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 .
The examiner notes that no power of attorney appears of record.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II claims 9-11 and 17-19 in the reply filed on 1/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the amounts of the composition are not addressed by the cited prior art and asserts that the cited prior art would not support a rejection – this is not persuasive as the standard for lack of unity includes not making a contribution over the prior art for a special technical feature not establishing anticipation or obviousness of the combination of the substances. Applicant appears to assert overlapping searches. This is not persuasive as the standard for lack of unity is failure to share a special technical feature and / or failure of the special technical feature to make a contribution over the prior art. The lack of unity/restriction mailed 12/12/2025 asserts a failure to share a special technical feature between the groups. Applicant has not fully addressed this a priori lack of unity. The lack of unity/restriction mailed 12/12/2025 also established a posteriori lack of unity by citing to prior art teaching a special technical feature of polyphosphate, inorganic sulfate and amine which was taught by Zheng and by Pislak as cited therein.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-8, 12-16 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 1/15/2026.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
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 9-11 and 17-19 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.
The term “high water demand” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high water demand” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Water demand in cementious compositions relates to the ratio of water to cement (w/c); however, there being no indication of an amount of water or amount of cement it is unclear what ratio would satisfy “high”. The water to cement ratio is affected by various factors known by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention; factors not claimed or addressed by the instant application/claims (i.e. particle size, particle size distribution, Blaine/surface area, porosity, etc.). The term high water demand is indefinite.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9 includes the composition of non-elected claim 1. Claim 9 should be amended to include and expressly recite the limitations of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION AND INTRODUCTION
The following claim interpretation and introduction is expressly incorporated into each and very rejection below as though fully set forth therein.
Giving the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification, a poly phosphate is interpreted to includes salts thereof. See instant specification esp. the below excerpts.
PNG
media_image1.png
150
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
254
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The prior art teaches compositional components of species recognized in the instant specification and dependent claims to be high water content (i.e. limestone, cement kiln dust, etc.) thereby meeting said limitations.
The reference teaches ranges which overlap the instantly claimed ranges thereby rendering same obvious. In some instances, the amounts of the required components result in ranges of the remaining components which will overlap the instantly clamed ranges as more fully below set forth. See MPEP 2144.05(I): "In the case where the 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)" "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See also Warner-Jenkinson Co., Inc. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co., 520 U.S. 17, 41 USPQ2d 1865 (1997)
The prior art also teaches hydraulic compositions as such it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to utilize ranges suitable for this purpose thereby overlapping the claimed ranges. Consider the properties and utilities of the structurally similar prior art species or subgenus. It is the properties and utilities that provide real world motivation for a person of ordinary skill to make species structurally similar to those in the prior art. Dillon, 919 F.2d at 697, 16 USPQ2d at 1905; In re Stemniski, 444 F.2d 581, 586, 170 USPQ 343, 348 (CCPA 1971)
The amounts taught by the prior art may not be entirely set forth as a separate composition of the “composition according to claim 1”; however, the amounts are of the instantly claimed ratios when used in the overall composition and would be expected to be in the same and/or overlapping ranges.
Notwithstanding the teaching of overlapping ranges, the examiner notes: Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[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)
The instant specification provides:
PNG
media_image3.png
234
756
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The claimed phosphate:
The phosphates taught by the cited prior art meet the limitation for a polyphosphate. For example:
PNG
media_image4.png
244
410
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(i.e. polyphosphate with 2-100 phosphate units meeting claim 19)
PNG
media_image5.png
168
380
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(meeting claim 19 for 2-100 phosphate units)
The claimed amine:
The alkanolamines of the prior art meet the limitations for the claimed Formula (I) esp. where at least 2 of R1, R2 and R3 are C1-C4 alkanol:
PNG
media_image6.png
274
394
media_image6.png
Greyscale
(All three R groups are alkanol groups possessing C1-4 carbons)
PNG
media_image7.png
162
390
media_image7.png
Greyscale
(Two R groups are alkanol groups possessing C1-4 carbons)
Claim(s) 9-11 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547) (cited on IDS)
Regarding Claims 9-11 and 17-19:
Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547) (cited on IDS) discloses a composition comprising water, an alkali sulfate a polyphosphate salt and a stabilizer polymer.
The composition comprises water 30-95% of the liquid cement activator composition the alkali sulfate salt (meeting claim 9 for an inorganic sulfate and claim 19 component c for alkali sulfate) is about 0.001 to about 40 % (overlapping 35-85% of alkali sulfate) and the polyphosphate salt is 0.001 to about 30 wt. % (overlapping the range of 5-50% and 10-50%) and a polymer is 0.001 to 30 wt.%. [0052] The sulfate includes sodium sulfate [0074]
The composition includes an activator such as triethanolamine or diethanolamine a polyphosphate and metakaolin (i.e. calcined clay of claim 11 and at least one supplementary cementitious material of claim 9) [0095] (given the amount of the sulfate and polyphosphate and polymer the balance may be as much as 99%% or as little as 1% approx. overlapping the claimed range of 35-85%)
Any suitable amount of the mixture may be added with a cement composition such s 0.001 to 99.999 % [0063]
The cement composition may undergo curing with an activator it includes hydraulic cement [0069] (meeting claim 9 for hydraulic cement) and cement kiln dust in amounts such as 0.001 to 9 wt.% [0070] (i.e. a high-water demand material sulfate/aluminate) and other additives [0071]
The polyphosphate salt includes hexametaphosphate, tri metaphosphate etc. such as sodium hexametaphosphate [0075]
PNG
media_image4.png
244
410
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(i.e. polyphosphate)
The composition includes other components [0088]
The composition is activated to improve compressive strength [0002] and accelerate curing and the activating composition are prepared prior to use to avoid curing too soon [0003]
Claim(s) 9-11 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perez-Pena et al (US 2008/0302276) alternatively further in view of Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547) (cited on IDS)
Regarding claims 9-11 and 17-19
Perez-Pena et al (US 2008/0302276) discloses a composition for cement including Portland cement, sly ash, gypsum, alkanolamine and phosphate where is synergy between the alkanolamine and the phosphate to increase effectiveness of accelerating reactions for quick setting and increased early age compressive strength (Abstract)
HYDRAULIC CEMENT
The composition comprise hydraulic cement and accelerating amounts of alkanolamine and polyphosphate [0010][0011] Using the alkanolamine in combination with the polyphosphate to accelerate setting of the cementitious composition, when the slurry is formed at elevated temperatures, makes possible increased rate of production of cementitious products such as cement boards while reducing alkanolamine levels.[0012]
SYNERGY POLYPHOSPHATE AND ALKANOLAMINE
[0022] There is a synergistic interaction between the polyphosphate and the alkanolamine. Adding the polyphosphate alkanolamine has the benefits of achieving a short final set and increasing early compressive strength for compositions with reduced alkanolamine dosages as compared to compositions lacking the polyphosphate
[0023] In addition, adding the polyphosphate improves mix fluidity contrary to other accelerators such as aluminum sulfate which may lead to premature stiffening of concrete mixtures.
ALKANOLAMINE:
The alkanolamines include mono ethanolamine and diethanolamine, triethanolamine or and combinations thereof [0016] 0.025 to 4.0 wt. %, more preferably about 0.025 to 2.0 wt. %, furthermore preferably about 0.025 to 1 wt. % or about 0.05 to 0.25 wt. %, and most preferably about 0.05 to 0.1 wt. % based on the cementitious reactive components of the invention [0016]
[0060] Alkanolamines are amino alcohols that are strongly alkaline and cation active. The alkanolamine, for example triethanolamine, is typically used at a dosage of about 0.025 to 4.0 wt. %, preferably about 0.025 to 2.0 wt. %, more preferably about 0.025 to 1.0% wt. %, furthermore preferably about 0.05 to 0.25 wt. %, and most preferably about 0.05 to 0.1 wt. % based on the weight of the cementitious reactive powder of the invention. Thus, for example, for 100 pounds cementitious reactive powder there is about 0.025 to 4.0 pounds of alkanolamine.
[0061] Addition of alkanolamines and polyphosphate (described below) has a significant influence on the rapid setting characteristics of the cementitious compositions of the invention when initiated at elevated temperatures. Addition of an appropriate dosage of alkanolamine and polyphosphate under conditions that yield slurry temperature greater than 90.degree. F. (32.degree. C.) permits a significant reduction of the final setting times.
POLYPHOSPHATE
[0017] The dosage of the poly phosphate is about 0.15 to 1.5 wt. %, preferably about 0.3 to 1.0 wt. % and more preferably about 0.4 to 0.75 wt. % based on the cementitious reactive components of the invention. While the preferred phosphate is the sodium tri meta phosphate (STMP), formulations with other poly phosphate such as potassium tri poly phosphate (KTPP), sodium tri poly phosphate (STPP), tetrasodium pyro phosphate (TSPP) and tetra potassium pyro phosphate (TKPP) also provide enhanced final setting performance and enhanced compressive strength at reduced triethanolamine levels
PNG
media_image5.png
168
380
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(meeting claim 19 for 2-100 phosphate units)
[0062] While the preferred polyphosphate is sodium tri metaphosphate (STMP), formulations with other phosphates such as potassium tripolyphosphate (KTPP), sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP), tetrasodium pyrophosphate (TSPP) and tetra potassium pyrophosphate (TKPP) also provide formulations with enhanced final setting performance and enhanced compressive strength at reduced alkanolamine, e.g., triethanolamine, levels.
[0063] The dosage of polyphosphate is about 0.15 to 1.5 wt. %, preferably about 0.3 to 1.0 wt. % and more preferably about 0.5 to 0.75 wt. % based on the cementitious reactive components of the invention. Thus, for example, for 100 pounds of cementitious reactive powder, there may be about 0.15 to 1.5 pounds of polyphosphate.
[0064] The degree of rapid set obtained with the addition of an appropriate dosage of polyphosphate under conditions that yield slurry temperature greater than 90.degree. F. (32.degree. C.) allows a significant reduction of triethanolamine in the absence of high alumina cement.
INORGANIC SULFATE
[0039] Other ingredients may include high alumina cement, calcium sulfate, (meeting the limitation of claim 9 for an inorganic sulfate) and a mineral additive, preferably a pozzolan such as fly ash. Preferably, calcium aluminate cement and calcium sulfate are used in small amounts and preferably excluded, leaving only the hydraulic cement, the mineral additive, and alkanolamine and phosphate as accelerators.
The composition also includes calcium sulfate, calcium aluminate cement Portland cement a mineral additive such as fly ash [0018]
[0020] Another typical cementitious reactive powder includes about 40 to 80 wt. % Portland cement, zero to 20 wt. % calcium aluminate cement, zero to 7 wt. % calcium sulfate, zero to 55 wt. % fly ash, based on the sum of the Portland cement, calcium aluminate cement, calcium sulfate and fly ash. Thus, the cementitious reactive powder blend of the cementitious composition may contain concentrations of mineral additives, such as pozzolanic materials, up to 55 wt. % of the reactive powder blend. Increasing the content of mineral additives, e.g. fly ash, would help to substantially lower the cost of the product. Moreover, use of pozzolanic materials in the composition would also help to enhance the long-term durability of the product as a consequence of the pozzolanic reactions
[0032] While not wishing to be limited to a particular theory, it is theorized that rapid sets are achieved by providing the cementitious reactive powder, e.g., 40-80 wt. % Portland cement, 0-20 wt. % calcium aluminate cement, 0-7 wt. % calcium sulfate, and 0-55 wt. % mineral additive and mixing the cementitious reactive powder, alkanolamine, polyphosphate and water to form slurry at elevated temperatures above 90.degree. F. (32.2.degree. C.) so that formation of ettringite and/or other hydrates of calcium aluminate and/or calcium phosphate compounds can take place as a result of the hydration of this reactive powder blend.
[0034] Typically, in the slurry the weight ratio of the water to cementitious reactive powder blend is about 0.20/1 to 0.80/1, preferably about 0.30/1 to 0.60/1. The amount of water depends on the needs of the individual materials present in the cementitious composition.
The composition further comprises additives with pozzolanic properties such as class C fly ash as well as fillers and other additives [0024-0025] fillers
The composition may comprise a reactive powder blend such as Portland cement, mineral additive such as fly ash at least one alkanolamine and at least one phosphate and may include calcium sulfate [p0026]
The composition comprises minor constituents of sulfates and alkali [0053] (rendering obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to try to use an alkali sulfate in the composition with a reasonable expectation of success.)
SCM/FILLER
The composition comprises hydraulic cement and includes limestone (i.e. a high-water content filler) [0042] the composition comprises metakaolin [0046] (i.e. calcined clay)(meeting claim 11)
ADDITIONAL ADDITIVES
Perez-Pena teaches the composition comprises [0025] Other additives such as one or more of sand, aggregate, lightweight fillers, water reducing agents such as superplasticizers, set accelerating agents, set retarding agents, air-entraining agents, foaming agents, shrinkage control agents, slurry viscosity modifying agents (thickeners), coloring agents and internal curing agents, may be included as desired depending upon the processability and application of the cementitious composition of the invention.
[0042] To manufacture Portland cement, an intimate mixture of limestone and clay is ignited in a kiln to form Portland cement clinker.
[0052] The dry powder comprising of bauxite and limestone is then fed into a rotary kiln. A pulverized low-ash coal is used as fuel in the kiln. Reaction between bauxite and limestone takes place in the kiln and the molten product collects in the lower end of the kiln and pours into a trough set at the bottom. The molten clinker is quenched with water to form granulates of the clinker, which is then conveyed to a stock-pile. This granulate is then ground to the desired fineness to produce the final cement.
PRE-MIX
[0087] Due to the rapid setting characteristics of the cementitious mixture it should be appreciated that the mixing of dry components of the cementitious blend with water usually will be done just prior to the casting operation. As a consequence of the formation of hydrates of calcium aluminate compounds and the associated water consumption in substantial quantities the cement-based product becomes rigid, ready to be cut, handled and stacked for further curing. As such the composition may be produced in a pre-mix in the appropriate proportions and subsequently added to an overall hydraulic cement composition.
FURTHER REGARDING CLAIMED RANGES:
[0032] While not wishing to be limited to a particular theory, it is theorized that rapid sets are achieved by providing the cementitious reactive powder, e.g., 40-80 wt. % Portland cement, 0-20 wt. % calcium aluminate cement, 0-7 wt. % calcium sulfate, and 0-55 wt. % mineral additive and mixing the cementitious reactive (i.e. this is the amount of the powdered components in the overall composition totaling an amount which overlaps the total amount of instant claims 17-18)
Reference claim 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the alkanolamine is provided in an amount of about 0.025 to 1 wt. % based on the weight of the cementitious reactive powder.
Reference Claim 6: The method of claim 1, wherein the polyphosphate is provided in an amount of about 0.15 to 1.5 wt. % phosphate based on the weight of the cementitious reactive powder.
(i.e. the ratio of phosphate to alkanolamine includes 1:1 which is a ratio encompassed by the instant claims)
Reference claim 18: The method of claim 1, wherein the cementitious reactive powder comprises about 40 to 80 wt. % Portland cement, 0 to 20 wt. % calcium aluminate cement, 0 to 7 wt. % calcium sulfate, 0 to 55 wt. % fly ash, based on the sum of the Portland cement, calcium aluminate cement, calcium sulfate and fly ash.
(the ratio of calcium sulfate to the alkanolamine and polyphosphate includes 1:1 encompassed by the instant claims)
PRE-MIX
[0087] Due to the rapid setting characteristics of the cementitious mixture it should be appreciated that the mixing of dry components of the cementitious blend with water usually will be done just prior to the casting operation. As a consequence of the formation of hydrates of calcium aluminate compounds and the associated water consumption in substantial quantities the cement-based product becomes rigid, ready to be cut, handled and stacked for further curing.
As such the composition may be produced in a pre-mix in the appropriate proportions and subsequently added to an overall hydraulic cement composition.
While the reference does not expressly disclose the ranges of the “pre-mix” and final composition, the amounts of each compositional component of the prior art is in the same proportion as that of the instant claims. As such the examiner maintains one of ordinary skill in the art would find the instantly claimed ranges obvious (see also Introduction/Claim Interpretation above).
Notwithstanding same, assuming arguendo the ranges of the prior art do not render obvious the instantly claimed ranges:
Further regarding the ranges of claims
Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547) (cited on IDS) discloses a composition similar to that of Perez-Pena. Haydon discloses a composition comprising water, an alkali sulfate a polyphosphate salt and a stabilizer polymer.
The composition comprises water 30-95% of the liquid cement activator composition the alkali sulfate salt (meeting claim 9 for an inorganic sulfate and claim 19 component c for alkali sulfate) is about 0.001 to about 40 % (overlapping 35-85% of alkali sulfate) and the polyphosphate salt is 0.001 to about 30 wt. % (overlapping the range of 5-50% and 10-50%) and a polymer is 0.001 to 30 wt.%. [0052] The sulfate includes sodium sulfate [0074]
The composition includes an activator such as triethanolamine or diethanolamine a polyphosphate and metakaolin (i.e. calcined clay of claim 11 and at least one supplementary cementitious material of claim 9) [0095] (given the amount of the sulfate and polyphosphate and polymer the balance may be as much as 99%% or as little as 1% approx. overlapping the claimed range of 35-85%)
Any suitable amount of the mixture may be added with a cement composition such s 0.001 to 99.999 % [0063]
The cement composition may undergo curing with an activator it includes hydraulic cement [0069] (meeting claim 9 for hydraulic cement) and cement kiln dust in amounts such as 0.001 to 9 wt.% [0070] (i.e. a high-water demand material sulfate/aluminate) and other additives [0071]
The polyphosphate salt includes hexametaphosphate, tri metaphosphate etc. such as sodium hexametaphosphate [0075] (i.e. polyphosphate)
The composition includes other components [0088]
The composition comprises an activator of an alkali sulfate 0.001-40 wt.% [0053]
The composition is activated to improve compressive strength [0002] and accelerate curing [0003]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to add the polyphosphate, the alkanolamine and the inorganic sulfate in amounts taught by Hayden to the composition of Perez-Pena as these are suitable amounts for cement compositions to provide an improved strength product.
Further Regarding Claim 19
Perez-Pena et al (US 2008/0302276) discloses the limitations above set forth.
Perez-Pena teaches the composition comprises [0025] Other additives such as one or more of sand, aggregate, lightweight fillers, water reducing agents such as superplasticizers, set accelerating agents, set retarding agents, air-entraining agents, foaming agents, shrinkage control agents, slurry viscosity modifying agents (thickeners), coloring agents and internal curing agents, may be included as desired depending upon the processability and application of the cementitious composition of the invention.
[0042] To manufacture Portland cement, an intimate mixture of limestone and clay is ignited in a kiln to form Portland cement clinker.
[0052] The dry powder comprising of bauxite and limestone is then fed into a rotary kiln. A pulverized low-ash coal is used as fuel in the kiln. Reaction between bauxite and limestone takes place in the kiln and the molten product collects in the lower end of the kiln and pours into a trough set at the bottom. The molten clinker is quenched with water to form granulates of the clinker, which is then conveyed to a stock-pile. This granulate is then ground to the desired fineness to produce the final cement.
