DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Applicant’s amendment filed 3 December 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 have been amended, new claims 9 and 10 have been introduced, and claims 1-10 remain pending.
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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, replace “up to5 Hz” with --up to 5 Hz--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 6-8 and 10 are 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.
In claim 6, line 14, is the phrase “the target value set (SET)” the same as or different from “a target value (SET)” as established in line 10? If they are intended to be different, how can both of these values be considered “(SET)”? As claims 7, 8, and 10 depend directly from claim 6, they are rejected for the same reason.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 and 9 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 1: The prior art, either taken alone or in combination, fails to teach:
wherein frequencies of the variations of the casting level are detected and at least one observer is provided which, on the basis of the detected frequences and an actual value (ACT) of the roller spacing, determines a compensation value (k’) that is added to a target value (SET) of the roller spacing of the rollers to compensate for a phase shift and/or amplitude of the actual value (ACT) of the roller spacing, and wherein the combination of the target value (SET) and the compensation value (k’) is used to set the roller spacing before the complete solidification point (D) to reduce the variations of the casting level, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1.
Claims 2-5 and 9: Depend directly from claim 1.
The closest prior art (of record) is Dollhäubl et al. (WO 2018/108652 A1, hereinafter “Dollhäubl:; listed in the IDS filed 9 February 2024; using US 2019/0308238 for the English translation and citations), and Kanazawa et al. (JP S5813457 A, hereinafter “Kanazawa”; using previously attached English machine translation for citations).
Dollhäubl teaches a method for regulating a strand casting plant,
wherein the strand casting plant comprises a mold (mold 1, see Fig. 1; [0065]) and a strand guide (strand guide 8, see Fig. 1; [0065]) downstream of the mold (see Fig. 1),
wherein liquid metal is poured into the mold (liquid metal 3, see Fig. 1; [0065]) via an inflow unit (inflow unit 4, see Fig. 1; [0065]), which liquid metal solidifies on walls of the mold, so that a metal strand having a solidified strand shell and a still liquid core forms (see [0065]-[0066]),
wherein the metal strand is drawn out of the mold by means of rollers of the strand guide arranged spaced apart (see Fig. 1 and [0066]),
wherein a measured variable is determined, which correlates with the variation of the casting level forming in the mold, this measured variable is processed with incorporation of at least one computing rule and is used to reduce the variations of the casting level (see [0028]),
wherein the mutual spacing of opposing rollers of the strand guide is cyclically changed before the complete solidification point (D) to reduce the variations of the casting level (see [0028]), namely by cyclic change of the roller spacing, opposing the variations of the casting level, of opposing rollers of the strand guide (see [0028] and [0044]-[0051]), and
wherein frequencies of the variations of the casting level are detected and at least one observer is provided which, on the basis of the detected frequencies, determines a compensation value (k') (see [0045]-[0049] and [0079]-[0082]).
Kanazawa teaches each middle segment 41/42 is provided with a roll gap measuring device 91a/92a to measure the roll gap between the upper and lower rolls on the entrance side, and a roll gap measuring device 91b/92b to measure the roll gap between the upper and lower rolls on the exit side. The thickness of the slab 2 measured by the thickness gauges 81 and 82 is input to the arithmetic and control circuit 10, and the roll gaps between the upper and lower rolls measured by the roll gap measuring devices 91a, 91b, 92a, and 92b are also input to the arithmetic and control circuit 10 (thickness gauges 81 and 82 and roll gap measuring devices 91a and 91b). The target slab thickness and target roll spacing at the measurement positions 92a and 92b are set to target values. The target value is set in advance in the calculation control circuit 10 by S11, and this target value is also input to the calculation control circuit 10, which then calculates the deviation between the measured value at each position and the target value. When continuously casting a slab 2 using such an apparatus, the pinch roll reduction blades in each segment are calculated so as to prioritize the elimination of the deviation in the slab thickness while taking into consideration the elimination of the deviation in the roll gap calculated as described above, and the roll reduction amounts are independently adjusted according to the seventh reduction blade. By carrying out such control, the proper position of the bottom blade of the pinch roll is maintained, bulging is suppressed, internal cracking of the slab is prevented, and at the same time, the desired target thickness of the slab can be obtained (see p. 4-5).
Dollhäubl and Kanazawa both fail to teach:
wherein frequencies of the variations of the casting level are detected and at least one observer is provided which, on the basis of the detected frequences and an actual value (ACT) of the roller spacing, determines a compensation value (k’) that is added to a target value (SET) of the roller spacing of the rollers to compensate for a phase shift and/or amplitude of the actual value (ACT) of the roller spacing, and wherein the combination of the target value (SET) and the compensation value (k’) is used to set the roller spacing before the complete solidification point (D) to reduce the variations of the casting level, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, without the benefit of Applicant’s disclosure, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to do so at the time the invention was filed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 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.
Conclusion
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 HA whose telephone number is (571)270-5934. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 EST.
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 571-272-3458 . 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.
/S.S.H/Examiner, Art Unit 1735 30 April 2026
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights