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 I claims 1-7, 10 and 12-13 in the reply filed on 12/2/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that concurrent with the election the applicant has amended the non-elected claims to include the limitations of the elected claims and asserts no undue burden. This is not found persuasive because: the non-elected claims are drawn to a method of making the carbo paste and a method of lining an aluminum electrolysis cell. As set forth in the restriction office action mailed 10/2/2025 these groups possess different classification/subclassification establishing recognition in the art as separate fields of endeavor. Further the product may be made by another materially different process. And the product may be used in another materially different process.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8-9 and 11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
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 1-4, 6-7, 10 and 12 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.
The term “minimum amount” in claims 1 and 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “minimum amount” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what the property/goal to be achieved is so as to ascertain what a minimum amount is as that will vary depending on the properties sought (i.e. to adhere, to bind, to achieve a particular viscosity or density, etc.)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 10 appears to recite an intended uses (which would each possess separate and distinct classification) and does not further limit the composition as set forth in claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(2) as being anticipated by JP 2010/018798A Hideki Koujiya
Regarding claim 12:
JP 2010/018798A Hideki Koujiya discloses an epoxy resin comprising epoxy resin A and a curing agent B a polysaccharide component F and/or a polyhydric alcohol (Claims of reference) as well as B a polyamine, C crosslinking aqueous resin and D phosphorous flame retardant C:D”D:F 100;70 to 400:20 to 160:20 to 160:80 to 200 The polysaccharide and/or polyhydric alcohol is glucose and glycerin.
Excerpts with emphasis added by examiner:
(8) The (F) polysaccharide and / or polyhydric alcohol is glucose, sucrose, monopentaerythritol, dipentaerythritol, polypentaerythritol, tris (2-hydroxyethyl) isocyanate, triethylene glycol, sorbitol. Indoor or outdoor use according to any one of the above (4) to (7), which is at least one selected from the group consisting of resorcinol, glycerin, trimethylolmethane, trimethylolpropane, diethylene glycol, propylene glycol hexamethylene glycol and inositol Foaming agent type fireproof
Examples of the aqueous epoxy resin include bisphenol A type, bisphenol F type, brominated bisphenol A type, hydrogenated bisphenol A type, bisphenol S type, bisphenol AF type, biphenyl type, naphthalene type, phenol novolak type, and ortho-cresol novolak type. And glycidyl ether type epoxy resins, polyglycol type epoxy resins, alicyclic epoxy resins, and modified epoxy resins in which various modifiers are reacted with epoxy groups or hydroxyl groups in these epoxy resins. These aqueous epoxy resins may be used singly or in combination of two or more as a coating composition.
Examples of the antifoaming agent that can be used in the present invention include low molecular weight compounds such as lower alcohols, higher alcohols, fats and oils, fatty acids, fatty acid esters, phosphate esters, metal soaps, and mineral oils. Examples include antifoaming agents, polyether-based, and silicone-based polymer antifoaming agents. These may be used alone or in combination of two or more.
Similarly, as the foaming agent (E) which is one of the main components, various materials can be used as long as they can generate incombustible gases such as nitrogen and ammonium when heated. Examples include nitrogen compounds such as melamine, urea, dicyanamide, guanidine and guanidine sulfamate. These may be used alone or in combination of two or more. This (E) component can expand the carbide | carbonized material produced | generated by combustion of the fire-resistant coating film further, and can further improve the heat insulation of a fire-resistant coating film by this.
Similarly, (F) polysaccharide and / or polyhydric alcohol, which is one of the main components, is a component that is carbonized by heat during foaming of the foaming agent to form a porous charcoal layer containing bubbles inside. is there. For example, polysaccharides such as glucose and sucrose, monopentaerythritol, dipentaerythritol, polypentaerythritol, tris (2-hydroxyethyl) isocyanate, triethylene glycol, sorbitol, resorcinol, glycerin, trimethylol methane, trimethylol propane and polyhydric alcohols such as diethylene glycol, propylene glycol hexamethylene glycol and inositol. These may be used alone or in combination of two or more.
(where porous charcoal and carbonized carbide render obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention try calcined anthracite coal where there are only four types of coal anthracite which is the highest rank of coal with high fixed carbona and low volatile matter, bituminous coal middle range, sub bituminous which is black and dull and lignite which is brown low grade coal)
Except as otherwise above set forth, the prior art does not teach the ranges of the instant claims and does not provide motivation to alter the teachings of the prior art to those of the instant claims.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(2) as being anticipated by Keulen et al WO 2015/076675
Regarding Claim 12:
Keulen et al WO 2015/076675 discloses a geopolymer binder composition comprising a matrix forming material comprising a mineral binder and optionally an adjuvant selected from aggregate, resin, combinations, a liquid and an optional alkaline re agent (P2 l3-12)
The mineral binder includes materials such as pozzolanic, hydraulic and non hydraulic including powder coal fly ash ground granulated blast furnace slag, calcinated clay, industrial slag, industrial incineration ash, cement, modified and/or green cement, natural minerals, waste minerals etc. and combinations (P5 L3-14)
The composition further comprises a resin (P5 L22-24)
The composition further comprises aggregates (P5 L28-P6l8)
The aggregate may have a size range of 0.2550 mm, 1- 2 mm 204 mm 4-8 mm etc. (P13 L8-14) See also reference claim 6 for particles less than 4 mm and greater than 4 mm.
The composition comprises resins such as epoxy resin (P6 L10-18)
The composition comprises additives such as sugars including glucose (P7 L18-22)and sugar derivatives such as glycerol (P7 L25-30) and combinations thereof.
The composition may be cured (P10 L20-30)
The composition is suitable for use in industrial and utility applications (P11 L15-20)
Except as otherwise above set forth, the prior art does not teach the ranges of the instant claims and does not provide motivation to alter the teachings of the prior art to those of the instant claims.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(2) as being anticipated by Alibek et al US 2021/0261459A1
Regarding Claim 12:
US 2021/0261459A1 discloses adhesives resin epoxide bonding agents [0034] used with pumping aids such as coal tar asphalt [0039] in the form of a paste [0042 0046]
The composition comprising a carbon source of glucose and glycerol and combinations thereof [0068]
The composition comprises aggregate [0102]
The composition comprises a composition which promotes adherence such as adhesive resins and epoxies [0106]
The composition is used with a tamping rod [0159] [0162]
Except as otherwise above set forth, the prior art does not teach the ranges of the instant claims and does not provide motivation to alter the teachings of the prior art to those of the instant claims.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(2) as being anticipated by KR 20180051097A KonBong Jin Kim et al
Regarding Claim 12:
KR 20180051097A KonBong Jin Kim et al teaches a dust forming coal composition binder comprising steelmaking dust, epoxy resin, glycerol and glucose (See claim 1 of reference)
Except as otherwise above set forth, the prior art does not teach the ranges of the instant claims and does not provide motivation to alter the teachings of the prior art to those of the instant claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunan Zhenshen Carbon (CN 105347824A)
Regarding claims 1-4
Hunan Zhenshen Carbon (CN 105347824A) teaches a cold ramming paste for an arc furnace comprising 16-20 pbw binder and 10 pbw additive and 75-82 pbw of skeletal material (Abstract)
The composition comprises a paste comprising aggregate 75-82 pbw a binding agent 16-20 pbw (where 82 is sufficiently close to 84 as in the instant claims as to ender same obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention absent evidence of criticality rendering claims 2-3 obvious) and an additive 5-10 pbw where the aggregate is crushed to below 12 mm (overlapping the range of claim 4) The aggregate includes electrically calcined anthracite at 1 mm to 10 mm (overlapping range of claim 4) (See claims)
Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) See MPEP 2144.05(I): "In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976)"
Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)(emphasis added by examiner)
Described binding agent is one or several the mixture in modified coal asphalt, coal tar, carbolineum, resin.
The object of this invention is to provide the special cold preparation method smashing paste of the overall brickwork of a kind of mineral hot furnace, the method production process is without the need to heating, energy consumption is low, efficiency is high, little to environmental influence, the cold paste product of smashing prepared can make operation firm by ramming at normal temperatures, and has the advantages such as density is high, intensity is high, anti-oxidant, wear-resistant after sintering. Hunan does not expressly disclose the resin to be epoxy or the binder to further comprise glucose and glycerol
Keulen et al WO 2015/076675 discloses a geopolymer binder composition comprising a matrix forming material comprising a mineral binder and optionally an adjuvant selected from aggregate, resin, combinations, a liquid and an optional alkaline re agent (P2 l3-12)
The mineral binder includes materials such as pozzolanic, hydraulic and non hydraulic including powder coal fly ash ground granulated blast furnace slag, calcinated clay, industrial slag, industrial incineration ash, cement, modified and/or green cement, natural minerals, waste minerals etc. and combinations (P5 L3-14)
The composition further comprises a resin (P5 L22-24)
The composition further comprises aggregates including coarse and fine aggregate which may have grain diameter of at least 4 mm or less than 4 mm respectively (P5 L28-P6l8)
The aggregate may have a size range of 0.2550 mm, 1- 2 mm 204 mm 4-8 mm etc. (P13 L8-14) See also reference claim 6 for particles less than 4 mm and greater than 4 mm.
The composition comprises resins such as epoxy resin (P6 L10-18)
The composition comprises additives such as sugars including glucose (P7 L18-22)and sugar derivatives such as glycerol (P7 L25-30) and combinations thereof.
The composition may be cured (P10 L20-30)
The composition is suitable for use in industrial and utility applications (P11 L15-20)
The geopolymer binder cures quickly and can replace conventional construction materials to provide an environmental and sustainable advantage (P1 L10-15)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to add the binder of Keulen to the binder of Hunan as it is suitable for use in industrial and utility applications and functions as a geopolymer type binder and will impart additional environmental benefits to the composition and method of Hunan.
(Except as otherwise above set forth, the prior art does not teach the ranges of the instant claims and does not provide motivation to alter the teachings of the prior art to those of the instant claims).
Claim Objections
Claims 2-6 and 13 are objected to so as to better recognize the antecedent bases of various claim limitations:
Claims 2 line 1 and claim 3 line 1 require correction “of electrically” to “of the electrically”, in claim 2 - line 1, claim 3 – line 1,
Claims 4 line 1 requires correction: “electrical” to “the electrically”
Claims 5-line 2 claim 6 line 1 and claim 13 line 2 require correction: “gluclose” to “the glucose”
Claims 5 line 2 and claim 6 line 1 and clam 13 line 2 require correction: “glycerol” to the “glycerol”
Claims 5 line 2, claim 6 line 2 and claim 13 line 2 require correction: “epoxy” to ‘the “epoxy”
Claims 5 and 13 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
(The prior art does not teach the ranges of the instant claims and does not provide motivation to alter the teachings of the prior art to those of the instant claims).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA HL WEISS whose telephone number is (571)270-7057. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 830 am-700 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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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.
/PAMELA H WEISS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1732