbon dioxide capture.
Regarding Claim 18, CN ‘416 teaches the sealing gas is carbon dioxide.
Regarding Claim 19, CN ‘416 teaches an ore bin as the hopper, ore outlet taught by the first baiting valves, the inlet of the direct reduction shaft is taught by the second baiting valves, the seal gas inlet as the aerating pipe, and a gas outlet as the relief valve. As taught by CN’ 416, the ore outlet, inlet, seal gas inlet, and gas outlet are all in “communication” in CN ‘416 since they are all part of the “pans.”
Response to Arguments
The examiner notes applicant’s amendments to the abstract. The objection to the specification is withdrawn. The drawings received on 08/28/2026 overcomes the objection to the drawings.
Applicant's arguments filed 08/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to the rejection of Claims 10-12 over Astoria et al in view of Rosenfellner.
Applicant argues that Rosenfellner fails to teach or suggest at least an iron ore charging arrangement comprising a pressurizable charge hopper having a seal gas inlet fluidly connected to the source of carbon dioxide. Claim 10 does not recite an inlet to the charge hopper. The recitation “pressurizable” is described in Claim 10 as comprising “a seal gas inlet ... arranged in fluid connection with the source of carbon dioxide.” In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the inlet to the charge hopper) are not recited in the rejected claim. 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). Rosenfellner teaches a seal gas inlet and a fluid connection to a source of carbon dioxide as claimed.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Tima M. McGuthry-Banks whose telephone number is (571)272-2744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:00 am to 3:00 pm.
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 D. 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.
Tima M. McGuthry-Banks
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1733
/Tima M. McGuthry-Banks/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights