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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-5 in the reply filed on 10/31/2025 is acknowledged. Claim 6-9 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/31/2025.
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 3 and 5 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.
Claim 3 depends from claim 2. Claim 2 recites “a material containing silicon”; claim 3 recites “a material containing…”. The Examiner believes these are the same materials and the “a” article presents confusing antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required
Claim 5 line 4 recites “an atmosphere inside the furnace” which was already introduced in parent claim 1. The limitation should be “the atmosphere inside the furnace”.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kunitake et al (US-20210114912-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kunitake teaches of a furnace [0025] comprising a heating element that generates heat in response to conduction of electricity ([0036] electrodes); and an exhaust system that adjusts the supply of the exhaust gas generated in an atmosphere inside the furnace [0040-41, 48].
Regarding claim 4, depending from claim 1, Kunitake teaches the furnace heats a glass material [0025]. See MPEP 2115, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935).
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.
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kunitake et al (US-20210114912-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view Yogo et al (JP-H10139445-A, English translation provided by Espacenet).
Regarding claim 2-3, depending from claim 1, Kunitake teaches of electrode heating elements [0036]. Kunitake does not expressly teach the material of the heating element. In related furnace art [0001], Yogo teaches of electrically conductive heating element made of a material containing silicon, more specifically silicon carbide and molybdenum disilicide [0006]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use suitable material known in the art for the heating element to heat through electrical conductivity/resistance such as silicon containing silicon carbide or molybdenum disilicide. See MPEP 2144.07, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Claim 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kunitake et al (US-20210114912-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view Cohn et al (US-20190295734-A1).
Regarding claim 5, depending from claim 1, Kunitake teaches of a measurement device that measures gaseous species from the exhaust [0038] that measures a boron concentration (HBr/boric acid/Neobor Fig. 6 [0044, 50]). Kunitake does not expressly teach of the measurement device measures the atmosphere specifically in the furnace, a control device that controls the supply device and/or the exhaust device on the basis of a measurement. In related furnace art, Cohn teaches of a measurement device for gases in the atmosphere inside the furnace [0037], a control device that control the exhaust device [0042] and a gas supply device [0092] based on the measurement result from the measurement device [0036-37]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the furnace of Kunitake to move the measurement device to measure the atmosphere inside the furnace for boron concentration and to use a control device to control a gas supply device and exhaust device of the furnace based on the measurement result to control the rate of the boron removal in the furnace atmosphere [0042]. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20140075995-A1, WO-2020106539-A1 teaches measuring and controlling boron in the atmosphere of a glass melting furnace
WO-2014199241-A1 teaches the heating element material
JP-2018184308-A teaches measuring the fluorine concentration in the exhaust for a glass melting furnace
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2645. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm Mon-Thurs.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/STEVEN S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741