DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a heating system that elevates a temperature of the kiln” (Claim 1)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
“a heating system that elevates a temperature of the kiln” (from Claim 1) is being interpreted as a system comprising gas or liquid fuel fired burners and/or electrical resistive heating elements, and equivalents thereof
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Grady (US 2019/0119588 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (CN 208303881 U) (hereinafter “Zhang”) (see attached original document and translation for reference) and Liss et al. (US 2018/0051877 A1) (hereinafter “Liss”).
Regarding Claim 1, O’Grady teaches of an indirectly heated rotary kiln (Fig. 2) comprising:
an outer housing (3) (see at least [0077] and Fig. 2);
a kiln (4) having a body (as is shown in Fig. 2) (see at least [0077] and Figs. 2, 6-7), a first end (left-hand end of element (4) with respect to Fig. 2), and a second end (right-hand end of element (4) with respect to Fig. 2) that define a cavity (as is shown in Fig. 2) (see at least [0077] and Figs. 2, 6-7), the kiln being dimensioned to fit within the outer housing (as is shown in Fig. 2) (see at least [0077] and Figs. 2, 6-7);
a feed screw assembly (83) coupled to the outer housing that transports feedstock into the kiln through the first end (as is shown in Fig. 6) (see at least [0104] and Figs. 2, 6-7);
an extraction screw assembly (15) coupled to the outer housing that removes product material from the kiln through the second end (as is shown in Fig. 7) (see at least [0120] and Figs. 2, 6-7); and
a heating system that elevates a temperature of the kiln (heating system comprising at least burner elements (11) and (18)) (see at least [0077] and Figs. 1-2).
O’Grady also teaches of controlling kiln rotation speed (see at least [0182] and Fig. 2), feed screw rotation speed (see at least [00127]-[0128] and Fig. 6) and extraction screw rotation (see at least [0184] and Fig. 7).
O’Grady fails to teach that the outer housing includes an upper outer housing pivotably coupled to a lower outer housing.
Zhang discloses a relatable rotary kiln system (Fig. 2) that comprises a kiln (2) disposed within an outer housing (1) (see at least [0013]-[0016] and Figs. 1-2). The outer housing includes an upper outer housing (11) pivotably coupled to a lower outer housing (12) (see at least [0013]-[0016] and Figs. 1-2). Zhang teaches that such configuration enables, inter alia, “simple maintenance” and “automated cooling control” (see at least [0016] and Fig. 2).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus taught by O’Grady by configuring the existing outer housing to include an upper outer housing pivotably coupled to a lower outer housing as is taught by Zhang. Doing so would have yielded an outer housing configuration that enables simple maintenance and automated cooling control.
Furthermore, O’Grady fails to explicitly teach of an electronic controller that controls a temperature profile along a length of the kiln in addition to the existing controllable kiln rotation speed, feed screw rotation speed and extraction screw rotation.
Liss discloses a relatable rotary kiln system (Fig. 2A) that comprises a kiln (200) through which material to be heat treated passes (see at least [0031], [0041] and Fig. 2A). Liss teaches that the system comprises an electronic controller (202) that controls all aspects of the system including a temperature profile along a length of the kiln (“axial temperature profile”), kiln rotation speed (“kiln rotation rate”), feed rate (“feed rates”) and extraction rate (“rate” of extraction at (at least) port (112)) (see at least [0031]-[0034] and Fig. 2A). Liss teaches that such a controller is advantageous because, inter alia, it provides means for controlling all aspects of the system from a common location while enabling the creation and sustainment of “a plurality of reaction zones” (see at Abstract, [0031]-[0034] and Fig. 2A).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have further modified the apparatus taught by O’Grady by configuring the rotary kiln to comprises an electronic controller that controls all aspects of the rotary kiln including a temperature profile along a length of the kiln in addition to the existing kiln rotation speed, feed rate via feed screw rotation speed and extraction rate via extraction screw rotation speed based on the teachings of Liss. Doing so would have provided means for controlling all aspects of the apparatus from a common location while enabling the creation and sustainment of a plurality of distinct reaction zones. Note that such modification would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Grady, Zhang and Liss further in view of Hope et al. (US 5,655,313) (hereinafter “Hope”).
Regarding Claim 2, O’Grady, Zhang and Liss teach the indirectly heated rotary kiln according to Claim 1 (see the rejection for Claim 1) and O’Grady also teaches of a drive mechanism (100) that is configured to rotate the kiln (see at least [0018] and Figs. 2, 6).
O’Grady (in addition to Zhang and Liss) fails to explicitly teach that the drive mechanism comprises a motor drive and chain drive.
Hope discloses a relatable rotary kiln system (Fig. 1) that comprises a kiln (50) through which material to be heat treated passes (see Fig. 1) that is rotatable within an outer housing (31) (see at least Col. 3 lines 6-20 and Fig. 1). Hope teaches of a drive mechanism (drive mechanism comprising elements (76) and (73) as shown in Fig. 1) that is configured to rotate the kiln (see at least Col. 3 lines 48-61 and Fig. 1) that comprises a motor drive (76) and chain drive (73) (see at least Col. 3 lines 48-61 and Fig. 1). Hope teaches that such a motor drive/chain drive configuration, inter alia, enables the rotational power source (i.e., the motor) to be disposed in any desired location and out of excessive heat via a “bracket” element (77) or “wall” mount (see at least Col. 3 lines 48-61 and Fig. 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have further modified the combined apparatus by configuring the existing drive mechanism to comprise a motor drive and chain drive based on the teachings of Hope. Doing so would have (at least) enabled the rotational power source (i.e., the motor) to be disposed in any desired location and out of excessive heat. Note that such modification would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art is considered relevant to this application in terms of structure and use:
Lobik et al. (US 10,132,496 B1)
Harris et al. (US 2009/0175779 A1)
Fordred (US 363,057)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN W JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8523. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5:00 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, Steve McAllister can be reached at 571-272-6785. 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.
/BENJAMIN W JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 1/13/2026
/STEVEN B MCALLISTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762