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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/04/2023 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Please refer to applicant’s copy of the 1449 herewith.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 4-12 in the reply filed on 12/11/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-3 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in reply filed on 12/11/2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the minor informalities listed below:
Figures 1-27, should be labelled as “FIG. X” not as “FIGURE X”. Example: FIG. 2 .
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. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretations
Regarding Claims 11 and 12 - do not require Sn (tin) as Sn is considered an optional limitation due to the formula from claim 8 allowing “c” to be zero.
Regarding Claim 7 - the phrase “wherein the reaction occurs at a temperature in the range of 850°C to 950°C” is understood to mean 850°C to 950°C inclusive.
Examiner Note: A method is defined as a series of actions (MPEP 2106 (I), i.e., “processes…defines “actions”; inventions that consist of a series of steps or acts to be performed). Thus, since methods are defined by actions, the method is given weight only to the extent that it impacts the method in a manipulative sense. See Ex parte Pfeiffer, 135 USPQ 31, noting “recited structural limitations must affect method in manipulative sense and not amount to mere claiming of a use of a particular structure”. Listed below are structural limitations:
Regarding Claim 11 – “wherein MI is Cu or Ti, MII is Sn, 0.1 < b ≤ 1 and 0 ≤ c <0.9.”. The claim is merely a structural outcome of the method.
Claim Objections
The below are in the form read/Examiner suggestion:
Regarding Claim 4 – at aa temperature/ at a and a
Regarding Claim 5 – one or more transition metal/one or more transition metal oxide; a vitreous material/the vitreous material.
Regarding Claim 7 – in the range of/ in a range of.
Regarding Claim 12 - comprises an alkaline earth metal silicate/ comprises
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 5 , 10 , and 12 is/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.
Regarding Claim 5, the limitation ,
“alkaline carbonate powder” is cited. There is
insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests applicants intended
to recite “ alkaline earth carbonate powder”;
Regarding Claim 5, the term “finely” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “finely” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear if the word “finely” means particles in the ground mixture of a) a certain size, b) a size range c) or a maximum size, and those skilled in the art may have different interpretations of the meaning of the word “finely”.
Parameters, quantities and limitations rendered indefinite by using the word “finely”:
finely ground mixture.
For the purposes of prosecution and prior art, the Examiner understands “finely” to mean a ground
mixture where particles in the mixture are less than, but not limited to, 1mm.
Regarding Claims 5, 10 and 12 – the limitation “mixed” or “mixing” borosilicate powder” is cited. It is
unclear how “mixed” or “mixing” relates to the method of “reacting” in Claim in Claim 4, rendering
the instant claim indefinite.
All dependent claims not cited but dependent on the independent and dependent claims above are also hereby rejected.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 4-9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (as submitted in the IDS dated 05/04/2023) (English language translation of the Description and provided herewith and referenced herein) CN107555767A by Wang et. al. (herein “Wang”).
Regarding Claim 4, Wang teaches a process for the preparation of one or more alkaline earth metal
silicates by,
reacting a vitreous material; Page 4 line 8…”by weight of borosilicate glass waste and rinse
with water and drain for use.”
and an alkaline earth carbonate; Page 4 lines 13-14, “…7 parts by weight of calcium carbonate
powder…”
optionally in the presence of a transition metal or post-transition metal oxide;
at a
heating temperature is 900°C…”.
to form a composite consisting of,
one or more alkaline earth metal silicates; Page 4 lines 13-15, 20, “100 parts by weight of
water, 21 parts by weight of sodium carbonate powder, 7 parts by weight of calcium
carbonate powder, 6 parts by weight of sodium sulfate powder, 30 parts by weight of water
glass, and uniformly mixed to obtain a mixture”. Calcium in an alkaline earth. Water glass is,
as one skilled in the art would know, is sodium silicate.
and,
a
oxide: 76.2% of silica, 13.6% of boron oxide, 3.1% of alumina, 1.6% of sodium oxide, 3.2% of
lithium oxide, 2.3% of calcium oxide, oxidation.钡 0.2%, bismuth trioxide 0.5%.” As one skilled
in the art would know borosilicate glasses have very high melting temperatures that are much
greater than 900°C. As such, borosilicate glass in the composite would remain separate, or
residual, in reference to other components in the mixture.
and ,
optionally recovering the one or more silicates.
