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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 08/25/2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. There is no English explanation of the Chile search reports.
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.
Claim 28 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 28 requires an intermediate pool of molten glass being held within a stilling chamber of a stilling tank of the stiller the intermediate pool of molten glass is heated with combustion products discharged from one or more non-submerged burners mounted in a housing of the stilling tank. There is no support in the specification of the present application for heating with a non-submerged burner in the stiller and/or stilling step.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites a “stiller” however does not clearly identify a structure that is said “stilling vessel, stilling chamber, or “stiller” [0078] of the published specification of the present application indicates the downstream vessels of “hot-end subsystem 30 also may include stilling vessel, stilling chamber, or stiller but there is no indication of the stiller being a separate vessel in the present claims and the specification only indicates a stiller allows the molten glass to settle in [0078].
For the purpose of this examination any area downstream of the submerged combustion melting is considered a stiller, this includes any area of a glass melting process downstream of the melter where glass may still or settle to some extent.
The claims recite the terms, fining and conditioning. The published specification of the present application indicates the stiller begins the process of “fining the molten glass” [0078] thus any stiller is considered to also be fining the molten glass at the downstream portion of said stiller.
[0095] of the published specification recites “conditioning the fined molten glass” which does not clearly define what “conditioning of molten glass entails. Fining, Conditioning, stilling are all terms known in the art to remove bubbles from the glass or homogenize the glass and will be interpreted as such for the purpose of this examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 22-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shita (CN 1583614) as cited in the machine translation provided and Raju et al. (US 9752998) and as evidenced by Huber et al. (US 20180044214)
Regarding claim 1, Shita discloses a glass manufacturing method (title) [comprising:
melting feedstock, or raw material, into molten glass melt in a combustion melter (Fig 1, 40, Page 4),
Shita discloses discharging the melted glass (G) to a stiller (Fig, 1, 40 Page 4 ¶4) downstream of the melter (Fig 1) for defoaming, thus the glass from the melter is foamy and stilled in said stiller (Page 4 ¶4).
Shita then discloses the glass is
continuously or intermittently the glass raw material is put into the melting tank 20, the clarifying tank 40 defoaming molten glass, and then introducing a working slot 60 adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps
Intermediate or subsequent step of the procedure, there may be other processes, for example, can be provided for the homogenization process of the stripe to remove glass after the decontamination bag process.
Shita does not specifically use the word fining however; Shita also refers to the settling tank (40) as a clarifying tank (40), known in the art as fining, thus the downstream end of the stiller is considered to fine the stilled molten glass given the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses the “working tank” (60) where the glass is
adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps, high production efficiency in manufacturing the glass (at least page 7 ¶ 2)
considered the claimed conditioning tank given the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses a combustion melter but does not specifically; disclose a submerged combustion melter.
In an analogous art of combustion melting glass, Huber discloses melting glass using a submerged combustion melter which causes rapid melting [0002] It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Shita with submerged combustion melting as motivated to yield rapid melting of feedstock. The submerged combustion melting also naturally yields turbulent melting and foamy glass melt as evidenced by Huber [0002] and thus turbulent melting causes a fluctuating flow rate due to the turbulence within the glass melt exiting the melter to the stiller.
Shita indicates the glass melt being used for any product Huber discloses the glass melting method for a bushing (making glass fibers), or gob cutters known in the art [0080].
does not specifically state steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product.
In an analogous art of manufacturing a glass container, Raju discloses steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product (Col 3; lines 47-59-Col 4; lines 1-35), it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to manufacture containers from the glass melt of Shita and submit containers to annealing, inspecting and packaging as motivated to produce an inspected container and package for further distribution.
Regarding claim 2, The combined teachings of Shita and Huber disclose receiving the feedstock in a melter, dosing some amount of feedstock, and transmitting the feedstock to a location for the submerged combustion melting step. (See rejection of claim 1)
Regarding claims 22-25,
MPEP 2144.04 states;
In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (Claims directed to a lumber package "of appreciable size and weight requiring handling by a lift truck" were held unpatentable over prior art lumber packages which could be lifted by hand because limitations relating to the size of the package were not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art.); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) ("mere scaling up of a prior art process capable of being scaled up, if such were the case, would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled." 531 F.2d at 1053, 189 USPQ at 148.).
The glass factory having a floor, walls, and roof simply described a building that the installation exists within. The size of the building or manufacture materials thereof is not considered to limit the glass manufacturing method
Regarding claim 26, Shita does not indicate cooling in the stilling step thus it would be obvious to a skilled artisan that heat loss is prevented to some extent in the stilling step and reducing foam tank 40 defoaming molten glass (Page 7 ¶2).
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shita (CN 1583614) as cited in the machine translation provided and Raju et al. (US 9752998) and as evidenced by Huber et al. (US 20180044214) and Arbeit (US 2691689) and Nagano (CN 103269986).
Regarding claims 15-16, Shita discloses a glass manufacturing method (title) [comprising:
melting feedstock, or raw material, into molten glass melt in a combustion melter (Fig 1, 40, Page 4),
Shita discloses discharging the melted glass (G) to a stiller (Fig, 1, 40 Page 4 ¶4) downstream of the melter (Fig 1) for defoaming, thus the glass from the melter is foamy and stilled in said stiller (Page 4 ¶4).
Shita then discloses the glass is
continuously or intermittently the glass raw material is put into the melting tank 20, the clarifying tank 40 defoaming molten glass, and then introducing a working slot 60 adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps
Intermediate or subsequent step of the procedure, there may be other processes, for example, can be provided for the homogenization process of the stripe to remove glass after the decontamination bag process.
Shita does not specifically use the word fining; however, Shita also refers to the settling tank (40) as a clarifying tank (40), known in the art as fining, thus the downstream end of the stiller is considered to fine the stilled molten glass given the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses the “working tank” (60) where the glass is
adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps, high production efficiency in manufacturing the glass (at least page 7 ¶ 2)
considered the claimed conditioning tank given the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses a combustion melter but does not specifically; disclose a submerged combustion melter.
In an analogous art of combustion melting glass, Huber discloses melting glass using a submerged combustion melter which causes rapid melting [0002] It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Shita with submerged combustion melting as motivated to yield rapid melting of feedstock. The submerged combustion melting also naturally yields turbulent melting and foamy glass melt as evidenced by Huber [0002] and thus turbulent melting causes a fluctuating flow rate due to the turbulence within the glass melt exiting the melter to the stiller.
In an analogous art of glass melting Arbeit discloses a first melting area, followed by refining and conditioning zones (Page 1, Col 1 lines 4-12) where it is known to provide multiple fining compartments and conditioning compartments (Page 1, Column 1; lines 42-48, Page 1; Col 2; lines 40-45). Examiner notes there is no clear distinction between the claimed stilling step and other fining steps. Arbeit discloses a heating means in the stiller, considered the intermediate pool of the stiller, of electrodes (22) Arbeit further discloses spouts, or conduits, from one refining compartment to another to prevent backflow into an upstream vessel or compartment and ensure a defoamed/bubble free, homogenous glass (Page 1; Column 1; lines 1-19, 42-56). Arbeit discloses controlling the flow between each settling, refining, and conditioning vessel with a plunger such as (12 or 13) in orifices such as 10 or 11 as depicted in Fig 1. For controlling the outflow of molten glass (Page 2, Col 4; lines 1-13).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide plungers in the feeding spouts between each refining vessel, including stillers, refining, conditioning and additional refining taught by Arbeit as motivated to control the flow and speed conditions of the glass between vessels.
Shita indicates the glass melt being used for any product Huber discloses the glass melting method for a bushing (making glass fibers), or gob cutters known in the art [0080].
does not specifically state steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product.
In an analogous art of manufacturing a glass container, Raju discloses steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product (Col 3; lines 47-59-Col 4; lines 1-35), it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to manufacture containers from the glass melt of Shita and submit containers to annealing, inspecting and packaging as motivated to produce an inspected container and package for further distribution.
Shita desires continuous melting however does not disclose the exact claim language “the entire method produces between 95 and 126 tons of glass per day in an installation having a capacity-adjusted size of less than 440 cubic meters per each ton of glass produced per day.”
In an analogous art of glass melting Nagano discloses a molten glass flow path can be 14-29m in length, producing 100-1000 tons/day of glass [0027]
MPEP 2144.05 states; 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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 and [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)
Furthermore, In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device
Optimization of the dimensions of the installation as motivated to achieve a desired production rate is obvious as indicated by Nagano.
Claim(s) 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shita (CN 1583614) as cited in the machine translation provided and Raju et al. (US 9752998) and as Huber et al. (US 20180044214) and Arbeit (US 2691689) and further in view of Hiroshi (JP H06127953)
Regarding claim 18, Shita discloses a glass manufacturing method (title) [comprising:
melting feedstock, or raw material, into molten glass melt in a combustion melter (Fig 1, 40, Page 4),
Shita discloses discharging the melted glass (G) to a stiller (Fig, 1, 40 Page 4 ¶4) downstream of the melter (Fig 1) for defoaming, thus the glass from the melter is foamy and stilled in said stiller (Page 4 ¶4).
Shita then discloses the glass is
continuously or intermittently the glass raw material is put into the melting tank 20, the clarifying tank 40 defoaming molten glass, and then introducing a working slot 60 adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps
Intermediate or subsequent step of the procedure, there may be other processes, for example, can be provided for the homogenization process of the stripe to remove glass after the decontamination bag process.
Shita does not specifically use the word fining however; Shita also refers to the settling tank (40) as a clarifying tank (40), known in the art as fining, thus the downstream end of the stiller is considered to fine the stilled molten glass given the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses the “working tank” (60) where the glass is
adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps, high production efficiency in manufacturing the glass (at least page 7 ¶ 2)
considered the claimed conditioning tank given the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses a combustion melter but does not specifically; disclose a submerged combustion melter.
In an analogous art of combustion melting glass, Huber discloses melting glass using a submerged combustion melter which causes rapid melting [0002] It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Shita with submerged combustion melting as motivated to yield rapid melting of feedstock. The submerged combustion melting also naturally yields turbulent melting and foamy glass melt as evidenced by Huber [0002] and thus turbulent melting causes a fluctuating flow rate due to the turbulence within the glass melt exiting the melter to the stiller.
In an analogous art of glass melting Arbeit discloses a first melting area, followed by refining and conditioning zones (Page 1, Col 1 lines 4-12) where it is known to provide multiple fining compartments and conditioning compartments (Page 1, Column 1; lines 42-48, Page 1; Col 2; lines 40-45). Examiner notes there is no clear distinction between the claimed stilling step and other fining steps. Arbeit discloses a heating means in the stiller, considered the intermediate pool of the stiller, of electrodes (22) Arbeit further discloses spouts, or conduits, from one refining compartment to another to prevent backflow into an upstream vessel or compartment and ensure a defoamed/bubble free, homogenous glass (Page 1; Column 1; lines 1-19, 42-56). Arbeit discloses controlling the flow between each settling, refining, and conditioning vessel with a plunger such as (12 or 13) in orifices such as 10 or 11 as depicted in Fig 1. For controlling the outflow of molten glass (Page 2, Col 4; lines 1-13).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide plungers in the feeding spouts between each refining vessel, including stillers, refining, conditioning and additional refining taught by Arbeit as motivated to control the flow and speed conditions of the glass between vessels thus a controlled outflow and inflow.
Shita indicates the glass melt being used for any product Huber discloses the glass melting method for a bushing (making glass fibers), or gob cutters known in the art [0080].
does not specifically state steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product.
In an analogous art of manufacturing a glass container, Raju discloses steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product (Col 3; lines 47-59-Col 4; lines 1-35), it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to manufacture containers from the glass melt of Shita and submit containers to annealing, inspecting and packaging as motivated to produce an inspected container and package for further distribution.
Raju discloses forming a glass gob for molding however does not specifically state the exact claim language of the “molten charge as a freefalling glass gob, and wherein the forming step includes receiving the freefalling glass gob directly into a forming mold.
In an analogous art of forming a molten glass charge, Hiroshi discloses forming a glass molten charge as a free falling glass gob (107) cut by blades (106) from freefalling glass into a mold (6). Where Raju is silent as to how the glass gob, or charge, it put into a mold it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to look to the available art for a suitable method of getting a glass gob from a molten glass into a mold and thus be motivated to use the method of Hiroshi.
Claim(s) 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shita (CN 1583614) as cited in the machine translation provided and Raju et al. (US 9752998) and Huber et al. (US 20180044214) and Arbeit (US 2691689) as applied above and further in view of Ueda (US 20040194506).
Regarding claim 19 and 21, Shita discloses a glass manufacturing method (title) [comprising:
melting feedstock, or raw material, into molten glass melt in a combustion melter (Fig 1, 40, Page 4),
Shita discloses discharging the melted glass (G) to a stiller (Fig, 1, 40 Page 4 ¶4) downstream of the melter (Fig 1) for defoaming, thus the glass from the melter is foamy and stilled in said stiller (Page 4 ¶4).
Shita then discloses the glass is
continuously or intermittently the glass raw material is put into the melting tank 20, the clarifying tank 40 defoaming molten glass, and then introducing a working slot 60 adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps
Intermediate or subsequent step of the procedure, there may be other processes, for example, can be provided for the homogenization process of the stripe to remove glass after the decontamination bag process.
Shita does not specifically use the word fining however; Shita also refers to the settling tank (40) as a clarifying tank (40), known in the art as fining, thus the downstream end of the stiller is considered to fine the stilled molten glass given the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses the “working tank” (60) where the glass is
adjusted to the viscosity suitable for forming and then is continuously flowing out and processed into a desired shape of a series of steps, high production efficiency in manufacturing the glass (at least page 7 ¶ 2)
considered the claimed conditioning tank given the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification.
Shita discloses a combustion melter but does not specifically; disclose a submerged combustion melter.
In an analogous art of combustion melting glass, Huber discloses melting glass using a submerged combustion melter which causes rapid melting [0002] It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Shita with submerged combustion melting as motivated to yield rapid melting of feedstock. The submerged combustion melting also naturally yields turbulent melting and foamy glass melt as evidenced by Huber [0002] and thus turbulent melting causes a fluctuating flow rate due to the turbulence within the glass melt exiting the melter to the stiller.
Shita indicates the glass melt being used for any product Huber discloses the glass melting method for a bushing (making glass fibers), or gob cutters known in the art [0080].
does not specifically state steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product.
In an analogous art of manufacturing a glass container, Raju discloses steps of
annealing; inspecting; and packaging the glass product (Col 3; lines 47-59-Col 4; lines 1-35), it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to manufacture containers from the glass melt of Shita and submit containers to annealing, inspecting and packaging as motivated to produce an inspected container and package for further distribution.
Raju discloses forming a glass gob for molding however does not specifically state the exact claim language of the “molten charge as a freefalling glass gob, and wherein the forming step includes receiving the freefalling glass gob directly into a forming mold.
In an analogous art of forming a molten glass charge, Ueda discloses forming a glass molten charge as a free falling glass gob (10) cut by blades (8) from freefalling glass into a mold (14) and pushing molten glass (5) through the circumferentially closed conduit (3) with plunger (7). Where Raju is silent as to how the glass gob, or charge, it put into a mold it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to look to the available art for a suitable method of getting a glass gob from a molten glass into a mold and thus be motivated to use the method of Ueda.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shita (CN 1583614) as cited in the machine translation provided and Raju et al. (US 9752998) and as evidenced by Huber et al. (US 20180044214) as applied above and further in view of Olin Nunez (CA 2701611)
Regarding claim 20, Shita discloses providing a feedstock to the melting furnace which necessarily comes from some type of area considered a holding device. Shita does not disclose the exact claim language receiving and holding the feedstock; and pneumatically transmitting the feedstock downstream toward a location where the submerged combustion melting step is carried out.
In analogous art a providing feedstock to a glass melting furnace, Olin-Nunez discloses a container for holding pulverized material and discharging means with pneumatic conveying means arranged to provide material to the melter (Page 7; lines 17-20). Where Shita is silent as to how the feedstock is stored and provided to the melter it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to look to analogous art of a feedstock supply to a glass melter and modify Shita with that of Olin-Nunez as being motivated to use a suitable feedstock feed system for a glass melter.
Claim(s) 27-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shita (CN 1583614) as cited in the machine translation provided and Raju et al. (US 9752998) and Huber et al. (US 20180044214) as applied above and further in view of Arbeit (US 2691689) and Charbonneau (US 20170015579)
Regarding claim 27-31, the combined disclosures of Shita and Huber disclose a submerged combustion melter with a settling tank and refiner for defoaming.
