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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: for example, the reference number 107 used in figure 7 is not mentioned in the description. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In the specification page 9, line 13, “the wheels 109b” should be “the wheels
109a” as defined in other portions of the specification and the drawing figure 7 for example.
In the specification page 12, lines 1-2, “direct reduced metal material 106” is in error since the numerical label “106” is already used in other portions of the specification as “metal material 106 to be reduced”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing
a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
5. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a
rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35
U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable
presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim
limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are
being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise
indicated in an Office action.
Claim 17, in lines 2-3 recites the limitation “circulation means for circulating hydrogen gas” and in lines 6-7, recites the limitation “circulation means …to circulate an inert gas”, these limitations have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “means” coupled with functional language “for indirect cooling” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitations invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim 17 has been interpreted to cover the corresponding structures described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents
thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structures described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: the recited circulation means for circulating hydrogen gas, and the circulation means …to circulate an inert gas are described in the specification page 34, lines 25-30, and in the drawing figures 1, 4 and 5 as being either a fan or a pump, 194 and (172, 174) respectively.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 1-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, it is suggested to replace “A method for producing direct reduced metal material in a continuous process, the method comprising circulating hydrogen gas in a closed-loop first gas circuit by, using a first valve system, selectively circulate hydrogen gas via one or several of a set of several hydrogen gas connection stations, the method further comprising circulating an inert gas in a closed-loop second gas circuit by, using a second valve system, selectively circulate inert gas via one or several of a set of several inert gas connection stations, wherein the method further comprises the following steps, performed for each of a plurality of individual mobile furnaces:” , lines 1-9 with -- A method for producing direct reduced metal material in a continuous process, the method comprising circulating hydrogen gas in a closed-loop first gas circuit by, using a first valve system for selectively circulate the hydrogen gas via one or more of a set of hydrogen gas connection stations, the method further comprising circulating an inert gas in a closed-loop second gas circuit by, using a second valve system for selectively circulate the inert gas via one or more of a set of inert gas connection stations, wherein the method further comprises the following steps, performed for each of a plurality of individual mobile furnaces:--. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 1, at the beginning of line 13, it is suggested to replace “a first one of said inert gas connection stations;” with -- a first one of said set of inert gas connection stations; --. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 1, at the beginning of line 17, it is suggested to replace “disconnecting
the mobile furnace from said first inert gas connection station;” with -- disconnecting the mobile furnace from said first one of said set of inert gas connection station; --. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 1, at the beginning of line 20, it is suggested to replace “to, a first one of said hydrogen gas connection stations” with -- to, a first one of said set of hydrogen gas connection stations --. For claim language consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 1, at the beginning of line 27, it is suggested to replace “to, a second one of said inert gas connection stations” with -- to, a second one of said set of inert gas connection stations --. For claim language consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 2, it is suggested to replace “wherein the inert gas used to cool the metal material in step i is used to preheat, or be used as, the inert gas used to heat the metal material in step c” with -- wherein the inert gas used to cool the metal material in step i is recycled to preheat, or heat the metal material in step c--.
In claim 6, it is suggested to replace “wherein said inert gas and/or said hydrogen gas is provided in steps c, f and/or i to flow into the mobile furnace and past the metal material from below the metal material upwards in the mobile furnace” with -- wherein said heated inert gas, said heated hydrogen gas and said cooled inert gas provided in steps c, f and I, respectively to flow into the mobile furnace and past the metal material from below the metal material upwards in the mobile furnace --.
In claims 1-17, it suggested, where appropriate to replace “first one of said inert gas connection stations;” with -- first one of said set of inert gas connection stations; --. “second one of said inert gas connection stations;” with -- second one of said set of inert gas connection stations; --; “first one of said hydrogen gas connection stations” with -- first one of said set of hydrogen gas connection stations --. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 17, it is suggested to replace “A system for producing direct reduced metal material in a continuous process, the system comprising circulation means for circulating hydrogen gas in a closed-loop first gas circuit, the system comprising a first valve system, arranged to selectively circulate hydrogen gas via one or several of a set of several hydrogen gas connection stations comprised in the system, the system further comprising circulation means, arranged to circulate an inert gas in a closed-loop second gas circuit, the system comprising a second valve system, arranged to selectively circulate inert gas via one or several of a set of several inert gas connection stations comprised in the system, wherein the system further comprises a plurality of individual mobile furnaces, the system being arranged to:” lines 1-11 with -- A system for producing direct reduced metal material in a continuous process, the system comprising circulation means for circulating hydrogen gas in a closed-loop first gas circuit, the system comprising a first valve system, arranged to selectively circulate the hydrogen gas via one or more of a set of hydrogen gas connection stations, the system further comprising circulation means, arranged to circulate an inert gas in a closed-loop second gas circuit; a second valve system, arranged to selectively circulate the inert gas via one or more of a set of inert gas connection stations, wherein the system further comprises a plurality of individual mobile furnaces, being arranged to:--. For claim language simplicity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-16 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the mobile furnace" throughout lines 10-34. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because the preceding line 8-9, requires “each of a plurality of individual mobile furnaces”, and as such it is unclear which of said individual mobile furnace is being referred to in lines 10-11. It is further suggested that all the claims depending therefrom claim 1 be amended to reflect said each of a plurality of individual mobile furnaces.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein said hydrogen gas and/or said inert gas is
circulated in said closed-loop first and/or second gas circuits at atmospheric pressure or at the most 1.5 bars”. The limitation as written appears each one of the hydrogen gas and the inert gas are circulated in both the closed-loop first gas circuit and closed-loop second gas circuit, however, the base claim 1 from which claim 2 depends from assigns the closed-loop first gas circuit to hydrogen gas circulation and the closed-loop second gas circuit to inert gas circulation. Therefore, it is unclear as to what the limitation
means, and thus rendering the scope of the claim indefinite.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the preheated hydrogen gas” in the middle of line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because the base claim 1 from which claim 4 depends does not includes a preheating step of the hydrogen gas.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Als in claim 4, it is unclear what “the inert gas or hydrogen gas connection station in question” means.
Claim 7, recites the limitations “wherein the mobile furnace is caused to comprise two furnace parts” and “wherein said hydrogen gas and/or inert gas connection stations are further caused to comprise connections for said cooling water”. It is unclear as to what the phrase “caused to comprise” in each of the above limitation means, particularly since the plain meaning of the word caused is to make something happen or result in. The claim is therefore rendered indefinite since the scope id unascertainable.
Claim 8, recites the limitation “wherein the method further comprises controlling,
using a fan or pump the speed of which can be controlled, a circulation velocity in said first and/or second gas circuit so that a heating power, reduction velocity
and/or cooling power of the metal material is controlled as a result”. It is unclear as to what “a heating power” and “a cooling power” or the metal material means, since it’s the metal material that is the object subjected to either heating or cooling. Particularly since one oof ordinary skill in the art would have expected the heating power and the cooling power to be associated with the heating means and the cooling means respectively.
The claim is therefore rendered indefinite since the scope is unascertainable.
Claim 13 is indefinites due to the use of the multiple alternative expression "and/or", which does not serve to restrict the claim but rather makes its subject matter ambiguous because it raises doubt as to the scope of the claim and about the essential features of the invention. Furthermore, the recitation of multiple instances of “and/or” appears to make the claim confusing, because, it is unclear which portion(s) of each of the limitation before, between, and after the multiple “and/or” are required or optional, and which limitations are linked together by the “and/or”.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the mobile furnace" throughout lines 14-37. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because the preceding line 10-11, requires “each of a plurality of individual mobile furnaces”, and as such it is unclear which of said individual mobile furnace is being referred to in lines 10-11. It is further suggested that all the claims depending therefrom claim 1 be amended to reflect said each of a plurality of individual mobile furnaces.
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 1-17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
10. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Murray (US Patent No. 3,964,898) is the closest cited prior that teaches a system and a process for producing direct reduced iron oxide or producing sponge iron
that comprises: charging an iron oxide into a heatable chamber (2, see figure 1 and
column 4, lines 51-65) of a furnace (1, see figure 1, abstract and column 4, lines 51-65), a heating step of heating the iron oxide in the heatable chamber (2) by flowing or circulating a heated or a hot non-reducing atmosphere in a form of an inert gas (abstract column 4, lines 51-65, and claims 3-5) pass the charged iron oxide in the furnace chamber; a reduction step of reducing the charged iron oxide by flowing or circulating a hot or heated reducing atmosphere containing H.sub.2 and CO in a molar ratio of between about 1:1 and 1:3, pass the charged iron oxide in the furnace chamber; and a cooling step of cooling the reduced iron oxide or sponge iron with a cold non-oxidizing atmosphere (see abstract , column 4, lines 51-65, claims 28 and 31-33).
Murray, however differs from the instant claimed invention by failing to teach and/or adequately suggest as in claim 1 and 17: a system and continuous process for producing direct reduced metal material by the following steps: charging an amount of metal material to be reduced into a first of the plurality of individual mobile furnace, moving the mobile furnace to, and connect to a first one of a set of inert gas connection stations, providing a heated inert gas to the first mobile furnace to heat the metal material by circulating past the metal material inside the first mobile furnace; disconnecting the first mobile furnace from said first one the set of inert gas connection station; moving the first mobile furnace to, and connecting to, a first one of a set of hydrogen gas connection stations; providing heated hydrogen gas to the first mobile furnace reduced the metal material by circulating the heated hydrogen gas past the metal material inside the mobile furnace; disconnecting the first mobile furnace from said first one of the set of hydrogen gas connection station; moving the first mobile furnace to, and connecting to, a second one of said set of inert gas connection stations; providing cooled inert gas to the first mobile furnace to cool the metal material by circulating the cooled inert gas past the metal material inside the first mobile furnace; disconnect the first mobile furnace from said second one of said set of inert gas connection station; and discharging the reduced and cooled metal material from said first mobile furnace; and other claimed features.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tsuge et al. (US 8,915,352), Clark et al. (US 6,569,220), Martinez Vera et al. (US 4,216,011), Hsieh (US 4,160,663) and Knop (US 5,545,251) are also cited in PTO-892.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ABOAGYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8165. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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 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.
/M.A/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/JESSEE R ROE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759