Regarding Claim 5 – Wang in the rejection of claim 4 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 4.
Wang further teaches wherein,
a vitreous material in a powder form; Page 4 lines 10-11, “The borosilicate glass waste which
has been washed and drained in step (1) is crushed in a crusher into glass
particles having a particle size of D90 of less than 10 μm;
alkaline carbonate powder; Page 4 lines 13-15, “ 7 parts by weight of calcium
carbonate powder,
and optionally one or more transition metal or post-transition metal oxide powders;
are mixed, and the mixture is subjected to at least one cycle of particle size reduction, to form a
finely ground mixture; Page 4 lines 17-18, “The mixture obtained…is added to a centrifugal
granulator for granulation, and the spherical particles are obtained and dried…”
Regarding Claim 6 – Wang in the rejection of claim 4 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 4.
Wang further teaches wherein,
the vitreous material is in the form of borosilicate glass powder; Page 4 lines 10-11, “The
borosilicate glass waste which has been washed and drained in step (1) is crushed in a crusher
into glass particles having a particle size of D90 of less than 10 μm…”
Regarding Claim 7 – Wang in the rejection of claim 6 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 6.
Wang further teaches wherein,
the reaction occurs at a temperature in the range of 850°C to 950°C; Wang teaches the instant
claim in Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 8 - Wang in the rejection of claim 4 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 4.
Wang further teaches wherein the alkaline earth metal silicate has the formula Ma MIb MIIc SidOe in
which,
M is an alkaline earth metal Ca, Sr or Ba, and a is 1 or 2;
MI is a transition metal, and b is from 0 to 1, inclusive;
MII is a post transition metal, and c is from 0 to 1, inclusive;
such that the sum of b and c equals 0 or 1;
d is an integer in the range from 1 to 5, inclusive; and e is an integer in the range from 3 to 10,
inclusive.
Using the Wang formulation, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to ascertain the below:
The total mass of the mixture is 1064 parts by weight. The composition of the borosilicate glass is given in weight percent, so 1000 parts borosilicate glass contain:
SiO2: 1000×0.762=762 parts
B2O3: 1000×0.136=136 parts
Al2O3: 1000×0.031=31 parts
Na2O: 1000×0.016=16 parts
Li2O: 1000×0.032=32 parts
CaO: 1000×0.023=23 parts
BaO (oxidation.钡): 1000×0.002=2 parts (钡 = barium)
Bi2O3: 1000×0.005=5 parts
Additional components added:
Na2CO3: 21 parts
CaCO3: 7 parts
Na2SO4: 6 parts Water glass: 30 parts ( sodium silicate = Na2O⋅SiO2⋅H2O) contributing 30 parts of Na2O and SiO2 and H2O.
After heating to 900°C which eliminates water and CO2 gases, there remain 30 parts of CaO (calcium oxide) available for a stoichiometric combination of 30 parts of SiO2 in a ratio of 1:1, as the formula requires specific stoichiometric compounds. Therefore,
30CaO:30SiO2 = CaO:SiO2 which provides CaSiO3; the most common and stable form of calcium silicate ( wollastonite, or calcium metasilicate, whose chemical formula is CaSiO3). The formula CaSiO3 meets all the requirements of the instant claim as both “b” and “c” can be zero.
` Regarding Claim 9 - Wang in the rejection of claim 8 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 8.
Wang further teaches wherein ,
b and c both equal zero; Wang teaches the instant claim in Claim 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (as submitted in the IDS dated 05/04/2023) (English language translation of the Description and provided herewith and referenced herein) CN107555767A by Wang et. al. (herein “Wang”) and in further view of SK500302018U1 by Mika et. al. (herein “Mika”) (English language translation of the Description and provided herewith and referenced herein).
Regarding Claim 10 - Wang in the rejection of claim 9 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 9.
Wang teaches BaO available in the borosilicate glass powder composition (See Claim 8) that is available to bond with SiO2 in a stoichiometric fashion during reaction. Wang also teaches a preparation process for hollow glass spheres that includes:
producing hollow glass spheres due to foaming agents (expansion material).
carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent CaCO3.
borosilicate waste glass powder.
water glass in the formulation.
processing temperature of 900°C.
But Wang fails to teach,
mixing borosilicate glass powder and barium carbonate powder
In an analogous endeavor of using alkaline earth carbonates as a foaming (expanding) agent in combination with ground glass waste to prepare foam glass, Mika teaches,
a) closed pore foam glass ([0023], lines 1-2).
b) carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent powders of Calcium, Magnesium, Barium and Strontium ([0023] lines 6-8).
c) waste glass flour that can be borosilicate and packaging glass (soda-lime) among many types of glass ([0023], line 3; [0042] lines 1-2).
d) water glass in the mixture ([0027]).
e) processing temperature of the mixture of 700°C-1000°C ([0276], lines 1-4).
Items a-e above provide a nexus. Further, Mika teaches for all examples,
soda-lime glass was used [0054].
calcium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent was used [0079].
water glass used for example sets 5 and 6 [0133].
where P5-2 used calcium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent and magnesium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent [0217].
Mika teaches the use of a calcium carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent powder and an alternative (magnesium carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent) in a mixture with soda-lime glass flour (that could be borosilicate glass alternatively) processed between 700°C-1000°C. Mika discloses the claimed invention except for specific use of barium carbonate alkaline earth metal powder mixed with a borosilicate glass powder. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the of barium carbonate alkaline earth metal powder of Mika to replace the calcium carbonate powder of the process of Wang, and mix with the borosilicate glass powder of Wang, as one would be motivated to do so for the purpose of increasing the foaming temperature for glass powders with higher viscosity, as noted by Mika([0025], lines 13-15).
Wang fails to teach,
to form a composite consisting of BaSi2O5 and residual glass.
Mikafurther teaches a mixture of a certain quantity of the carbonate alkaline earth metal and a certain quantity of glass flour from waste glass ([0023]). Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art would know that a combination of a carbonate alkaline earth metal and a glass powder processed in the range of 700°C-1000°C produces an alkaline earth metal and residual glass, as this is a standard practice in the art. Mika discloses the claimed invention except for the alkaline earth metal silicate BaSi2O5 . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the formulation for the amount barium carbonate alkaline earth metal and SiO2 to provide stoichiometric BaSi2O5, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to optimize the formulation for the amount barium carbonate alkaline earth metal and SiO2 to provide stoichiometric BaSi2O5 for the purpose of obtaining a stable composite due to the stable form of BaSi2O5. Further, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235.
Regarding Claim 11 - Wang in the rejection of claim 8 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 8.
Note: Wang teaches CaSiO3 in Claim 8.
Wang teaches that the invention has advantages because the borosilicate glass is widely used in the industries of solar energy, chemical industry, medical packaging, electric light source, craft jewelry and the like due to its excellent physical and chemical properties. Wang also teaches a preparation process for hollow glass spheres that includes:
producing hollow glass spheres due to foaming agents (expansion material).
carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent CaCO3.
borosilicate waste glass powder.
water glass in the formulation.
processing temperature of 900°C.
But Wang fails to teach wherein,
MI is Cu or Ti, MII is Sn, 0.1 < b ≤ 1 and 0 ≤ c <0.9.
Mika teaches,
a) closed pore foam glass ([0023], lines 1-2).
b) carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent powders of Calcium, Magnesium, Barium and Strontium ([0023] lines 6-8).
c) waste glass flour that can be borosilicate and packaging glass (soda-lime) among many types of glass ([0023], line 3; [0042] lines 1-2).
d) water glass in the mixture ([0027]).
e) processing temperature of the mixture of 700°C-1000°C ([0276], lines 1-4).
Items a-e above provide a nexus. Further, Mika teaches for all examples,
soda-lime glass was used [0054].
calcium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent was used [0079].
water glass used for example sets 5 and 6 [0133].
where P5-2 used calcium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent and magnesium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent [0217].
where P6-2 contains all the elements of P5-2 ([0233] lines 1-3) with the addition of a quantity CuO ([0251], lines 5-6)
Mika teaches the use of a calcium carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent powder (CaCO3) which is in a mixture with soda-lime glass flour (that could be borosilicate glass alternatively), water glass (N20 * SiO2) and CuO processed between 700°C-1000°C that would support the formation of CaSiO3 (P5-2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention add the CuO of Mika to process of Wang to create a CaCu-type alkaline earth metal silicate with b=1 and c=0, and mix with the borosilicate glass powder of Wang, as one would be motivated to do so for the purpose of adding a green colorant (for possibly a Wang noted craft jewelry application), as noted by Mika ([0251], lines 5-6) .
Regarding Claim 12 – Wang and Mika in the rejection of claim 11 above teaches all of the limitations of claim 11.
Wang teaches BaO available in the borosilicate glass powder composition (See Claim 8) that is available to bond with SiO2 in a stoichiometric fashion during reaction. Wang also teaches a preparation process for hollow glass spheres that includes:
producing hollow glass spheres due to foaming agents (expansion material).
carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent CaCO3.
borosilicate waste glass powder.
water glass in the formulation.
processing temperature of 900°C.
But Wang fails to teach wherein,
the composite prepared comprises an alkaline earth metal silicate selected from the group consisting of: BaCuSi2O6, BaCuSi4O10.
Mika teaches,
a) closed pore foam glass ([0023], lines 1-2).
b) carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent powders of Calcium, Magnesium, Barium and Strontium ([0023] lines 6-8).
c) waste glass flour that can be borosilicate and packaging glass (soda-lime) among many types of glass ([0023], line 3; [0042] lines 1-2).
d) water glass in the mixture ([0027]).
e) processing temperature of the mixture of 700°C-1000°C ([0276], lines 1-4).
Items a-e above provide a nexus. Further, Mika teaches for all examples,
soda-lime glass was used [0054].
calcium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent was used [0079].
water glass used for example sets 5 and 6 [0133].
where P5-2 used calcium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent and magnesium carbonate alkaline earth foaming agent [0217].
a CaCu-type alkaline earth metal silicate (P6-2, [0233], [0251]).
a quantity of CuO.
a quantity of carbonate alkaline earth metal CaCO3 (or BaCO3 alternatively).
a quantity of water glass (containing SiO2).
Mika teaches the use of a calcium carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent powder and an alternative (magnesium carbonate alkaline earth metal foaming agent) in a mixture with soda-lime glass flour (that could be borosilicate glass alternatively) that contains CuO, processed between 700°C-1000°C. Mika discloses the claimed invention except for specific use of barium carbonate alkaline earth metal powder mixed with a borosilicate glass powder. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the of barium carbonate alkaline earth metal powder of Mika to replace the calcium carbonate powder of the process of Wang, and mix with the borosilicate glass powder of Wang, as one would be motivated to do so for the purpose of increasing the foaming temperature for glass powders with higher viscosity, as noted by Mike ([0025], lines 13-15).
Further, Mika discloses the claimed invention except for a composite prepared comprises an alkaline earth metal silicate selected from the group consisting of: BaCuSi2O6, BaCuSi4O10. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the formulation for the amount barium carbonate alkaline earth metal, CuO and SiO2 to provide desired stoichiometry for either BaCuSi2O6 or BaCuSi4O10 , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to optimize the formulation for the amount barium carbonate alkaline earth metal, CuO and SiO2 to provide stoichiometric BaCuSi2O6 or BaCuSi4O10 for the purpose of obtaining a stable composite. Further, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER PAUL DAIGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-1066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30 CT.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER PAUL DAIGLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741