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 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.
Claims 1-4, 10-12, 16, 19-26, 29, 32, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Filippini (WO 0152976).
Regarding claims 1-4, 10, 21-23, Filippini discloses an emulsion explosive that includes ammonium nitrate, fuel oil, and additives such as potassium carbonate (meets pH agent as described in Applicant’s specification) (pg. 31), molybdenum disulfide, alkali and alkaline earth phosphates (meets metal ion binding agent as described in Applicant’s specification) (pg. 31).
Regarding claim 11, potassium carbonate is a base.
Regarding claim 12, the pH of the pH agent will be inherent to the compound since the same claimed compounds are used.
Regarding claim 16, the stability will be inherent since the same claimed compounds are used.
Regarding claims 19. 20, 29, the additives are present at 1 % of the composition (pg. 35).
Regarding claims 24 and 25, Filippini discloses the use of urea (meets nitrous acid neutralizing agent). This compound will inherently be stable at the claimed temperature since the same compound is used.
Regarding claim 32, the emulsion is used as an explosive for blasting
Regarding claim 33, the use in reactive ground is s statement of intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments that the prior art discloses a fertilizer composition are not well taken. The background of the prior art and multiple sections in the prior art refer to the use of the composition as an explosive emulsion. It is very clear that the prior art is indicating that the composition can be used for multiple things one of which is an explosive. There is an entire section of the disclosure which refers to explosive emulsions from page 14-16 of the prior art.
Conclusion
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 AILEEN BAKER FELTON whose telephone number is (571)272-6875. The examiner can normally be reached Monday 9-5:30, Thursday 11-3, Friday 9-5:30.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/AILEEN B FELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734