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 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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 11, 18, 21, 26, 29, 32, 34, 36, 40, 44, 49,52, 57, 58, 73, 93 and 98 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciceri et al ‘712 (US 10,800,712). Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose a process for making a multi-phase material comprising heating K-feldspar at a temperature of at least about 50C in the presence of an alkali metal oxide or hydroxide or an alkaline earth metal or hydroxide. (See col. 5, line 60 to col. 6, line 30.) Ciceri et al ‘712 al further disclose at col. 6, lines 31-33 that the combination is exposed to atmospheric pressure. The difference between the process disclosed by Ciceri et al, and that recited in applicant’s claims 1 and 2, is that Ciceri et al ‘712 do not disclose that an intermediate product is heated at a temperature of at least 180 C, or further reacted at a pressure of at least five atmospheres. It would have nee obvious to modify the process of Ciceri et al ‘712 by reacting intermediate products at a temperature of at least 180 C or a pressure of at least five atmospheres One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so, since Ciceri et al ‘712 teaches at col. 6, lines 27-30 that removal of at least some of the water can occur at temperatures of about 50 C “and/or” 200 C, suggesting ta temperature for the removal of water at a temperature of 50 C, followed by heating at a temperature of 300C. Ciceri et al ‘712 also disclose at col. 6, lines 31-38 that removal of water can occur at atmospheric pressure “and/or” pressures of at least 5 atm, suggesting that the materials could be reached at atmospheric pressure followed by reacting at a pressure of at least 5 atm.
Regarding claim 3, it would have been obvious to react intermediate products without agitation in the process of Ciceri et al ‘712, since intermediate products would inherently have been formed in the process, and there does not appear to be agitation during the process.
Regarding claim 32, it would have been a matter of routine process design to carry out the process of Ciceri et al ‘712 in two different reaction vessels, rather than the same one.
Regarding claims 409 and 44, Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose at col. 6, lines 21-26 that removal of water can occur for a period of about 15 minutes to up to 20 hours.
Regarding claims 52 Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose at col. 5, lines 40 and 41 that the third composition is a dried hydrothermally modified material.
Regarding claim 57, Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose at col. 5, lines 46-51 that the starting materials can include potassium framework silicate ores.
Regarding claim 38, Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose at col. 5, lines 46-51 that the starting materials can include such ores as K-feldspar and biotite, and at col. 6, lines 60-65 alkali metal or alkaline earth metal oxides or hydroxides.
Regarding claim 73, Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose at col. 10, lines 13-24 that the composition can include a K-feldspar phase and a tobermorite or dicalcium silicate hydrate phase.
Regarding claim 93, the phase percentages recited therein are suggests at col. 3, lines 41-61 of Ciceri et al ‘712.
Regarding claim 98, Ciceri et al ‘712 disclose in the Abstract that the composition can be used as a fertilizer.
Claims 1-3, 11, 18, 21, 26, 29, 32, 34, 36, 40, 44, 49,52, 57, 58, 73, 93 and 98 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wender et al (US 2023/0055830). Wender et al disclose a method for making a multi-phase material comprising reacting an alkali metal silicate with an oxide, hydroxide or carbonate of an alkali metal or alkaline earth metal at a temperature between 90 C and 400 C and a pressure between one atm and 300 atm. (See Paragraph [0009].) Thew difference between the process disclosed by Wender et al, and that recited in applicant’s claims 1 and 2, is that Wender et al do not disclose that the materials should be heated at a temperature of at most 100 C to form intermediate products, followed by reacting the intermediate products at a temperature of at least 180 C, or reacting the materials at a pressure of at most two atmospheres to form intermediate products,, followed by reacting the intermediate products at a pressure of at least five atmospheres. It would have been obvious to heat the starting materials at a temperature of at most 100 C or a pressure of at most two atmospheres in the process of Wender et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so, since Wender et al suggest such temperatures and pressures in Paragraph [0009]. It would have been further obvious to heat the intermediate products at a temperature of at least 180 C or a pressure of at least five atmospheres. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so, since Wender et al teach in Paragraphs [0010] that the intermediate combination is dried, and discloses drying temperatures of 200 C in Paragraph [0106] and drying pressures of 100 atm in Paragraph [0028].
Regarding claims 3, 34 and 36,, Wender et al disclose in Paragraph [0106] that the drying step can occur without agitation.
Regarding claim 32, it would have been a matter of routine process design whether the process should be carried out in two different reaction vessels, or the same reaction vessel.
Regarding claims 40 and 44, Wender et al disclose reaction times of one minute to 24 hours in Paragraphs [0106].
Regarding claims 57 and 58, Wender et al disclose in Paragraph [0100] that the starting materials can include K-feldspar or rhyolite.
Regarding claims 73 and 93, the ranges of phases recited therein are disclosed in Paragraph [0166] of Wender et al.
Regarding claim 98, Wender et al disclose in Paragraph [0005] that the composition is useful as a fertilizer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE A LANGEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-1353. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:15 am to 4:15 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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.
/WAYNE A LANGEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights