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 of Group II (Claims 9-12) in the reply filed on 07/28/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 1-8 are withdrawn. Claims 9-12 are examined herein.
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 9-12 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 9 recites “profile data” in line 2. The meaning of “profile data” is unclear. Besides distance data and image data, it’s unclear what other data are included in the scope of “profile data”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites “distance data to the deposited material”. When measuring a distance, there is a start point and an end point. The starting point in the distance measurement is unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites “deposited material”. It’s unclear how the deposited material relates to the blast furnace. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites "detecting each of the plurality of particles based on the profile data". The claim fails to disclose how such detecting is realized. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 9 recites “calculating an index” in line 5. Claims 10 and claim 11 recite “the index”. The meaning of "index" is unclear and one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand the technical meaning of “index” and how the calculating is done based on the profile data. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites “an envelope or envelope surface”. The meaning of envelope and envelope surface is not clear. Appropriate clarification is required.
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 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’931 (JP 2019-174931, IDS dated 03/29/2024).
Regarding claims 9 and 12, JP’931 discloses a method of measuring particle diameter of particulate material such as iron ore used for blast furnace operation, comprising: collecting images and positions of the particles, detecting each of the plurality of particles based on the images; performing contour extraction by performing valley detection filter process to determine the boundary between particles, removing the particles at the lower positions in the contour extraction image (i.e. extracting particles in a surface layer among the deposited material based on results of the detecting for each of the plurality of particles and the index calculated based on the profile data), calculating the number of particles, the area of each particle, the perimeter, the roundness and diameter of the particles (Page 1, last two paragraphs; Page 2 to Page 11). Since JP’931 discloses that the method can be used to measure the particle size of iron ore used for blast furnace operation (Page 1, last two paragraphs), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust smelting time based on particle size of the iron ore in order to use iron ore to produce iron. Thus, claim 9 is obvious over JP’931.
Regarding claim 10, JP’931 discloses that by performing image processing, a contour of each particle is extracted (Page 2 to Page 9), which meets the limitation recited in claim 10.
Regarding claim 11, JP’931 discloses particles at low positions often look smaller than their true size and in order to accurately measure particle size, the contours of particles at low positions are removed (Page 9, 2nd and 3rd paragraph), which meets the limitation recited in claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xiaowei Su whose telephone number is (571)272-3239. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00.
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 Hendricks can be reached at 5712721401. 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.
/XIAOWEI SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights