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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 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 § 112
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.
Claims 17-18 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the cooling gas" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 is rejected based on its dependency from claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10-12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Breese Jr. (US 1,629,253).
With respect to claim 10 Breese discloses a process for reducing production of NOx gases at a burner, the process comprising: injecting a fuel gas into a combustion zone [via fuel injector G]; injecting a combustion air into the combustion zone [via fan B2], wherein the combustion air and the fuel gas react and produce a flame and a flue gas in the combustion zone; recovering a portion of the flue gas from a radiant section of the combustion chamber [via “a duct”, see annotated Fig. below] comprising a combustion zone with the flame, as a recycled flue gas to be mixed with the fuel gas [see Fig. 1] to form a mixture injected into the burner; and cooling, in a heat exchanger1 [see annotated Fig. below], the recycled flue gas with the combustion air.
PNG
media_image1.png
454
776
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11 Breese discloses mixing the recycled flue gas with a cooling gas [via E and E1 in Fig. 1] before the recycled flue gas is mixed with the fuel gas.
With respect to claim 12 Breese discloses that the cooling gas comprises air [see Fig. 1].
With respect to claim 14 Breese discloses adjusting a flow rate of the cooling gas [pp. 1 lines 92-109].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breese Jr. (US 1,629,253) in view of Rampley et. al (US 4,995,807).
With respect to claim 1 Breese discloses a burner configured to receive a fuel gas and a combustion air which react and produce a flame and a flue gas in a combustion zone, the burner comprising: a duct [see annotated Fig. below] configured to remove a portion of the flue gas from a radiant section of the combustion chamber, comprising a combustion zone with the flame, as a recycled flue gas, and a heat exchanger [see annotated Fig. below], wherein the heat exchanger receives the combustion air and the recycled flue gas and is configured to transfer heat from the recycled flue gas to the combustion air2. Breese discloses that that the fuel is mixed with the recycled flue gas upstream of the combustion zone [see annotated Fig. below].
Breese does not disclose that the fuel and flue gas are admixed with combustion air upstream of the combustion zone.
Rampley discloses a furnace having a burner [reference character 118] where flue gas [via reference character 134] is premixed with fuel [in reference character 142] and combustion air [see annotated Fig. below] prior to being injected into the burner.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the burner taught by Breese by premixing the fuel and flue gas with air prior to admission to the burner assembly, as taught by Rampley, in order to improve mixture homogeneity in the burner [column 2 lines 20-24 of Rampley].
PNG
media_image1.png
454
776
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
300
599
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2 Breese discloses an inlet [see E and E1 in Fig. 1] configured to provide a cooling gas to the recycled flue gas, wherein the cooling gas is provided to the recycled flue gas upstream of the mixing of the recycled flue gas with the fuel gas and the combustion air.
With respect to claim 3 Breese discloses that the cooling gas comprises air [see Fig. 1 of Breese].
With respect to claim 4 Breese discloses that the inlet is formed as an end of a conduit [see Fig. 1 of Breese].
With respect to claim 7 Breese discloses that a portion of the recycled flue gas is mixed with at least a portion of the combustion air upstream of the heat exchanger [via E and E1].
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breese Jr. (US 1,629,253) in view Rampley et. al (US 4,995,807) and further in view of Carson et. al (US 3,854,455).
With respect to claim 8 Breese and Rampley do not disclose at least one sensor configured to measure a condition of a mixture of the recycled flue gas.
Carson discloses a heating system that includes a flue gas recirculation pathway [reference character 27 that includes a damper [reference character 33] connected to a temperature controller [reference character 30] and temperature sensor [reference character 29], control of the damper via temperature controller 30 and sensor 29 allows for control over the flame temperature.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Breese and Rampley by including a temperature sensor in the flue, a temperature controller, and a damper for the recirculated flue gas, as taught by Carson, in order to allow for control over the flame temperature.
Claim(s) 15 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breese Jr. (US 1,629,253) in view of Carson et. al (US 3,854,455).
With respect to claim 15 Breese does not disclose the flow rate is adjusted based on a condition of a mixture of the recycled flue gas and the cooling gas.
Carson discloses a heating system that includes a flue gas recirculation pathway [reference character 27 that includes a damper [reference character 33] connected to a temperature controller [reference character 30] and temperature sensor [reference character 29], control of the damper via temperature controller 30 and sensor 29 allows for control over the flame temperature.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Breese and Rampley by including a temperature sensor in the flue, a temperature controller, and a damper in recirculation line 13 of Hardison for the recirculated flue gas, as taught by Carson, in order to allow for control over the flame temperature.
With respect to claim 19 Breese discloses adjusting a flow rate of the recycled flue gas [pp. 1 lines 92-109].
With respect to claim 20 the combination of Breese and Carson disclose the flow rate is adjusted based on a condition of a mixture of the recycled flue gas and the cooling gas [see rejection for claim 15, where, in combination, the damper is placed in recirculation line 13].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 9, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIVEK K SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)272-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:20AM.
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, Steven B 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.
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
1 The co-axial arrangement between the central flue gas and annular air is interpreted to be a co-flow or co-current heat exchanger.
2 The co-axial arrangement between the central flue gas and annular air is interpreted to be a co-flow or co-current heat exchanger.