Assuming arguendo Perez-Pena does not render obvious an alkali sulfate:
Further regarding the ranges of claim 19
Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547) (cited on IDS) discloses a composition similar to that of Perez-Pena. Haydon discloses a composition comprising water, an alkali sulfate a polyphosphate salt and a stabilizer polymer.
The composition comprises water 30-95% of the liquid cement activator composition the alkali sulfate salt (meeting claim 9 for an inorganic sulfate and claim 19 component c for alkali sulfate) is about 0.001 to about 40 % (overlapping 35-85% of alkali sulfate) and the polyphosphate salt is 0.001 to about 30 wt. % (overlapping the range of 5-50% and 10-50%) and a polymer is 0.001 to 30 wt.%. [0052] The sulfate includes sodium sulfate [0074]
The composition includes an activator such as triethanolamine or diethanolamine a polyphosphate and metakaolin (i.e. calcined clay of claim 11 and at least one supplementary cementitious material of claim 9) [0095] (given the amount of the sulfate and polyphosphate and polymer the balance may be as much as 99%% or as little as 1% approx. overlapping the claimed range of 35-85%)
Any suitable amount of the mixture may be added with a cement composition such s 0.001 to 99.999 % [0063]
The cement composition may undergo curing with an activator it includes hydraulic cement [0069] (meeting claim 9 for hydraulic cement) and cement kiln dust in amounts such as 0.001 to 9 wt.% [0070] (i.e. a high-water demand material sulfate/aluminate) and other additives [0071]
The polyphosphate salt includes hexametaphosphate, tri metaphosphate etc. such as sodium hexametaphosphate [0075] (i.e. polyphosphate)
The composition includes other components [0088]
The composition comprises an activator of an alkali sulfate 0.001-40 wt.% [0053]
The composition is activated to improve compressive strength [0002] and accelerate curing [0003]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to add an alkali sulfate in amounts taught by Hayden to the composition of Perez-Pena to provide improved compressive strength and set acceleration with a reasonable expectation of success. Perez Pena expressly contemplates the addition of a set accelerator additive; so, adding the alkali sulfate of Hayden in the amounts taught therein go the composition of Perez-Pena amounts to nothing more than use of a known salt (alkali sulfate) in a known environment (Cementous compositions) to achieve an entirely expected result (set acceleration)
Claim(s) 9-11 and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramkumar et al (WO 2021/105823) published 6/3/2021 (the instant effective filing date is 7/1/2021) (cited on IDS) further in view of Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547)
Regarding claims 9-11 and 16-19:
Ramkumar et al (WO 2021/105823) published 6/3/2021 (the instant effective filing date is 7/1/2021)
Ramkumar discloses a composition of a mineral additive to be added with cement and concrete to improve the strength and durability of concrete. Specifically, the present invention discloses composition and method for making the additive which increases the compressive strength and reduces the water permeability of concrete. (cited on IDS) teaches an additive for concrete compositions comprising:
Claim 1 reference:
1-30% alkali metal carbonate
0.1-20 wt.% alkali metal sulfate (overlapping the claimed ranges of claims 17-18)
0.01-2 wt.% of a tertiary amine which includes tri iso propanolamine (see claims 5 and 10 of reference)
30-70 % industrial byproduct which may comprise fly ash [024]
to 0.5% alkali metal phosphate which includes sodium hexametaphosphate (see claim 7 reference)
The alkali metal sulfate is a mineral additive in an amount of 0.1 to 20 wt.% [0022] The mineral additive improves strength and durability of concrete and increases compressive strength and reduces water permeability of concrete (Abstract)
The composition is added with cement and concrete to improve strength and durability (Abstract) [0019-0020] Hydraulic cements are encompassed within the generic cement (which has a limited number of species therein) and said hydraulic cement binders are used in cement as such it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to try add the composition of Ramkumar to a hydraulic type cement binder and provide improved strength and durability to the composition thereof.
