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 .
Specification
Abstract
The abstract reads: A furnace, including: a metallic pot, for housing fire; and means for cooling the metallic pot, the means being a water tank attaching an external wall of the metallic pot and/or an air blower, for producing an airstream attaching an internal wall of the metallic pot. It appears the use of the word “attaching” makes the abstract statement confusing and should be replaced with “attached to”.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification includes several misleading numerical labeling for example:
(i) in page 3, line 18, the label (52) is used to designate “water pipes”, in page 4, line 11, label (52) is used to designate “an opening”, and in page 4, lines 19-20, the label (52) is used to designate “water inlet opening”; and furthermore, in page 7, line 1, the label (52) is used to designate “water pipe”.
(ii) in page 4, the label (44) is used to designate “a pipe” in line 11, and “a cooling pipe” in line 19.
The specification page 4, lines 4-8, includes the description “Airstreams 62A and 62B block fire 66 from attaching internal wall 74B, thus decreasing the heating thereof”. Airstreams 62A and 62B are directed downwards toward bottom 72 of pot 36, thus they meet at the center of bottom 72 and join to an airstream 62C directed upwards. Thus, airstream 62C lift fire 66 away from bottom 72, thus not attaching it and less heating it”. The language construction of this portion of the specification together with the use of the word “attaching” appears confusing because it lacks clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is further objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter in claim 7, calling for “a chimney; and a system comprising electromagnetic coils, for turning smoke exiting said chimney to gas fuel, for flowing thereof into said pot”. It appears the specification does not provide any clear description for the concept of “turning smoke exiting said chimney to gas fuel”.
See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 5, it is suggested to replace “at least one water tank attaching an external wall of said metallic pot” with -- at least one water tank attached to an external wall of said metallic pot--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing
a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a
rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35
U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable
presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The term “means” has not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it has modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. In this instant case the term “means” includes or modified by at least one of the following structures: water tank and air blower for performing the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-7 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 1, recites the limitation in lines 6-7, “at least one air blower, for producing an airstream attaching an internal wall of said metallic pot”. In particular it is unclear as to what the phrase “for producing an airstream attaching an internal wall of said metallic pot” means, because from the manner in which the phrase is recited, it is unclear if it is intended to mean that (i) the blower for producing the airstream is attached to an internal wall of the metallic pot or (ii) the airstream produced is attached to an internal wall of the metallic pot. The claim is therefore rendered indefinite because the scope is unascertainable.
Claim 7, recites the limitation “a chimney; and a system comprising electromagnetic coils, for turning smoke exiting said chimney to gas fuel, for flowing thereof into said pot”. In particular, it is unclear from the manner in which the claim is set forth, how the smoke exiting the chimney turns to gas fuel; particular since the specification appears to provide no clear direction or description for the concept of “turning smoke exiting said chimney to gas fuel”. Furthermore, the claim lacks essential
structural features that cooperate with the electromagnetic coil for turning the smoke exiting said chimney to gas fuel. The scope of the claim is therefore unascertainable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/ 103
9. 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.
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.
10. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in
the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Lai et al. (CN 106895578, also see the English Machine Translation Version “EMTV”).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Lai et al. teaches a biomass hot stove that comprises a furnace body (1, see figure 2 and the “EMTV”: abstract and description), the furnace body comprising: a metallic pot (i.e., furnace hearth (2), see figure 1 and the “EMTV”: description) for housing a grate (7, see figure 1), with said grate serving as a supporting surface for the biomass material used as energy source or fuel for producing fire; and means for cooling said metallic pot consisting of: at least at least one air blower (4, see figure 1, and the “EMTV”: abstract and description) attached to the metallic pot or hearth (2) for producing an airstream conducted through a spiral heat conduction tube (8, see figure 1, and the “EMTV”: abstract and description).
With respect to the cooling means, Lai et al. does not expressly teach a water tank directly attached to the metallic pot or hearth (2) as claimed, however teaches a water heat extraction system (see figures 1 and 3, and the “EMTV”: abstract and description) in fluid communication with an annular heat conducting cavity (3 see figure 1, and the “EMTV”: description) surrounding the metallic pot or hearth (2) of the furnace body; wherein the heat extraction system includes a water injector (19, see figure 3, and “EMTV”: description and claim 1 ) and a water pipe (23, see figure 3 and “EMTV”: description and claim 1) having heat collecting sheet (21, see figure 3 and “EMTV”: description and claim 1 ) attached; and wherein said heat extraction system is configured for circulating cooling water and extracting heat accumulated in the annular heat conducting cavity (3 see figure 1, and the “EMTV”: description) from the heat
generated from the metallic pot or hearth (2) by burning the biomass material.
Because the water heat extraction system and the blower of Lai et al., cooperatively performs the same function as the claimed cooling means; the apparatus of Lai et al., is deemed functionally equivalent to the claimed furnace, absent any evidence to the contrary.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Lai et al. teaches two means for extracting heat from the furnace comprising: a water heat extraction system that comprises a water injector (19, see figure 3, and “EMTV”: description and claim 1) and a water pipe (23, see figure 3 and “EMTV”: description and claim 1) having heat collecting sheet (21, see figure 3 and “EMTV”: description and claim 1), and heat extraction by airstream using an air blower (4, see figure 1, and the “EMTV”: abstract and description); and both systems attached to an outer wall of the metallic pot or hearth (2) but at different positions. It is noted that because the water heat extraction system and the airstream heat extraction of Lai et al. are disposed at different positions on the outer wall of the metallic pot or hearth (2); reasonably meets the requirement of a peripheral arrangement about the metallic pot or hearth (2); particularly since the drawings of the instant claimed invention do not show the water tank and the air blower completely encircling the melting pot.
Regarding claim 5, Lai et al. in figure 1 shows the metallic pot or hearth (2) being cylindrical with a rounded bottom.
Regarding claim 6, Lai et al. teaches a furnace further comprising an air
compressor (18, see figure 2, “EMTV”: description and claim 1) for compressing air into metallic pot or hearth (2).
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim (US 2012/0227728), Hottenroth et al. (US 3,868,943), Walker et asl. (US 7,284,550), Hatanaka et al. (JPH08326522) and Svenson (EP0446193) are also cited in PTO-892.
12. 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