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 .
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 21 and 22 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 21, recitation of “the method according to claim 1, wherein at step (b)…” is indefinite, as step (b) is expressly recited in claim 2, not in claim 1. Since claim 21 depends from claim 1, it is unclear how claim 21 is to be applied when depending from a claim that does not recite step (b). Claim 22 is rejected due to its dependency upon claim 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birken (US20140048454A1) in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr (WO2016041916A1).
Regarding claim 1, Birken discloses a method for manufacturing a concentrate enriched in iron mineral content from an ore, which contains an iron mineral and silicate, by a reverse flotation (Birken ‘454 pars. [0002], [0125] and [0127]), characterized that said method comprises the step of
(c) adding a collector composition comprising
(i) an amidoamine, which contains a compound of formula I
PNG
media_image1.png
79
155
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(I), wherein R1 is a linear or branched aliphatic C7-C19 alkyl or a linear C7-C19 aliphatic alkenyl, R2 is a linear or branched aliphatic C2-C6 alkylene, R3 and R4 are independently from each other H, C1-C2 alkyl or a substituent of formula I-S
*-[-(CH2-)p-NH-]q-(-CH2-)p-NH2 (I-S), wherein p is 2, 3 or 4, q is 0, 1, 2 or 3, and * represents the connecting site of the substituent, or a salt of a protonated compound of formula I and an anion (Birken ‘454 pars. [0027-0042] and claim 1 teaches formula 1 comprising many examples of amidoamines consisting of ranges of substituents which overlap and encompass the range of substituents indicated for formula 1 disclosed above) to a prepared aqueous pulp of the ore and optionally one or more flotation auxiliary (Birken par. [0070]) to obtain an aqueous mixture (Birken par. [0004] “Flotation process generally takes place in a cell containing an aqueous suspension of the ore to be treated, and a generator of air bubbles. At least one collector is added”).
Birken ‘454 does not explicitly disclose that the collector composition further comprises
(ii) an ethoxylate, which contains a compound of formula II
RE-O-(-CH2-CH2-O-)n-H (II), wherein RE is a linear or mono-branched aliphatic C10-C20 alkyl or a linear aliphatic C10-C20 alkenyl, n is an integer from 1 to 12, to a prepared aqueous pulp of the ore and optionally one or more flotation auxiliary to obtain an aqueous mixture as presently recited. Rather, Birken ‘454 teaches that its optional second collector is a compound of formula (2), including alkoxylated fatty polyamines and, more specifically, ethoxylated or propoxylated fatty diamines. Thus, Birken ‘454 teaches the claimed reverse flotation iron-ore/amidoamine framework and even suggests a multi-component collector system, but does not expressly disclose the alcohol ethoxylate second component of formula II.
Smolko-Schvarzmayr is directed to froth flotation collector systems employing a primary collector together with a secondary collector and expressly teaches that “collector performance may be improved by using collector combinations of a primary (main) collector and a secondary collector (co-collector),” and that the term “’collector composition’ shall be used to describe compositions containing both a primary and a secondary collector.” Smolko-Schvarzmayr further discloses a flotation process using a collector composition comprising a primary collector and a secondary collector which is selected from the group of branched fatty alcohols with 12-16 carbon atoms having a degree of branching of 1-3, and alkoxylates thereof with a degree of ethoxylation of up to 3 (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p. 3 par 2), with the secondary collector also described as branched fatty alcohols with 12-16 carbon atoms having a degree of branching of 1-3, and their alkoxylates with a degree of ethoxylation of up to 3 (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 1 and p. 4 showing formula I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reverse-flotation amidoamine collector method of Birken ‘454 by employing, as the additional collector component, the known alcohol alkoxylate/ethoxylate secondary collector taught by Smolko-Schvarzmayr. Birken ‘454 already teaches that its amidoamine collector may be used in reverse flotation of silicate-containing ores, is particularly efficient for iron ores, and may optionally be used with an additional collector component. Smolko-Schvarzmayr teaches in the same flotation art that collector performance may be improved through use of a primary collector together with a secondary collector, and specifically teaches alcohol alkoxylates/ethoxylates as such secondary collectors. A person of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have been motivated to select a known ethoxylated alcohol co-collector for use with Birken ‘454’s amidoamine collector in order to obtain the known benefits of multi-component collector systems, including improved flotation performance and froth behavior, while retaining Birken ‘454’s known suitability for reverse flotation of silicate-containing ores including iron ores.
Regarding claim 2, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises the steps of
(a) providing the ore, which contains an iron mineral and silicate (Birken ‘454 claims 13, 20),
(b) preparing from the provided ore by addition of water and optionally one or more flotation auxiliaries an aqueous pulp (Birken ‘454 pars. [0003] and claims 10, 12),
(c) adding the collector composition to the prepared aqueous pulp of the ore and optionally one or more flotation auxiliaries to obtain an aqueous mixture (Birken ‘454 par. [0004], Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 7 “collector composition”),
(d) aerating the aqueous mixture in a flotation cell to generate a froth, which is enriched in silicate content, and removing the generated froth from the flotation cell (Birken ‘454 par. [0004]),
(e) obtaining from the flotation cell the concentrate enriched in iron mineral content (Birken ‘454 claim 14 where reverse flotation leaves the ores of value behind after the impurities are floated away).
Claims 3-11, 15-20 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birken (US20140048454A1) in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr (WO2016041916A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Martins (20140144290A1).
Regarding claim 3, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr discloses the method according to claims 1, wherein (i) the amidoamine contains different compounds of formula I, or salts of the protonated different compounds of formula I and an anion (Birken par. [0035] states formula I may also be used in the form of their addition salts with one or more acid and in par. [0071] also states “mixtures of compounds having various R1 radicals contain 16-18 carbon atoms”).
Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr does not expressly disclose that the ethoxylate contains different compounds of formula II.
Martins is directed to “mixed collector compositions” and teaches that using a collector composition containing a combination of one of more amidoamines and one of more etheramines in a separation process for the purification of iron containing ores yields a greater recovery of iron as compared to using a collector that contains the amidoamine or the etheramine alone, and further teaches that the amidoamines and etheramines can be combined with one another to form a collector that can include but is not limited to, the amidoamines of formula I and etheramines of formula IV and can be combined with varieties of these formulas with various listed substituents (Martins par. [0035]). Martins par. [0036] goes on to state that “collector composition can include, but is not limited to, about 1 wt.% to about 99 wt.% of the amidoamine of formula I and about 1 wt. % to about 99 wt. % of the etheramine of the Formula IV” teaching the desirability and known use in the same iron-ore flotation field of collector compositions employing plural different amidoamine-type and co-collector species together, rather than only a single species on each side.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ, in the collector system of Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr, plural different amidoamine compounds of formula I and plural different ethoxylate compounds of formula II rather than only a single species of each. Birken ‘454 already teaches a formula I amidoamine collector for reverse flotation of silicate-containing ores including iron ores and further teaches that collector performance may be improved by using collector combinations comprising a primary collector and a secondary collector, and its disclosure of secondary collectors embraces alkoxylates of branched fatty alcohols as a class rather than a single fixed species. Martins then reinforces that, in the same iron-ore flotation art, mixed collector compositions using one or more amidoamines together with one or more co-collector species were known to improve recovery relative to use of either collector alone. A person of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have been motivated to use variations of mixtures of the known formula I amidoamine collectors and known formula II-type ethoxylate co-collectors in order to optimize collector performance, selectivity, and recovery, which would have been no more than the predictable use of known alternative members of recognized collector classes in a known mixed-collector flotation system.
Regarding claim 4, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein (i) the amidoamine is obtainable by condensation of a fatty acid with an amine (Birken ‘454 claim 3 and par. [0043-0045] “C16-C18 unsaturated fatty acid” and “1’” ).
Regarding claim 5, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein (ii) the ethoxylate is obtainable by ethoxylation of one equivalent of an alcohol of the formula II-AL RE-OH (II-AL), wherein RE is defined as in claim 1, with n equivalents of ethylene oxide, wherein n is defined as in claim 1. (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claims 1 and 2 with Formula (I) teaches an alcohol alkoxylate/ethoxylate made from an alcohol backbone with ethylene oxide units and therefore renders the added ethoxylation limitation obvious for the secondary collector already used).
Regarding claim 6, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition comprises (i) an amidoamine, which contains a compound of formula I
PNG
media_image1.png
79
155
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(I), wherein R1 is a linear or branched aliphatic C11-C19 alkyl or a linear C11-C19 aliphatic alkenyl, R2 is a linear or branched aliphatic C2-C6 alkylene, R3 and R4 are independently from each other H, C1-C2 alkyl or a substituent of formula I-S
*-[-(CH2-)p-NH-]q-(-CH2-)p-NH2 (I-S), wherein p is 2, 3 or 4, q is 0, 1, 2 or 3, and * represents the connecting site of the substituent, or a salt of a protonated compound of formula I and an anion (Birken ‘454 pars. [0027-0042] and claim 1 teaches formula 1 comprising many examples of amidoamines which overlap and encompass the framework of formula 1 with the R groups disclosed above), and which is obtainable by condensation of a fatty acid of formula I-FA with an amine of formula I-A (Birken ‘454 claim 3 and par. [0043-0045] “C16-C18 unsaturated fatty acid” and “1’” ) (ii) an ethoxylate, which contains a compound of formula II
RE-O-(-CH2-CH2-O-)n-H (II), wherein RE is a linear or mono-branched aliphatic C10-C20 alkyl or a linear aliphatic C10-C20 alkenyl, n is an integer from 1 to 12, and which is obtainable by ethoxylation of one equivalent of an alcohol of formula II-AL
RE-OH (II-AL) with n equivalents of ethylene oxide. (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claims 1 and 2 with Formula (I) teaches an alcohol alkoxylate/ethoxylate made from an alcohol backbone with ethylene oxide units and therefore renders the added ethoxylation limitation obvious for the secondary collector already used).
Regarding claim 7, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition comprises more parts by weight of the amidoamine than of the ethoxylate, and the sum of the amidoamine and the ethoxylate is 100 parts by weight (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 5 teaches embodiments where the primary collector is present in a greater amount ranging between 15:85 to 99:1, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill that these ranges sum 100 parts by weight).
Regarding claim 8, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition comprises (i) 65 to 99 parts by weight of the amidoamine, and (ii) 1 to 35 parts by weight of the ethoxylate, and the sum of the amidoamine and the ethoxylate is 100 parts by weight (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 5 teaches embodiments where the primary collector is present in at amounts ranging between 15:85 to 99:1 and p. 8 Example 1 specifically employs a 65:35 collector-mixture ration which falls exactly at the claimed boundary, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill that these ranges sum 100 parts by weight).
Regarding claim 9, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition comprises (i) 75 to 99 parts by weight of the amidoamine, and (ii) 1 to 25 parts by weight of the ethoxylate, and the sum of the amidoamine and the ethoxylate is 100 parts by weight (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 5 teaches embodiments where the primary collector is present in at amounts ranging between 15:85 to 99:1 and the claimed narrower subrange represents an obvious optimization/selection from the broader disclosed ratio range in the same collector-combination art, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill that these ranges sum 100 parts by weight).
Regarding claim 10, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition comprises (i) 85 to 99 parts by weight of the amidoamine, and (ii) 1 to 15 parts by weight of the ethoxylate, and the sum of the amidoamine and the ethoxylate is 100 parts by weight (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 5 teaches embodiments where the primary collector is present in at amounts ranging between 15:85 to 99:1 and the claimed narrower subrange represents an obvious optimization/selection from the broader disclosed ratio range in the same collector-combination art, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill that these ranges sum 100 parts by weight).
Regarding claim 11, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein (a) R3 is H or C1-C2 alkyl, (Birken Formula I R22/23 (R3) each independently represent a hydrocarbon group containing from 1 to 6 carbon atoms, encompassing this group of substituents) (b) p is 2 and q is 1, 2 or 3, (c) n is 1, 2, 3 or 4, (d) RE is a linear or mono-branched aliphatic C12-C18 alkyl or a linear aliphatic C18 alkenyl or any combination of (a) to (d).
Regarding claim 15, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein in case the ethoxylate contains only compounds of formula II with the same RE, the same RE is linear, or in case the ethoxylate contains compounds of formula II with two or more different RE, an average degree of branching of RE for all the compounds of formula II is between 0 and 0.8 (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p. 9 Table 1 expressly discloses both a linear alcohol ethoxylate secondary collector, “Alfol 12/14S + 1.5EO”, with “DB 0,” and also a “Mixture (linear/branched)” alcohol ethoxylate secondary collector, “Safol 23 + 1.5 EO,” with DB 0.6”; Smolko-Schvarzmayr further explains that linear alcohol ethoxylates were used in the flotation tests and compares them directly with branched alcohol ethoxylates teaching both linear and branching within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 16, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 15, wherein RE is linear (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p. 9 Table 1 expressly discloses a linear alcohol ethoxylate secondary collector, “Alfol 12/14S + 1.5EO”, with “DB 0,” with the type of alcohol as linear).
Regarding claim 17, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the anion is C1-C18 carboxylate, fluoride, chloride, bromide, iodide, sulfonate, hydrogensulfate, sulfate, dihydrogenphosphate, hydrogenphosphate, phosphate, nitrate, hydrofluorosilicate or fluorosilicate. Birken ‘454 par. [0035] teaches that the compounds of formula I may be used “in the form of their addition salts with one or more acid(s), said acid( s) being chosen from among mineral and organic acids, including but not limited to, hydrochloric acid, acetic acid, phosphoric acid, sulphuric acid, alkane (e.g. methane) sulphonic acid, toluene sulphonic acid, and the like” which teaches one of ordinary skill in the art the corresponding counteranions such as chloride from hydrochloric acid, carboxylate/acetate from acetic acid, sulfonate from alkane sulphonic acid and many other options of the anions listed above.
Regarding claim 18, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition is added in an amount between 10 g to 500 g per ton of the ore (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p. 7 teaches the amount of collector composition in ranges preferably from 20 to 500 g/ton dry ore).
Regarding claim 19, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the pH value at step (c) is between 8 and 12 (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p. 7 teaches the pH in a range within 8-11).
Regarding claim 20, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the collector composition is added as an aqueous solution or suspension. (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p.10 Example 2 expressly teaches that a mixture of primary and secondary collectors added as a 1% aqueous solution)
Regarding claim 24, Birken in view of Smolko-Schvarzmayr and further in view of Martins discloses a collector composition, comprising: (i) an amidoamine, which contains a compound of formula I
PNG
media_image1.png
79
155
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(I), wherein R1 is a linear or branched aliphatic C7-C19 alkyl or a linear C7-C19 aliphatic alkenyl, R2 is a linear or branched aliphatic C2-C6 alkylene, R3 and R4 are independently from each other H, C1-C2 alkyl or a substituent of formula I-S
*-[-(CH2-)p-NH-]q-(-CH2-)p-NH2 (I-S), wherein p is 2, 3 or 4, q is 0, 1, 2 or 3, and * represents the connecting site of the substituent, or a salt of a protonated compound of formula I and an anion (Birken ‘454 pars. [0027-0042] and claim 1 teaches formula 1 comprising many examples of amidoamines consisting of ranges of substituents which overlap and encompass the range of substituents indicated for formula 1 disclosed above); (ii) an ethoxylate, which contains a compound of formula II
RE-O-(-CH2-CH2-O-)n-H (II), wherein RE is a linear or mono-branched aliphatic C10-C20 alkyl or a linear aliphatic C10-C20 alkenyl, n is an integer from 1 to 12 (Smolko-Schvarzmayr p. 3 par 2 teaches a flotation process using a collector composition comprising a secondary collector which is selected from the group of branched fatty alcohols with 12-16 carbon atoms having a degree of branching of 1-3, and alkoxylates thereof with a degree of ethoxylation of up to 3, with the secondary collector also described as branched fatty alcohols with 12-16 carbon atoms having a degree of branching of 1-3, and their alkoxylates with a degree of ethoxylation of up to 3 (Smolko-Schvarzmayr claim 1 and p. 4 showing formula I).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM ADDISON GEISBERT whose telephone number is (703)756-5497. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 EDT.
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, Bobby RAMDHANIE can be reached at (571)270-3240. 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.
/W.A.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights