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 § 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 7, 11-14, and 17 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.
In claim 7, the phrase “the slurry” lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
In claim 11, the phrase “the precious metal” lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
In claim 14, the phrase “the affinity” lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
In claim 17, the phrase “the … pre-treatment” lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, and 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Simmons US 5458866.
Regarding claim 1, and 16-17, Simmons teaches a process of treating a sulfide ore (Abstract) that may contain organic carbon 0.5% (Col. 5, l. 31). The ore may be received in a horizontally arranged reactor with oxygen (Fig. 2, Item 238, 242), which is considered a pipe reactor under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. The ore is hydrometallurgically treated in the pipe reactor (Fig. 2, Item 238) at a pressure and temperature that is sufficient to oxidize the organic carbon (col. 12, l. 7-20).
Regarding claim 2, the reactor (Fig 2, Item 238) is a pressure vessel because it operates at high pressure (Table 3).
Regarding claim 3, pressure vessel is an autoclave (col. 12, l. 21) the first stages of the reactor (Fig. 2, Item 238), may be considered a “pre-treatment” pressure oxidation under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims.
Regarding claim 4, the temperature may be 200 deg. C (Table 3).
Regarding claim 5, the pressure may be 314 psig (Table 3).
Regarding claim 7, The ore may be heated then received in a horizontally arranged reactor with oxygen (Fig. 2, Item 238, 242) after which it is cooled and depressurized (Fig. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 10, the duration may be 20 min (Table 3).
Regarding claim 11 and 15, the process includes the recovery of gold (claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, the process further includes precipitation steps (Claim 51).
Regarding claim 13, gold may be recovered by adsorption onto activated carbon (col. 9, l. 8-22).
Regarding claim 14, the treatment process inherently increases the affinity of the gold to the activated carbon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 1, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not teach or suggest the features of claims 8 and 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A FIORITO whose telephone number is (571)272-9921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/JAMES A FIORITO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
