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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statements filed on 20 June 2023, 13 September 2024, and 8 September 2025 have been received and considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the recitation of “a lead” in lines 6-7 should be replaced with “the lead”, where the antecedent basis is the “lead from copper smelting dust” recited in the preamble;
references to claim 1 and claim 2 in dependent claims 2-4 should not capitalize the word “Claim”.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (JP 2001348627 A; foreign patent document #1 on the IDS filed 13 September 2024) in view of Chen et al. (CN 105695764 A; foreign patent document #1 on the IDS filed 8 September 2025). The provided English machine translation of Chen (CN 105695764 A) and Yamaguchi (JP 2001348627 A) are relied upon in the analysis below.
Regarding claim 1, Yamaguchi discloses a method for recovering lead ([0016]) from industrial ash (fly ash which contains copper, lead…and is generated from incinerators, melting furnaces; [0001]) comprising:
an alkali leaching step of leaching lead contained in ash with an alkali solution (fly ash was suspended in 1 liter of water to prepare a slurry… after which 200 cc of 40% sodium hydroxide was added (pH = 14.2) and the slurry was leached for 30 minutes; [0025]);
a step of performing a solid liquid separation step on the post-leaching solution and a leaching residue after the alkali leaching step (the mixture was then filtered using a filtration device to recover the alkali-insoluble residue and the alkali leaching solution; [0025])
a neutralization step of adding an acid to the separated post-leaching solution to precipitate a lead (sulfuric acid was added as a mineral acid to the alkaline leaching solution to adjust the pH to 12 and neutralize it; [0025]);
and a step of recovering a precipitate containing the lead by performing a solid liquid separation (then the solution was filtered to obtain a lead product; [0025]). The fact that lead was recovered by filtration indicates that it was precipitated during the neutralization step.
Yamaguchi does not specifically teach the fly ash being a copper smelting dust.
However, Chen teaches a largely similar process for recovering lead from industrial ash by alkali leaching, where that ash is copper smelting dust (NaOH solution of smoke dust in a copper smelting system; Example 4, page 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the method of Yamaguchi to copper smelting dust, thereby arriving at the instantly claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Yamaguchi teaches that their method can be applied to industrial ash from a variety of sources including melting furnaces ([0001]) and Chen teaches that lead can be recovered from copper smelting dust in particular using a substantially similar process.
Regarding claim 2, modified Yamaguchi teaches the method of claim 1 where the lead is leached out under a liquid condition of a pH of 14.2 in the alkali leaching step and where the lead is precipitated under a liquid condition in an alkali range of pH 12 in the neutralization step.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (JP 2001348627 A; foreign patent document #1 on the IDS filed 13 September 2024) in view of Chen et al. (CN 105695764 A; foreign patent document #1 on the IDS filed 8 September 2025), as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Ogami et al. (JP 2002018394 A). The provided English machine translation of Chen (CN 105695764 A), Yamaguchi (JP 2001348627 A), and Ogami et al. (JP 2002018394 A) are relied upon in the analysis below.
Regarding claim 3, modified Yamaguchi teaches the method of claim 1, and Yamaguchi further teaches that it is desirable to reduce the amount of chlorine and fluorine in the recovered heavy metal materials ([0007]). However, Yamaguchi does not teach the copper smelting dust being washed with water or an acid prior to the alkali leaching.
However, Ogami teaches a related method designed to enhance the recovery of heavy metals from waste materials such as fly ash and soot dust ([0001] and [0010]). Ogami further teaches that the first step in such a process is to perform a water wash to dissolve the chlorine content ([0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to wash the copper smelting dust to be used in the method of modified Yamaguchi with water prior to the alkali leaching, as taught by Ogami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Ogami teaches that such a wash can reduce chloride content, which Yamaguchi also teaches as desirable.
Regarding claim 4, modified Yamaguchi teaches the method of claim 2, and Yamaguchi further teaches that it is desirable to reduce the amount of chlorine and fluorine in the recovered heavy metal materials ([0007]). However, Yamaguchi does not teach the copper smelting dust being washed with water or an acid prior to the alkali leaching.
However, Ogami teaches a related method designed to enhance the recovery of heavy metals from waste materials such as fly ash and soot dust ([0001] and [0010]). Ogami further teaches that the first step in such a process is to perform a water wash to dissolve the chlorine content ([0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to wash the copper smelting dust to be used in the method of modified Yamaguchi with water prior to the alkali leaching, as taught by Ogami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Ogami teaches that such a wash reduces chloride content, which Yamaguchi teaches is desirable.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
CN 105567983 A teaches a process for treating dust from a copper smelting process ([0002] of the provided English machine translation) where the soot is first washed with water to remove copper and zinc ([0040]-[0041]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas A Piro whose telephone number is (571)272-6344. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8:00 am-5:00 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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/NICHOLAS A. PIRO/Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 1738
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735