Further regarding the ranges of claims and hydraulic cement
Haydon et al (WO 2017/034547) (cited on IDS) discloses a composition similar to that of Perez-Pena. Haydon discloses a composition comprising water, an alkali sulfate a polyphosphate salt and a stabilizer polymer.
The composition comprises water 30-95% of the liquid cement activator composition the alkali sulfate salt (meeting claim 9 for an inorganic sulfate and claim 19 component c for alkali sulfate) is about 0.001 to about 40 % (overlapping 35-85% of alkali sulfate) and the polyphosphate salt is 0.001 to about 30 wt. % (overlapping the range of 5-50% and 10-50%) and a polymer is 0.001 to 30 wt.%. [0052] The sulfate includes sodium sulfate [0074]
The composition includes an activator such as triethanolamine or diethanolamine a polyphosphate and metakaolin (i.e. calcined clay of claim 11 and at least one supplementary cementitious material of claim 9) [0095] (given the amount of the sulfate and polyphosphate and polymer the balance may be as much as 99%% or as little as 1% approx. overlapping the claimed range of 35-85%)
Any suitable amount of the mixture may be added with a cement composition such s 0.001 to 99.999 % [0063]
The cement composition may undergo curing with an activator it includes hydraulic cement [0069] (meeting claim 9 for hydraulic cement) and cement kiln dust in amounts such as 0.001 to 9 wt.% [0070] (i.e. a high-water demand material sulfate/aluminate) and other additives [0071]
The polyphosphate salt includes hexametaphosphate, tri metaphosphate etc. such as sodium hexametaphosphate [0075] (i.e. polyphosphate)
The composition includes other components [0088]
The composition comprises an activator of an alkali sulfate 0.001-40 wt.% [0053]
The composition is activated to improve compressive strength [0002] and accelerate curing [0003]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to add the polyphosphate, the alkanolamine and the inorganic sulfate in amounts taught by Hayden to the composition of Ramkumar in the form of a hydraulic cement composition as these are suitable amounts for cement compositions to provide an improved strength product.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892 accompanying this office action. For example:
Bullerjahn et al (US 2019/0144339) discloses a supplementary cement component comprises dolomite and aluminum silicate, which have been burned and a binder composition comprising cement and the ground supplementary cement material (Abstract) The composition is a binder comprising the aluminum silicate and dolomite constituents and cement [0027] The composition is a hydraulic composition [0030]
The composition comprises dolomite and limestone [0040] The materials are ground by adding tri iso propanolamine [0061] the composition comprises phosphated poly condensates based on phosphate alkyl carboxylic acids [0069]
[0070] The binder can furthermore contain additives, e.g., rock flour, in particular limestone and/or dolomite, precipitated (nano) CaCO.sub.3, magnesite, pigments, fibres, etc. In addition, SCMs known per se, in particular granulated blast furnace slag, fly ash, SiO.sub.2 in the form of silica fume, micro silica, pyrogenic silica, etc., can be contained. The total amount of these additives is preferably 40 wt. % max., preferably 5 to 30 wt. %, and particularly preferably 10 to 20 wt. %.
[0071] Naturally the sum of all constituents in a mixture, e.g., in a binder or in a starting material, is always 100 wt. %.
The binder comprises calcium sulfo aluminate (See claim 17 reference) and includes calcium sulfates
The minerals include sulfates such as an alkaline sulfates (See claim 16 reference) 19. The binder according to claim 17, wherein it contains an additional sulfate carrier.
20. The binder according to claim 19, wherein it contains from 0.1 to 10 wt. %, preferably from 1 to 7 wt. %, and in particular from 2 to 5 wt. % calcium sulfate or a mixture of calcium sulfates
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA HL WEISS whose telephone number is (571)270-7057. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 830 am-700 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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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.
/PAMELA H WEISS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1732