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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim 10 is 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 10 recites the limitation "the steel strip" in line 1. The limitation is indefinite as parent claim 8 discloses two different steel strips, S1 and S2, making unclear which steel strip is defined by claim 10 to have a composition within the claimed ranges.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 8-9, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Umlauf et al. (WO 2020128598 A1 supplied with IDS filed 07/16/2024, references made to family document US 20220090230 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Umlauf teaches a method for regulating a dew point of an atmosphere (i.e., regulating an atmosphere A) [0004, 0005, 0020] including H2 and N2 inside a furnace [0004, 0039] wherein a steel strip S1, which intrinsically has a composition C1 and an exposed surface area ASURF1, is heat treated for a time (i.e., a time T0 to a time TS1END), as the steel strip enters, passes through, and exits the furnace continuously [0003, 0007].
Umlauf teaches a data acquisition step wherein a dew point DP0, of the atmosphere A is measured [0005], which would include any time during the process, including e.g., at a time T0. Umlauf teaches outer PID controller 8 receives a set point signal 10 that corresponds to the desired furnace dew point temperature [0027, 0031-0031] (i.e., a target atmosphere ATAR1, for the steel strip S1 is retrieved, wherein the target atmosphere ATAR1 includes at least a dew point value). Umlauf teaches including a using PID controller 8 to receive the set point signal 10*, as well as measured dew point 10’* from an lower dew point sensor 7, which are converted to create an error signal added to the set point signal 10* to produce input signal 10”* to the inner PID controller 8’ [0034], where the error is then compared with measured dew point signal 10””* from an upper dew point sensor 7’ to produce an output signal 10”’* which adjusts the output of the steam generator 6 to the furnace (Fig. 6, [0035]), where the output signal 10”’* corresponds to projecting an atmosphere APRO-1 to APRO-N at each time N that the PID controller calculates the output signal 10”’*, as determining the amount of steam needed to adjust the atmosphere to the desired atmosphere based on data would require determining the projected atmosphere at a given time. Umlauf teaches the defining of projected atmospheres with respect to dew point, based on measurements of dew point from the furnace [0034-0035], therefore, the defining is based on the dew point, DP0, of the atmosphere measured at the time T0. Umlauf teaches the dew point to correlate to a concentration of water in the furnace [0028], thus the defining is intrinsically based on the volume of the furnace. Umlauf teaches the PID output signal is calculated based on changes in the steel grade/chemistry (i.e., the composition C1) and the steel strip width (which directly correlates with surface area), thus the defining is based on the exposed surface area ASURF1 of steel strip S1 inside the furnace for each of the times T1 to TN) (Claim 8, [0018]).
Umlauf teaches obtaining an output signal 10”’* sent to a steam generator to adjust the output of steam to the furnace using a PID controller (i.e., a model predictive control controller) [0034-0035], where the output signal 10”’* which adjusts the amount of steam (H2O) to add to the furnace, would comprise estimating an amount of H2O to be injected inside the furnace. Umlauf teaches the output signal 10”’* corresponds to projecting an atmosphere APRO-1 to APRO-N at each time N that the PID controller calculates the output signal 10”’*, as determining the amount of steam needed to adjust the atmosphere to the desired atmosphere based on data would require determining the projected atmosphere at a given time as noted above, and is based off of the set point signal 10 that corresponds to the desired furnace dew point temperature [0027, 0031-0031] (i.e., a target atmosphere ATAR1). Umlauf teaches the dew point to correlate to a concentration of water in the furnace [0028] and supplying N2 and H2 to the volume of the furnace continuously [0005] which also affects the moisture content in the furnace and is part of the consideration of the control system [0039], thus the volume and the renewal flow of N2 and H2 of the furnace themselves or results of those variables are data used as part of the data used to estimate the amount of H2O to be injected. Umlauf teaches the PID output signal is calculated based on changes in the steel grade/chemistry (i.e., the composition C1) and the steel strip width (which directly correlates with surface area), thus the defining is based on the exposed surface area ASURF1 of steel strip S1 inside the furnace for each of the times T1 to TN) (Claim 8, [0018]). Umlauf teaches injecting at T1 the estimated amount of H2O [0037].
Umlauf teaches the furnace may comprise a feed forward signal based on the type of steel being processed [0037], where known upcoming changes in the steel grade/chemistry, steel strip width, and atmosphere of the system are incorporated into feed forward signal 10^, which is combined with output signal 10’’’ [0018, 0037], where a steel grade/chemistry change or steel strip width change would indicate a transition to a different steel strip (i.e., a second steel strip). Therefore, whenever a steel grade/chemistry change or steel strip width change occurs, Umlauf is further based on a steel strip S2 having a composition C2 and an exposed surface area ASURF2 is heat treated from a time TS2START (the time the transition to a second strip occurs) to a time TN, and accordingly retrieves a target atmosphere ATAR2, for the steel strip S2, wherein the target atmosphere ATAR2 includes at least a second dew point value in the same manner as described above. Further, the amount of H2O to be injected is uses data from the compositions C1, C2 and the exposed surface areas ASURF1, ASURF2 of steel strips S1 and S2 inside the furnace for each of the times T1 to TN.
Regarding claim 9, Umlauf teaches wherein the heat treatment is an annealing [0008, 0027].
Regarding claim 13, Umlauf teaches defining N projected atmospheres as noted above. Umlauf does not disclose temperature or the total pressure of the atmosphere to be part of the defining step, therefore Umlauf teaches assuming the temperature and pressure of the atmosphere are constant as claimed.
Regarding claim 14, Umlauf teaches a method for regulating a dew point of an atmosphere (i.e., regulating an atmosphere A) [0004, 0005, 0020] including H2 and N2 inside a furnace [0004, 0039] wherein a steel strip S1, which intrinsically has a composition C1 and an exposed surface area ASURF1, is heat treated for a time (i.e., a time T0 to a time TN), as the steel strip enters, passes through, and exits the furnace continuously [0003, 0007].
Umlauf teaches a data acquisition step wherein a dew point DP0, of the atmosphere A is measured [0005], which would include any time during the process, including e.g., at a time T0. Umlauf teaches outer PID controller 8 receives a set point signal 10 that corresponds to the desired furnace dew point temperature [0027, 0031-0031] (i.e., a target atmosphere ATAR1, for the steel strip S1 is retrieved, wherein the target atmosphere ATAR1 includes at least a dew point value). Umlauf teaches including a using PID controller 8 to receive the set point signal 10*, as well as measured dew point 10’* from an lower dew point sensor 7, which are converted to create an error signal added to the set point signal 10* to produce input signal 10”* to the inner PID controller 8’ [0034], where the error is then compared with measured dew point signal 10””* from an upper dew point sensor 7’ to produce an output signal 10”’* which adjusts the output of the steam generator 6 to the furnace (Fig. 6, [0035]), where the output signal 10”’* corresponds to projecting an atmosphere APRO-1 to APRO-N at each time n that the PID controller calculates the output signal 10”’*, as determining the amount of steam needed to adjust the atmosphere to the desired atmosphere based on data would require determining the projected atmosphere at a given time. Umlauf teaches the defining of projected atmospheres with respect to dew point, based on measurements of dew point from the furnace [0034-0035], therefore, the defining is based on the dew point, DP0, of the atmosphere measured at the time T0. Umlauf teaches the dew point to correlate to a concentration of water in the furnace [0028], thus the defining is intrinsically based on the volume of the furnace. Umlauf teaches the PID output signal is calculated based on changes in the steel grade/chemistry (i.e., the composition C1) and the steel strip width (which directly correlates with surface area), thus the defining is based on the exposed surface area ASURF1 of steel strip S1 inside the furnace for each of the times T1 to TN) (Claim 8, [0018]).
Umlauf teaches obtaining an output signal 10”’* sent to a steam generator to adjust the output of steam to the furnace using a PID controller (i.e., a model predictive control controller) [0034-0035], where the output signal 10”’* which adjusts the amount of steam (H2O) to add to the furnace, would comprise estimating an amount of H2O to be injected inside the furnace. Umlauf teaches the output signal 10”’* corresponds to projecting an atmosphere APRO-1 to APRO-N at each time N that the PID controller calculates the output signal 10”’*, as determining the amount of steam needed to adjust the atmosphere to the desired atmosphere based on data would require determining the projected atmosphere at a given time as noted above, and is based off of the set point signal 10 that corresponds to the desired furnace dew point temperature [0027, 0031-0031] (i.e., a target atmosphere ATAR1). Umlauf teaches the dew point to correlate to a concentration of water in the furnace [0028] and supplying N2 and H2 to the volume of the furnace continuously [0005] which also affects the moisture content in the furnace and is part of the consideration of the control system [0039], thus the volume and the renewal flow of N2 and H2 of the furnace themselves or results of those variables are data used as part of the data used to estimate the amount of H2O to be injected. Umlauf teaches the PID output signal is calculated based on changes in the steel grade/chemistry (i.e., the composition C1) and the steel strip width (which directly correlates with surface area), thus the defining is based on the exposed surface area ASURF1 of steel strip S1 inside the furnace at T1 (Claim 8, [0018]). Umlauf teaches injecting at T1 the estimated amount of H2O [0037].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umlauf in view of as applied under 35 USC 102 to claim 8 above, further in view of Takeda et al. (US 20160363372 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Umlauf does not teach a composition of the steel strips.
