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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 01/29/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search and examination of the entire application could be made without serious burden. This is not found persuasive. Applicant amended withdrawn claims 1, 3, 4, and 7 and elected claims 8-15. Applicant requests the claims be rejoined and refers to MPEP § 803. However, the restriction is based on lack of unity under 37 CFR 1.475(e) and not based on serious burden of the search and examination.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1, 3, 4, and 7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 01/29/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/06/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final rejection on 10/29/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the jetting holes must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The amendment filed 01/29/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: The amendment to the specification to “(%f – CaO) was 0.5% by mass” has no support in the disclosure as originally filed.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 3, 4, and 7 are withdrawn and currently amended, Claims 2, 5, and 6 are canceled, and Claims 8-15 are currently amended.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 8 and 12 are interpreted as follows based on following options in lines 9-10:
A method for … adding a powdery auxiliary raw material or an auxiliary raw material processed into a powder form … supplying an oxidizing gas to the molten iron, the method comprising: … wherein: a burner having jetting holes for jetting a fuel and a combustion supporting gas is provided at
a leading end part of one lance that top-blows the oxidizing gas to the molten iron contained in the converter-type vessel
or, at a leading end part of another lance that is installed separately from the one lance;
the powdery auxiliary raw material or the auxiliary raw material processed into a powder form that is blown into the molten iron from
the one lance
or the other lance
Therefore, Claims 8 and 12 read on one of two lances or two lances.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2008-179876 A in view of Okuyama et al and Kikuchi (ISIJ International) as evidenced by the Engineering ToolBox.
The examiner notes that Claims 8 and 12 are substantially similar in scope but not identical. JP 2008-179876 A (JP ‘876) teaches an ore feeding lance for a smelting reduction furnace such as a converter with powder or particles (page 1) as represented in the annotated drawing:
PNG
media_image1.png
358
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The lance is top blowing (second figure). Flame is generated from the burner (abstract). Ore passes through the inside of the flame generated from the burner (page 1). JP ‘876 teaches residence time of the burner flame and residence time of the powder in the burner flame (page 4). The calorific value of the fuel and charging speed of the ore is determined (page 5). The powder and granular ore (abstract) read on auxiliary raw material. The jetting holes are 14, 15, and 16.
Regarding Expression (2), JP ’876 teaches a ratio of the speed charging speed of the powder S and the calorific value of the fuel Q (page 5). S reads on claimed Vp and Q reads on claimed Qfuel. Hcombustion represents an amount of heat generated by fuel combustion [0016]. Though JP ‘876 does not specifically recite “Hcombustion” as claimed, the equation that relates a fuel supply amount Vp and fuel supply flow rate Qfuel with Hcombustion and C0 as Expression (2) is taught by JP ‘876 since Hcombustion is a chemical property of the fuel gas as evidenced by The Engineering ToolBox. Both Hcombustion and C0 are inherent properties of the fuel gas.
Regarding Expression (1), JP ‘876 does not teach a relationship between the leading end of the lance to a molten metal surface and discharge speed of powder as claimed. Okuyama et al teaches a positional relationship between the lance height and the flow ratios of combustion oxidizing gas (column 4, lines 54-65). The CaO was blown simultaneously with the combustion oxygen gas and propane gas (column 11, lines 63 and 64). TABLE 3 teaches the amount of CaO in kg/min, and TABLE 4 teaches blowing time (minutes), which reads on a supply amount. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set the flame length to the top-blowing lance heightas taught in Okuyama et al with the process of JP ’876, since Okuyama et al teaches efficiently heating the powder smelting agent and increasing the heat margin of the molten iron (column 3, lines 55-60).
Regarding the particle diameter, Kikuchi teaches top-blowing a converter with CaO powder (page 2734). The CaO diameter is based a range of blowing gas flow rate, CaO flow rate, and the distance between the lance and hot metal surface (page 2733). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the diameter of CaO powder with respect to the flow rates and lance distance in JP ‘876, since Kikuchi teaches suppressing agglomeration and enlargement of the CaO powder, the efficiency of CaO is increased, and the amount of slag was reduced (page 2733).
Regarding Claims 9 and 13, JP ‘876 teaches supplying adding an oxidizing gas as shown above in the annotated drawing.
Regarding Claims 10 and 14, JP ‘876 teaches the fuel can be one or two or more of gaseous fuels, liquid fuels, and solid fuels (column 11, lines 18-21). The amount of heat will be based on the combustion properties of the fuel.
Regarding Claims 11 and 15, JP ‘876 teaches the fuel can be one or two or more of gaseous fuels, liquid fuels, and solid fuels (column 11, lines 18-21). The amount of heat will be based on the combustion properties of the fuel.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 01/29/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 8-15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made with the same prior art as in the office action mailed 10/29/2025 in addition to The Engineering ToolBox with further information for clarity of record as stated above.
With respect to Claims 8 and 12, applicant argues that the cited prior art does not teach Expression (2) since JP ‘876 teaches a fuel density in MJ/kg and the claimed Qfuel * Hcombustion units are simplified as MJ/min. Additionally, the constant C0 (calorific fuel value) has the unit kg/MJ. Applicant also claims and discloses that C0 is determined by the type of fuel gas used. As stated above, with evidence from The Engineering ToolBox, Hcombustion is a property of the fuel gas. Therefore, both C0 and Hcombustion are properties of the selected fuel gas. The two process variables are Qfuel and Vp.
Applicant states the value of V/QH in Fig. 3 is greater than C0 for LNG and LPG in [0040] and “Expression 2 is satisfied.” The examiner also notes that TABLE 2 also lists values of V/QH. However, these and other values of C0 are not identified in [0040], Fig. 3 or in any other part of the disclosure as originally filed and applicant has not provided any evidence for these values of C0. Therefore, unexpected results based on C0 are not established.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tima M. McGuthry-Banks whose telephone number is (571)272-2744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 am to 4:00 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, 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.
Tima M. McGuthry-Banks
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1733
/TIMA M. MCGUTHRY-BANKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733