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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-14 are pending and presented for examination on the merits.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Five (5) information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were submitted on 06/30/2023, 02/09/2024, 06/28/2024, 04/17/2025, and 12/12/2025. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS are being considered by the examiner.
Objection to the Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification states that Test Nos. 1 to 4 all contain relative amounts of scrap that exceed 15% (para. [0028]). However, Table 1 lists Test Nos. 1 and 2 as containing pre-charge ratios of cold iron source of 10.0% and 13.9%, respectively, which do not exceed 15%. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 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 1, the suffix “type” in the phrase “converter-type” renders the claim indefinite because the scope of the term is unclear. A converter is a known and well-defined furnace in the art. By adding the ending “-type” to the term “converter,” the meaning of the phrase “converter-type” is expanded. But without any guidance as to which furnaces do and do not qualify as a converter-type, the phrase lacks definiteness and clarity. Thus, the meaning of the phrase cannot be ascertained. See MPEP § 2173.05(b)(III)(E).
Regarding claims 2-14, the claims are likewise rejected, as they include all limitations of rejected claim 1.
Further regarding claim 8, the phrase “the furnace-top-added cold iron source that is added during the molten iron dephosphorization” is indefinite for lack of clarity. The phrase assumes that the furnace-top-added cold iron source is added during dephosphorization. However, parent claim 7 does not require addition of the cold iron source during dephosphorization. Claim 7 recites that the cold iron source can be added during dephosphorization, decarburization, or during both dephosphorization and decarburization, but only one of the options need to be satisfied in the claim, and addition during dephosphorization need not be selected.
Further regarding claim 14, the phrase “the furnace-top-added cold iron source that is added during the molten iron dephosphorization” is indefinite for lack of clarity. The phrase assumes that the furnace-top-added cold iron source is added during dephosphorization. However, parent claim 13 does not require addition of the cold iron source during dephosphorization. Claim 7 recites that the cold iron source can be added during dephosphorization, decarburization, or during both dephosphorization and decarburization, but only one of the options need to be satisfied in the claim, and addition during dephosphorization need not be selected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2018-178260 (A) to Kikuchi et al. (“Kikuchi”) (computer-generated translation is attached).
Regarding claim 1, Kikuchi discloses a method of lowering a phosphorus concentration in molten steel (molten iron refining method, molten iron subjected to a refining process) in a converter. Abstract. The method includes the addition of a CaO-based solvent and reused slag produced therein (both auxiliary materials). Page 4 – first and third paragraphs. Oxygen gas is supplied to the converter (oxidizing gas is supplied). Page 3 – last paragraph. A cold iron source and molten pig iron is contained in the converter (cold iron source and molten pig iron are contained or fed in a converter-type vessel). Page 2 – Summary of the Invention; p. 3 – seventh and eighth paragraphs.
The cold iron source can be charged into the converter after the third step and/or after the fifth step. Page 6 – sixth full paragraph. The third step is a step of discharging the slag formed during the desiliconing treatment (p. 4 – seventh paragraph), and the next step is the dephosphorizing treatment (p. 4 – last paragraph). The fifth step is a step of discharging the slag formed during the dephosphorizing treatment (p. 5 – eighth paragraph), and the next step is the decarburization treatment (pp. 5-6 – bridging paragraph). Thus, the cold iron source is charged during dephosphorizing and/or during decarburizing (cold iron source is fed into the converter-type vessel during the refining process). The converter vessel has only one opening, located at the top, for receiving metal. Figs. 1 and 2. Therefore, the cold iron source is added from the top of the furnace (a furnace-top-added cold iron source is added from a furnace top of the converter-top vessel).
The cold iron source is supplied to the converter prior to the addition of molten iron (prior to the refining process, a pre-charged cold iron source is charged all at once into the converter-type vessel before molten pig iron is charged into the converter-type vessel). Figs. 2(A) and 2(B). The amount of cold iron source is set to 10% by mass or less of total iron source charged into the converter (p. 6 – sixth full paragraph; p. 8 – Example 2), which falls within the claimed range (pre-charged cold iron source is charged in an amount not larger than 0.15 times a sum of an amount of the pre-charged cold iron source and a charge amount of the molten pig iron). Prior art that falls within claimed ranges anticipates the range. MPEP § 2131.03(I).
Regarding claim 3, Kikuchi discloses a step of decarburizing (refining process is a decarburization process of molten iron). Pages 5-6 – bridging paragraph; p. 6 – first through fourth full paragraphs; Fig. 2(G).