In an analogous art of glass melting Arbeit discloses a first melting area, followed by refining and conditioning zones (Page 1, Col 1 lines 4-12) where it is known to provide multiple fining compartments and conditioning compartments (Page 1, Column 1; lines 42-48, Page 1; Col 2; lines 40-45). Examiner notes there is no clear distinction between the claimed stilling step and other fining steps. Arbeit discloses a heating means in the stiller, considered the intermediate pool of the stiller, of electrodes (22) Arbeit further discloses spouts, or conduits, from one refining compartment to another to prevent backflow into an upstream vessel or compartment and ensure a defoamed/bubble free, homogenous glass (Page 1; Column 1; lines 1-19, 42-56). Arbeit discloses controlling the flow between each settling, refining, and conditioning vessel with a plunger such as (12 or 13) in orifices such as 10 or 11 as depicted in Fig 1. For controlling the outflow of molten glass (Page 2, Col 4; lines 1-13).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide plungers in the feeding spouts between each refining vessel, including stillers, refining, conditioning and additional refining taught by Arbeit as motivated to control the flow and speed conditions of the glass between vessels.
The combined disclosure of Shita and Arbeit disclose electrode heating to reduce bubbles during fining, they do not specifically disclose non-submerged combustion heating. In analogous art of fining glass Charbonneau discloses one or more low momentum non-submerged burners 22A, 22B, and 22C may be positioned in respective ports 20A, 20B, and 20C to impinge combustion product streams 24A, 24B, and 24C upon a portion of foam layer 18 [0054] It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute one known heating means of electrodes with the combustion heating means for the same purpose of reducing bubbles in molten glass during the fining process.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments regarding the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection is moot as it has been withdrawn. Examiner thanks Applicant for pointing out support for the previous claim amendments.
Applicant’s arguments against the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections are moot as the rejections do not concern this prior art.
Examiner would like to hold an interview if Applicant believes it would make prosecution more efficient. Currently the opinion of the Examiner is that the present invention comprises a method of submerged combustion with multiple fining vessels, though the claims are not written as they are separate vessels. As indicated in the prior art in the rejections herein, it is well-known to provide multiple fining vessels or channels, known by names of stilling vessels, refiners, fining vessels, homogenizers, clarifiers conditioners. In the art of submerged combustion it is well-known that the submerged combustion burners cause a lot of turbulence in the glass melt, this yields efficient melting but also yields entrapped gases, see US 20140007623 (abstract, background [0005]) as evidence or relied upon US 20140090421 [0073]. When a skilled artisan seeks bubble free glass refining is necessary as indicated in at least US 20020162358 and as indicated above it is known to have multiple refining steps, vessels or channels. The claims have not differentiated the present invention from the teachings and motivation to combine as indicated in the presently relied upon prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pertinent art Hideki (CN 102858697) Hideki discloses a glass manufacturing method (title) [comprising:
A first step S100 of melting feedstock, or raw feed material, [0004], [0041] into molten glass melt in a combustion melter [0005]-[0006], [0018], using combustion melter (10) [0037]-[0038],
Hideki discloses a step (s200) discharging the melted glass to a settling tank, or stiller downstream of the melter [0039] for defoaming, thus the glass from the melter is foamy [0040]-[0043].
US 20170253518 2 submerged combustion melter, 8 stiller section (20) and refiner (after 20, due to ramp (25) [0041]), 30 third vessel considered conditioner
Tetsuo (CN 203498246) as cited in the machine translation provided herein.
Regarding claim 28, Shita discloses the stiller has glass within thus any portion is considered an intermediate pool to hold molten glass however Shita fails to indicate said intermediate pool of molten glass is heated with combustion products discharged from one or more non-submerged burners mounted in a housing of the stilling tank. Tetsuo discloses a settling tank for defoaming [0016] wherein at least part of the settling tank is heated in the wall surface in order to defoam [0026] [0076], [0088]-[0089]
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JODI COHEN FRANKLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3966. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am-4 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, Alison Hindelang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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.
JODI COHEN FRANKLIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1741
/JODI C FRANKLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
