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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 21-25 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siracki et al. (US 2007/0017955 A1) in view of Chao et al. (US 3,811,878).
Regarding claim 21, Siracki teaches:
A method of forming an ignition system [device (100)] for an exothermic welding system, the method comprising:
providing a binder [binders may include sodium silicate and potassium hydroxide; 0039];
combining the binder solution with welding material to form an agglomeration mixture [agglomeration material (154), a slurry that includes a metal oxide powder, a reducing agent, a binder all mixed in water; 0033-0035, 0044, and figure 4];
forming the agglomeration mixture onto a conductor [wires (108,110)], to surround at least a portion of the conductor [see figure 4]; and
heating the conductor and the agglomeration mixture [heating; 0045], so that the binder binds the welding material to the conductor as an agglomerated ignition charge [0040, 0045, and figure 3].
Siracki does not teach:
the binder solution includes sugar and water;
heating to pyrolyze the sugar of the agglomeration mixture, so that the pyrolyzed sugar binds.
Chao teaches using water and sucrose as a binder for metal powder wherein the mixture is heated to 350-500 °F (176-260°C) in a mold in order to form a cohesive green preform; 2:61-3:12, 4:3-20.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that to use sucrose as a binder since it is known to do so, minus any unexpected results. Furthermore, one would have been motivated to use sucrose since it is environmentally friendly and/or due to cost. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to heat to 176-260°C as taught by Chao since this forms a cohesive green preform. Note that this is the temperature that results in pyrolyzed sugar as noted in claim 24.
Regarding claim 22, Siracki does not teach:
wherein the binder solution has a water to sugar mass ratio of between 1:1 and 2:1.
However, as noted above Siracki teaches adding water to the binder to make the slurry.
Chao teaches at higher water levels the mixture effectively fills the mold; 4:12-13.
Note that there is intrinsically a working range of water to binder since Siracki teaches a slurry with a binder and water. It would have been well within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to find a range that works, including that claimed, minus any unexpected results.
Regarding claim 23, Siracki teaches:
wherein the agglomeration mixture has a binder solution to welding material mass ratio of between 0.10 and 0.30 [20-50% less or about 45% less; 0044].
Regarding claim 24, Siracki does not teach:
wherein heating the agglomeration mixture includes: heating the agglomeration mixture to at least 176.6 degrees Celsius for between 3 and 9 hours.
Note that the temperature is addressed in the rejection of claim 21.
As for how long, there is intrinsically a working range of time when the binder is pyrolyzed enough to be useful; i.e. dried, solid, etc., and such a time is dependent upon things like temperature, amount of binder, workpiece thickness, etc. It would have been well within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to find a range that works, including that claimed, minus any unexpected results.
Regarding claim 25, Siracki does not teach:
wherein heating the agglomerated mixture includes: baking the agglomerated mixture within a mold.
Chao teaches the binder and metal powder mixture of these is heated in a mold in order to form a cohesive green preform; 2:61-3:12.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the Chao heating in a mold concept in order to form a cohesive green preform.
Regarding claim 28, Siracki teaches:
wherein the conductor is arranged for an electrical current to pass through the conductor to ignite the ignition charge [see figures 3, 8, 10B, 13].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26 and 27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 5/13/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 21-25 and 28 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Siracki et al. (US 2007/0017955 A1) in view of Chao et al. (US 3,811,878).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure; US 6,585,930 and US 5,925,405 both teach sugar(s) can be used as binders.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS J GAMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5826. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 5712723458. 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.
/CARLOS J GAMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights