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 Acknowledged
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 18-27, in the reply filed on 04/01/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that unity is not properly broken. Applicant argues that the fluidized bed in Backstrom et al. (US 3,813,196 (A)) is not in the screw conveyor but located before the screw conveyor. This is not found persuasive because Backstrom et al. discloses that the fluidized bed can be located “here” (col. 6, lines 18-27), referring to the lowest point of the chamber where the screw conveyor resides. Even if the fluidized were limited to a region above the screw conveyor, the chamber in FIG. 2 is open and the fluidized bed would be in contact with and adjacent to the screw conveyor, the total region of which can be broadly defined as being a conveying region, thereby meeting the recited claim limitation of “formed in the conveyor.”
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Status of Claims
Claims 18-34 are pending. Of the pending claims, claims 18-27 are presented for examination on the merits. Claims 28-34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Three (3) information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were submitted on 10/12/2023 (two submissions) and 04/03/2026. 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:
In the Brief Description of the Drawings (para. [0011]), there are descriptions for Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4, but there is no description for Figure 5. All drawings must be accounted for. See MPEP § 608.01(f) and 37 C.F.R. 1.74. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 18, 20, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 4,284,393 (A) to Brunosson et al. (“Brunosson”).
Regarding claim 18, Brunosson discloses a method of manufacturing metallic powder (process for manufacturing metal powders). Abstract; col. 1, lines 6-18. The method includes atomizing a melt stream into droplets formed by directing a jet of gas transversely into the stream (gas atomization). Col. 1, lines 37-55. A stream (8) of metal melt (6) travels through the collecting chamber (3) of container (1) and falls as powder (4) onto an inclined bottom (metal particles are discharged from a chamber of a gas atomizer into a conveyor). FIGS. 1 and 2.
When the powders land on the inclined bottom (30) (conveyor), the powders are fluidized by gas and slide to an outlet, the gas inducing a cooling effect on the powder and the incline facilitating movement of the powder towards the outlet (simultaneous cooling and transporting metal particles in the form of a fluidized bed formed in the conveyor). Col. 1, lines 56-64; col. 3, lines 7-20; FIG. 2.
Regarding claim 20, Brunosson illustrates the powders (4) as being discharged directly from the container (1) onto the inclined bottom (30) (direct discharge from the chamber of the gas atomizer into the conveyor). FIG. 2.
Regarding claim 26, Brunosson discloses that the powder is cooled down to a temperature of 50°C when reaching the bottom of the container (wherein the metal particles in the conveyor are cooled below 150°C). Col. 2, lines 63-68; col. 3, lines 1-6.
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.
Claims 19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunosson, as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 3,771,929 (A) to Hellman et al. (“Hellman”).
Regarding claim 19, Brunosson does not specify whether the metal powder is discharged from the collecting chamber (3) of container (1) continuously.
Hellman is directed to an apparatus and method for manufacturing powder by atomizing molten material by a fluid. Col. 1, lines 7-13. Cooling occurs continuously (title; col. 2, lines 49-53), and once the drops of molten material have solidified to powder, they are fed continuously out of the chamber (col. 3, lines 49-52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have conducted the process of Brunosson continuously and continuously discharged the powders because a continuous process facilitates a faster and higher volume throughput of powder due to lack of interruption of the cooling process.
Regarding claim 22, Brunosson discloses that the powder is cooled down to a temperature of 50°C when at bottom of the container. Col. 2, lines 63-68; col. 3, lines 1-6. It follows that the powder must be greater than 50°C prior to reaching the bottom of the container. Brunosson is silent regarding whether the temperature is below 300°C upon reaching the container bottom (at discharge from the chamber of the gas atomizer).
Hellman teaches that fine metal particles or drops are collected are collected after they have been cooled to such as extent that they have solidified and reached such a temperature that there is no longer any risk of the metal particles sticking together. Col. 2, lines 6-16. This implies that the particle temperature must be less the solidus temperature and not hot enough to be malleable, deformed, and/or agglomerated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have cooled the metal particles of Brunosson to a temperature well below the solidus temperature, which includes temperatures less than 300°C for metal, in the collecting chamber prior to reaching the inclined bottom so that the particles are not misshapen and do not adhere to one another.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunosson, as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 2016/0332232 (A1) to Forbes Jones et al. (“Forbes Jones”).
Regarding claim 21, Brunosson does not teach the existence of at least one further chamber of at least one further gas atomizer.
Forbes Jones is directed to a method of producing a metallic powder material. Abstract; para. [0003]. The method shows a single transfer unit and single atomizing apparatus, but includes embodiments comprising multiple atomizing apparatuses. Para. [0031]. Multiple apparatuses translate into increased process rates and decreased material production costs in an apparatus employing other atomizing apparatuses downstream of an atomizing hearth. Para. [0031].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added additional gas atomizers comprising additional chambers to the apparatus and process of Brunosson because this would permit the user to multiple the volume of powder produced within the same window of time compared to production using a single atomizing device, improving efficiency and increasing production of final product.
Claims 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunosson, as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 4,359,434 (A) to Tiberg (“Tiberg”).
Regarding claim 23, Brunosson discloses a gas supply provided by nozzles or openings (32) in the bottom (30) to form the fluidized bed (col. 3, lines 12-20), but does not specify the type of gas.
Tiberg is drawn to a process for granulating slag melts, glass melts, ceramic melts, metal melts, and melts of metal alloys. Abstract; col. 1, lines 5-10. The granulate is subjected to a fluidized bed. Col. 4, lines 3-5; col. 5, lines 11-14. The fluidized bed may comprise compressed air. Col. 6, lines 40-68; col. 7, lines 1-11.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have utilized air as the gas in Brunosson because it is inexpensive and readily available.
Regarding claim 24, Brunosson discloses a gas supply provided by nozzles or openings (32) in the bottom (30) to form the fluidized bed (col. 3, lines 12-20), but does not specify the type of gas.
Tiberg is drawn to a process for granulating slag melts, glass melts, ceramic melts, metal melts, and melts of metal alloys. Abstract; col. 1, lines 5-10. The granulate is subjected to a fluidized bed. Col. 4, lines 3-5; col. 5, lines 11-14. The fluidized bed can contain steam and/or gases, e.g., inert gases. Col. 4, lines 3-11. The fluidized bed may comprise compressed air. Col. 6, lines 40-68; col. 7, lines 1-11. The gases may be ejected from multiple nozzles. Col. 6, lines 46-56.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used a combination of different types of gases, such as air and inert gas, in different regions of the container bottom of the fluidized bed of Brunosson because a mixture would allow the user to customize heat capacity, and therefore cooling rate, of the fluidized bed. In addition, the selection of gas based on location (section) of the container bottom would enable cooling to be selected based on gas property, such as extra protection against oxidation for inert gas, and air for inexpensive cooling once oxidation is no longer a concern.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunosson, as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 2002/0179489 (A1) to Choudhary et al. (“Choudhary”).
Regarding claim 25, Brunosson discloses fluidizing the powder (col. 1, lines 59-64; col. 3, lines 12-17), but does not specify the type of fluidization.
Choudhary is directed to a method for gas-solid contacting in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor. Abstract. Choudhary states that most commercial gas fluidized bed reactors for catalytic and non-catalytic reaction operate in the bubbling regime as fluidized bubbling beds. Para. [0004]. Advantages of bubbling fluidized bed reactors are rapid mixing and high rates of heat transfer. Para. [0005]. Bubbling fluidized beds reactors can be operated to achieve efficient contact between solid and gas. Para. [0012].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have operated the fluidization of Brunosson under a bubbling regime because this mode would enable high heat transfer and exchange and increased contact between gas and solid particles, leading to more efficient and more effective cooling of the atomized particles.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunosson, as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Hellman and Choudhary.
Regarding claim 27, Brunosson does not teach having the metal particles undergo a first cooling step in a lower section of the container via bubbling fluidized bed ahead of discharging the particles.
Hellman is directed to an apparatus and method for manufacturing powder by atomizing molten material by a fluid. Col. 1, lines 7-13. Hellman discloses an embodiment in which drops of molten metal are cooled in a fluidized bed (12) prior to being discharged in solidified form through outlet (14). Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 43-54; col. 4, lines 13-17. Although cooling jackets may cool the molten metal, the use of a fluidized bed may be useful in shortening the length of the apparatus because the molten droplets need to only be solidified on their surface when reaching the fluidized bed. Col. 3, lines 55-67; col. 4, lines 1-25.
It would have been obvious to have incorporated fluidized bed cooling within the container of Brunosson prior to reaching the bottom because the molten droplets would cool and solidify more quickly than relying on just gas cooling alone. In addition, a fluidized bed before discharge would decrease the length of the atomizing apparatus, conserving space to operate.
Brunosson discloses fluidizing the powder (col. 1, lines 59-64; col. 3, lines 12-17), but does not specify the type of fluidization.
Choudhary is directed to a method for gas-solid contacting in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor. Abstract. Choudhary states that most commercial gas fluidized bed reactors for catalytic and non-catalytic reaction operate in the bubbling regime as fluidized bubbling beds. Para. [0004]. Advantages of bubbling fluidized bed reactors are rapid mixing and high rates of heat transfer. Para. [0005]. Bubbling fluidized beds reactors can be operated to achieve efficient contact between solid and gas. Para. [0012].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have operated the fluidization of Brunosson under a bubbling regime because this mode would enable high heat transfer and exchange and increased contact between gas and solid particles, leading to more efficient and more effective cooling of the atomized particles.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
DE 3546071 (A1) to Reif (computer-generated translation is attached) discloses an apparatus for the production of metal powder by atomization from a metal melt (abstract). The cooling chamber bottom is designed as a horizontal trough (para. [0004]). The air generated by fans results in a strong and turbulent fluid bed (para. [0019]).
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
June 09, 2026
Prosecution Insights