Regarding claim 4, Kikuchi discloses a dephosphorization treatment prior to decarburizing in the converter furnace (refining process is a decarburization process that is performed with a converter-type vessel in which molten pig iron is dephosphorized beforehand). Page 5; Figs. 2(E), 2(F), and 2(G).
Regarding claim 5, Kikuchi discloses a step of dephosphorizing (refining process is a dephosphorization process of molten iron). Page 5; Figs. 2(E).
Regarding claim 7, Kikuchi discloses the sequence of dephosphorization (Fig. 2(E)), slag removal (Fig. 2(F)), and decarburization (Fig. 2(G)) (dephosphorization-decarburization process in which a molten iron dephosphorization step, an intermediate slag removal step, and a molten iron decarburization step are performed as a series of processes). Pages 4-6. During the sequence of treatments, the converter is repeatedly tilted and returned to upright position (p. 5 – eighth paragraph; p. 6 – third and fourth full paragraphs), implying use of the same converter.
The ratio of pre-charged cold iron source and addition of furnace-top-added cold iron source during dephosphorization and/or decarburization are addressed in the discussion of claim 1, above.
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.
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 2, 9, 10, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi, as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 2, Kikuchi discloses that the cold iron source is cut from scrap that is 10 mm or more or is light scrap that is less than 10 mm (p. 8 – fourth full paragraph), which overlap and fall within, respectively, the claimed range of 100 mm or less.
The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art.
Regarding claim 9, Kikuchi discloses a step of decarburizing (refining process is a decarburization process of molten iron). Pages 5-6 – bridging paragraph; p. 6 – first through fourth full paragraphs; Fig. 2(G).
Regarding claim 10, Kikuchi discloses a dephosphorization treatment prior to decarburizing in the converter furnace (refining process is a decarburization process that is performed with a converter-type vessel in which molten pig iron is dephosphorized beforehand). Page 5; Figs. 2(E), 2(F), and 2(G).
Regarding claim 11, Kikuchi discloses a step of dephosphorizing (refining process is a dephosphorization process of molten iron). Page 5; Figs. 2(E).
Regarding claim 13, Kikuchi discloses the sequence of dephosphorization (Fig. 2(E)), slag removal (Fig. 2(F)), and decarburization (Fig. 2(G)) (dephosphorization-decarburization process in which a molten iron dephosphorization step, an intermediate slag removal step, and a molten iron decarburization step are performed as a series of processes). Pages 4-6. During the sequence of treatments, the converter is repeatedly tilted and returned to upright position (p. 5 – eighth paragraph; p. 6 – third and fourth full paragraphs), implying use of the same converter.
The ratio of pre-charged cold iron source and addition of furnace-top-added cold iron source during dephosphorization and/or decarburization are addressed in the discussion of claim 1, above.
Claims 6, 8, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi, as applied to claims 5, 7, 11, and 13 above, and further in view of US 2014/0298955 (A1) to Okuyama et al. (“Okuyama”).
Regarding claims 6, 8, 12, and 14, Kikuchi is silent regarding the carbon content of the cold iron source and the temperature of the molten iron upon completion of the dephosphorization process.
Okuyama is directed to a method of refining molten iron. Title. The method includes a dephosphorization step. Para. [0177]. The finish temperature of the dephosphorization is 1400°C (para. [0180]), which falls within the claimed range. The temperature of the dephosphorization is controlled to ensure complete melting of the cold iron source. Para. [0201], [0229].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have controlled the temperature of the dephosphorization upon completion to be high, such as 1400°C, in order to ensure full melting of the cold scrap iron added.
Claims 6, 8, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi, as applied to claims 5, 7, 11, and 13 above, and further in view of US 2002/0009118 (A1) to Mizukami et al. (“Mizukami”).
Regarding claims 6, 8, 12, and 14, Kikuchi is silent regarding the carbon content of the cold iron source and the temperature of the molten iron upon completion of the dephosphorization process.
Mizukami is direct to an apparatus for arc-melting cold iron source. Abstract. Iron scraps and cold iron have carbon concentrations of 4.5 wt.% (para. [0239], [0248]), which falls within the claimed range.
Kikuchi uses cold iron source material. And since cold iron source material is known to contain high amounts of carbon, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the cold iron source of Kikuchi to also have contained the same amount of carbon as the same material of Mizukami. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used cold iron scraps containing a high amount of carbon in the process of Kikuchi because Kikuchi’s process is capable of refining iron via decarburization, which would thereby expand the utility of Kikuchi’s process by treat all types of scrap material without the need to be discerning of carbon content.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is (571)270-3587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM ET.
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 D. 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.
/VANESSA T. LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
May 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights