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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 23rd, 2026 has been entered.
By the amendment claims 11, 13, 15, and 19 are pending with claims 11 and15 being amended and claim 19 being added.
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 classification rotor 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.
The applicant is also advised that if added to the drawings the numeral also needs to be added to the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: in L15-16, “wherein: the at least one dynamic classifier” should be “the at least one dynamic classifier”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant is advised that should claim 11 be found allowable, claim 13 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 11, 13, 15 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 11 has the dynamic classifier making two classifications then dispersing the material then separating a further fraction. In the specification, the dispersion and further classification happens after a static classification (Pg 11, L8-13) in a separate dynamic classifier (10).
Claims 13, 15 and 19 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies.
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.
Claims 11, 13, 15 and 19 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 11 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the at least one dynamic classifier being configured to disperse the fraction.” Claim 11 outlines two different fractions (coarse and fines), it is unclear which of these fractions are being dispersed.
Additionally, it is unclear whether this is being done in the same at least one dynamic classifier or a different dynamic classifier as outlined in the specification (see 112a rejection as outlined above).
Furthermore, claim 11, L22 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the starting material.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim will be interpreted as if it read “a starting material.”
Claims 13, 15 and 19 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 11, 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guenther et al. (US 20140306044), hereafter Guenther.
With regards to claim 11 Guenther discloses an installation for producing a powdered starting material provided for manufacturing rare earth magnets (Abstract; could be used for this purpose), comprising at least one dynamic classifier (3) having a feed inlet (upper housing 11a) configured to receive a powdered intermediate product which includes at least one rare earth metal obtained from pulverizing an alloy, separate a fraction from the powdered intermediate product by means of at least one dynamic classifier having a feed inlet configured to receive a powdered intermediate product which includes at least one rare earth metal obtained from pulverizing an alloy, the at least one dynamic classifier being configured to separate a fraction from-a the powdered intermediate product by means of at least two classifications that follow one another in time, each directed at particle size and/or particle density, wherein the at least one dynamic classifier separates coarse material (via medium material outlet 17) from the powdered intermediate product as part of a first classification of said at least two classifications and separates fine material from the powdered intermediate product (via fine material outlet 18) as part of a second classification of said at least two classifications, the at least one dynamic classifier having a classifying rotor (rod basket 12), the at least one dynamic classifier being configured to disperse the fraction to establish a homogenous distribution of particles in the fraction and perform a renewed classification to separate a further fraction from the dispersed fraction, said further fraction forming a starting material used to manufacture rare earth elements (P0052).
With regards to claim 13, Guenther discloses all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Guenther further discloses wherein the at least one dynamic classifier is formed for classifying and dispersing (via rod basket 12) the powdered intermediate product supplied (P0052)
With regards to claim 15, Guenther discloses all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Guenther further discloses wherein the at least one dynamic classifier may comprise the performs at least one of the at least two classifications directed at particle size and/or density under a protective gas atmosphere (P0052, L1-5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guenther.
With regards to claim 19, Guenther discloses all the elements of claim 11 as outlined above. Guenther does not directly disclose wherein the at least one dynamic classifier comprising the at least on dynamic classifier provides for the starting material to include a fraction of particles >8 µm in an amount <2 volume percent and/or a fraction of particles <2 µm in an amount 2 volume percent. However, this is considered routine optimization and is therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention based on what the end product is being used for (MPEP 2144.05).
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments are rendered moot. New grounds of rejection are outlined above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LYNN BURKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5824. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am to 6:00pm EST.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571)272-7805. 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.
/J.L.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653