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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 7, 11, 12, 19, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 2 at line 3 of the second page, “comprise position” should be corrected to –comprise a position--.
In claim 2 at line 4 of the second page, “and electric current” should be corrected to –and the electric current--.
In claim 7, “the electrical current… are in phase” should be corrected to EITHER –the electrical current… is in phase—OR –the electrical currents… are in phase--.
In claim 11, “receive first electric” should be corrected to –receive a first electric--.
In claim 11, “receive second electric” should be corrected to –receive a second electric--.
In claim 12, “the longitudinal axis” should be corrected to –the longitudinal axis of the crucible assembly—to maintain consistent wording.
In claim 19, “is” after “master controller” should be deleted.
In claim 20 at the second to last clause, “comprise position” should be corrected to –comprise a position--.
In claim 20 at the second to last clause, “and electric current” should be corrected to –and the electric current--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 2 limitation “localized to an arc region” is interpreted according to its plain meaning, which is limited to the arc region rather than along the entire crucible or a substantial portion of the crucible.
No claim limitations are interpreted under 112(f).
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.
Claim 19 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 19 recites “the electric current being provided to the secondary electromagnetic energy source.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, rendering the claim indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as and may be corrected to --an electric current being provided to the secondary electromagnetic energy source--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Akers (US 3793468).
PNG
media_image1.png
850
851
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Akers discloses:
A vacuum (col 20 lines 43-54) arc remelting (VAR) system (col 1 lines 20-21) for forming an ingot (360, col 32) from an electrode (348, 349), the system comprising:
a crucible assembly (mold 353) configured to accommodate the electrode and the ingot, wherein the crucible assembly includes an upper end portion (top in Fig 10, adjacent 356) and a lower end portion (bottom in Fig 10, adjacent 355);
a primary electromagnetic energy source (coil 362) arranged about the crucible assembly, wherein the primary electromagnetic energy source and the crucible assembly are configured to move relative to one another along a longitudinal axis of the crucible assembly (“Axially slidable on the solenoid is a concentrated coil 362 with a magnetic yoke 364” col 32 line 67-col 33 line 1); and
a secondary electromagnetic energy source (solenoid 357, “The invention includes a magnetic field produced by solenoid 357” col 34 lines 58-60) arranged about the upper end portion of the crucible assembly, wherein the secondary electromagnetic energy source is stationary and fixed to the upper end portion of the crucible assembly (“The solenoid it is noted, extends above and below the axial position of the electrode tip 349.” col 32 lines 58-60).
Regarding claim 13, Akers discloses:
the primary electromagnetic energy source moves along the longitudinal axis of the crucible assembly (“Axially slidable on the solenoid is a concentrated coil 362 with a magnetic yoke 364” col 32 line 67-col 33 line 1).
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akers (US 3793468) in view of Patel (US 2019/0112688).
Regarding claim 16, Akers discloses:
[all limitations of claim 1]
Akers does not disclose:
a current controller configured to provide electric current to the primary electromagnetic energy source.
Akers discloses that the primary electromagnetic energy source coil 362 “being adjustable by means symbolized by rheostat 371 in lead 369, leads 369 and 370 being connected to a source of energizing potential, not shown” (col 32 lines 68-col 33 line 5). The coil is configured for variable excitation to produce a magnetic field (col 33 lines 27-30).
Patel teaches, at ¶31:
“To control the current through the coil assembly 108 and thus, control the magnetic field, the VAC system 100 further comprises a coil current controller. Referring to FIG. 4, a coil current controller 130 includes a microcontroller 132, at least one H-bridge for each coil pair (e.g., H-bridges 134A, 134B, and 134C for coil pairs B-B′; and C-C′, respectively), and one or more DC power supplies 136.”
It is obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results. See MPEP 2143(B). The MPEP states the prior art must: (1) teach a device (method) which differs from the claimed device (method) by the substitution of some component or step with another component (step), (2) teach that the substituted components and their functions were known, and (3) show that one of ordinary skill could have substituted one known element for another to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(B).
In this case, Akers teaches a VAR1 system that differs from the claimed VAR system because it has a rheostat and undisclosed voltage source, rather than a current controller. The rheostat and voltage source of Akers and the current controller of Patel both perform the function of controlling a magnetic field. One of ordinary skill could have replaced the rheostat and voltage source of Akers with the current controller of Patel to achieve predictable results because both references deal with generating a magnetic field for a VAR system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VAR system of Akers by replacing the rheostat and voltage source of Akers with the current controller of Patel because the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12, 14, 15, 17,18, and 20-23 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.
Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Akers does not disclose claim 2, at least because it is lacking “magnetic fields generated by the primary electromagnetic energy source and the secondary electromagnetic energy source are localized to an arc region during remelting.” Localized is interpreted according to its plain meaning and the definition from US 11434544 " limited to this arc region 105 rather than along the entire crucible 112, or a substantial portion thereof"—which is consistent with the plain meaning.
Akers does not disclose claim 9. Akers is silent as to the structure of the solenoid, and so does not disclose “a coil assembly having a magnetic core and a plurality of coil pairs wrapped around the magnetic core.” One might expect the solenoid to be spirally wrapped around the crucible.
Akers does not disclose claim 20, at least because it is lacking “a primary current controller configured to provide electric current to the primary electromagnetic energy source; a secondary current controller configured to provide electric current to the secondary electromagnetic energy source; and a master controller configured to receive process inputs from the primary current controller and the secondary current controller and to provide current settings to each of the primary current controller and the secondary current controller based on the process inputs, the master controller further configured to communicate with a main VAR furnace controller, wherein the process inputs comprise position of the primary electromagnetic energy source and electric current being provided to each of the primary electromagnetic energy source and the secondary electromagnetic energy source, and wherein magnetic fields generated by the primary electromagnetic energy source and the secondary electromagnetic energy source are localized to an arc region during remelting.”
Akers does not disclose claim 21, at least because it is lacking “a secondary electromagnetic energy source arranged about the upper end portion of the crucible assembly, wherein the secondary electromagnetic energy source is stationary and fixed to the upper end portion of the crucible assembly.” Note that the solenoid 357 would be mapped to “an axial electromagnetic energy source wound about the longitudinal axis of the crucible assembly.”
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Regarding claim 1, Patel (US 2019/0112688) discloses:
A vacuum arc remelting (VAR) system for forming an ingot from an electrode (102), the system comprising:
a crucible assembly (112) configured to accommodate the electrode and the ingot, wherein the crucible assembly includes an upper end portion and a lower end portion;
a primary electromagnetic energy source (coil assembly 108, ¶29) arranged about the crucible assembly, wherein the primary electromagnetic energy source and the crucible assembly are configured to move relative to one another along a longitudinal axis of the crucible assembly (¶36).
Patel does not disclose:
a secondary electromagnetic energy source arranged about the upper end portion of the crucible assembly, wherein the secondary electromagnetic energy source is stationary and fixed to the upper end portion of the crucible assembly.
Cibula2 (US 20230349024) discloses movable coil 300 that moves along the crucible as the arc portion moves. Cibula2 discloses “the one or more magnetic field sources include one or more sources moveable longitudinally along the current-containing volume,” (¶85) but does not disclose or suggest an arrangement with a movable magnetic field source and a fixed magnetic field source “arranged about the upper end portion of the crucible”
PNG
media_image2.png
1116
879
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Ageev (RU 2346221) discloses a set of magnets 10 fixed at the upper end of the crucible, above the highest melt level. “The arc control system provides the alternate inclusion of electromagnets of the upper group 10, moving the arc 31 from one sector of the crucible to another, as shown in Fig.2.” In addition, there are magnets in the lower portion of the crucible to provide mixing of the melted metal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOPAZ L ELLIOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-5851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 a.m. - 4 p.m. 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on (571) 270-5569. 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.
/TOPAZ L. ELLIOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
1 VAR = vacuum arc remelting
Prosecution Insights