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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1/5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The 112b rejections and 102 rejection on claim 1 is withdrawn. Upon further consideration, previously cited but not relied upon reference Ando (US-20140075995-A1) is added to the 103 rejection to overcome the argued gaps in Kunitake and Cohn for amended claim 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, 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.
Claim 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kunitake et al (US-20210114912-A1) and further in view Ando et al (US-20140075995-A1) and Cohn et al (US-20190295734-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].
Kunitake teaches of a measurement device that measures gaseous species from the exhaust [0038] and measuring the amount of boron from the raw materials (boric acid/Neobor Fig. 6 [0044, 50]). Kunitake does not expressly teach the measurement device targets boron concentration. In related melting of boron containing glass art [0018], Ando teaches of an exhaust gas collection/treatment system [0057-66] that measures the amount of boron and fluorine (that was exhausted) [0088, 135-137]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a measurement device to the exhaust system of Kunitake to measure boron that is released as an exhaust gas and reuse the boron in the melt [0174] to decrease the loss of the volatile raw material.
Kunitake teaches of a computer controller feedback loop for the exhaust system [0045]. Modified Kunitake does not expressly teach the 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 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control device of modified Kunitake 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).
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).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kunitake et al (US-20210114912-A1), Ando et al (US-20140075995-A1), and Cohn et al (US-20190295734-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 before the effective filing date of the claimed 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).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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
KR-20180119115-A, WO-2014077114-A1 teach glass melting exhaust systems that measure fluorine content.
US-20150101484-A1 and WO-2019230276-A1 teach of collecting boron from the exhaust but does not expressly measure the amount
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights