DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed on 03/13/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 9 and 11-13 has/have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-13 are now pending in the application.
Response to Amendment
The previous drawing objections have been withdrawn in light of applicant's replacement drawings.
The previous 35 USC 112 rejections are withdrawn in light of applicant's amendments.
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) 1-3 and 5-13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Skoda et al. (GB 1,461,578).
Regarding claim 1, Skoda et al. teaches a holding device (anchoring; title) for holding a ceramic anchor brick (title) on a furnace wall (col. 1, lines 15-17), the holding device comprising:1.1 fastening means (1-5) for fastening the holding device to the furnace wall (col. 3, lines 5-12), 1.2 a receiving part (12) for holding the ceramic anchor brick on the holding device (figure 1), 1.3 the ceramic anchor brick (at 7), wherein 1.4 the ceramic anchor brick has a receiving section (7), and 1.5 the receiving part has a receptacle (inner portion of 12) in which the receiving section is received (figure 1), characterized in that 1.6 the receptacle is designed as a gap (figure 1) with a gap width decreasing in one direction (figure 1), and wherein 1.7 the receiving section is insertable into the receptacle (figure 1) in the direction of the decreasing gap width of the receptacle (tapered receptacle; figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Skoda et al. teaches the receiving section is form-fit received in the receptacle (figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Skoda et al. teaches the receiving section is received in the receptacle in a frictionally engaged manner (it is understood that the receiving section is received in the receptacle in a frictionally engaged manner as a result of the contact between the receiving section and the receptacle).
Regarding claim 5, Skoda et al. teaches the receiving section received in the receptacle rests against the receptacle over entire surface (figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Skoda et al. teaches the receiving part is formed in one piece (figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Skoda et al. teaches the receptacle is formed by a C-shaped receiving part (figure 1).
Regarding claim 8, Skoda et al. teaches the receiving section is formed adjacent to an end face of the anchor brick (figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Skoda et al. teaches the fastening means comprises a first fastening part (1st hook 3) and a second fastening part (2nd hook 3), wherein the first fastening part is configured to be fastened to the furnace wall (as illustrated, the first fastening part is capable of being fastened to the furnace wall at 6; figure 1), wherein the second fastening part is fastened to the receiving part (col. , lines 35-40), and wherein the second fastening part is configured to be fastened to the first fastening part (it is understood that the second fastening part is capable of being fastened to the first fastening part between the anchor brick and the receptacle; figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Skoda et al. teaches a furnace wall (col. 1, lines 15-17), 10.2 one or more holding devices (figure 1) according to claim 1, wherein the holding devices are each fastened to the furnace wall via the fastening means (figure 1).
Regarding claim 11, Skoda et al. teaches the holding devices are fastened to the furnace wall in such a way that the gap width of the gaps of the receptacles of the holding devices decreases in a downward direction (figure 1; the examiner notes that the direction is arbitrary since it is capable of being defined as downward depending on the point of view or perspective).
Regarding claim 12, Skoda et al. teaches a method for fastening one or more holding devices according to claim 1 to a furnace wall of a furnace (col. 3, lines 5-15), the method comprising the following steps: fastening the holding devices via the respective fastening means (figure 1) to the furnace wall (at 6; figure 1) such that the gap width of the gaps of the receptacles of the holding devices is reduced (tapered receptacle; figure 1) in a downward direction (figure 1; the examiner notes that the direction is arbitrary since it is capable of being defined as downward depending on the point of view or perspective).
Regarding claim 13, Skoda et al. teaches a ceramic anchor brick (title) for a holding device (1) for holding the ceramic anchor brick (figure 1) on a furnace wall (col. 1, lines 15-17), comprising the following features: 13.1 a receiving section (7) receivable in a receptacle (inner portion of 12) of the holding device for holding the ceramic anchor brick on the holding device (figure 1), wherein 13.2 the receiving section is insertable into the receptacle in the direction of a decreasing gap width of the receptacle (tapered receptacle; figure 1), and wherein 13.3 the receiving section is designed such that the receiving section can be received with form-fit in the receptacle (figure 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 of this title, 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(s) 4, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skoda et al. (GB 1,461,578).
Regarding claim 4, Skoda et al. teaches the receiving section is frictionally received in the receptacle (it is understood that the receiving section is received in the receptacle in a frictionally engaged manner as a result of the contact between the receiving section and the receptacle), however, the figure 1 embodiment does not specifically disclose by a first fixing means. The figure 3 embodiment of Skoda et al. discloses a first fixing means (10) which is capable of providing increased frictional engagement. Therefore, from the teaching of the figure 3 embodiment of Skoda et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the figure 1 embodiment to include a first fixing means, as taught by the figure 3 embodiment, in order to further secure the anchor brick to the holding device for increased support and reinforcement to the assembly for a more robust engagement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant’s argument that Skoda does not teach the receptacle is designed as a gap with a gap width decreasing in one direction, and wherein the receiving section is insertable into the receptacle in the direction of the decreasing gap width of the receptacle, has been carefully considered. Applicant attests that in the current application the receptacle 201 is designed as a gap with a gap width decreasing in one direction, namely, in the depicted figures from top to bottom, with surfaces 208, 209 of the receptacle 201 as well as the surface 205 of the receptacle 201 forming a downwardly decreasing gap width of the receptacle 201. Whereas in Skoda applicant argues that the section of the refractory brick 7 that can be inserted into the inner portion 12 of the sleeve 1 cannot be inserted in the direction of this decreasing gap width… [r]ather, the section of the refractory brick 7 that can be inserted into the inner portion 12 of the sleeve 1 can only be inserted into the inner portion 12 in a direction normal to this direction of the decreasing gap width, namely, in Figure 1, essentially normal to the drawing plane. However, the examiner agrees that the decreasing gap width is shown in figure 1 to be parallel to the sleeves of the U-shaped member, and since the brick at 7 is capable of being inserted in this parallel direction, the claim limitation is met. It is understood that the U-shaped member is bendable and would therefore allow the brick to be pressed therein. While the applicant argues that direction of insertion is different to what the applicant intends, under broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, the direction is arbitrarily claimed. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any reasonable evidence that the brick cannot be inserted in the direction parallel to the U-shaped member, which is the interpreted direction of the decreasing gap width as claimed.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR F HIJAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5790. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-6 EST Monday-Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached on (571) 270-3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F HIJAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3633