Takeda teaches a method for controlling dew point of reduction furnace (Title), where steel sheets are fed to a reducing furnace for annealing (abstract, [0017]), in an atmosphere of nitrogen and hydrogen [0034], where the dew point in the furnace is controlled and adjusted by addition of water [0035] and gas [0039] based on data from dew point collection points 12 in the furnace [0039], thus Takeda and Umlauf are analogous to the instant application as both are directed to methods of controlling the atmosphere within steel annealing furnaces based on dew point data from the furnace controlling addition of reagents to the furnace. Takeda teaches wherein the steel strip includes, in weight percent, 0.08, 0.12, or 0.15 wt% of C, 1.5, 1.9, or 2.8 wt% of Mn, and 0.25, 1.4, or 2.1 wt% of Si respectively, which are within the claimed ranges.
Because Umlauf is silent with respect to a composition of the steel strips used in the method, in order to carry out the invention of Umlauf one of ordinary skill in the art would necessarily look to the art for a reference teaching steel compositions suitable for use within the process of Umlauf, such as those taught by Takeda. As Umlauf and Takeda both relate to steels suitable for annealing in steel annealing furnaces with controlled dew points, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to use the compositions of steel of Takeda.
Regarding claim 11, Umlauf does not teach a specific number N.
Takeda teaches a method for controlling dew point of reduction furnace (Title), where steel sheets are fed to a reducing furnace for annealing (abstract, [0017]), in an atmosphere of nitrogen and hydrogen [0034], where the dew point in the furnace is controlled and adjusted by addition of water [0035] and gas [0039] based on data from dew point collection points 12 in the furnace [0039], thus Takeda and Umlauf are analogous to the instant application as both are directed to methods of controlling the atmosphere within steel annealing furnaces based on dew point data from the furnace controlling addition of reagents to the furnace. Takeda teaches a supply gas dew point meter that measures the dew point of the gas supplied to the reducing furnace [0019], the results from which are used to control the supply gas dew point and flow rate (which would comprise defining a projected atmosphere) [0039, 0043]. Takeda teaches the dew point is measured at least 13 distinct times (once every 15 minutes from 0 minutes to 2 hours and 45 minutes) (Fig. 4, Table 2), where an N of 13 is within the claimed range.
Because Umlauf is silent with respect to how often the steps of measuring and defining a projected atmosphere should occur, in order to carry out the invention of Umlauf one of ordinary skill in the art would necessarily look to the art for a reference teaching a number of times to measure and define an atmosphere suitable for use within the process of Umlauf, such as that taught by Takeda. As Umlauf and Takeda both relate to steels suitable for annealing in steel annealing furnaces with controlled dew points, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to use the compositions of steel of Takeda.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umlauf as applied to claim 8 under 35 USC 102 above, further in view of Baldo et al. (US 4992113 A)
Regarding claim 12, Umlauf does not teach wherein each of the times T0 to TN are spaced 5 seconds to 1 minute apart.
Baldo teaches a process for heat treatment under a gaseous atmosphere containing nitrogen and hydrocarbon (Title), where steel is annealed in an atmosphere of nitrogen and optionally hydrogen (Abstract), where the dew point is set and controlled by application of a PID controller which acts on the flow of atmosphere introduced to the furnace (Col. 2 lines 40-48), thus Baldo and Umlauf are analogous to the instant application as both are directed to controlling atmospheres comprising nitrogen and hydrogen in steel annealing furnaces by using PID controllers. Baldo teaches the computer performs sampling at regular intervals of time when calculating dew point (Col. 9 lines 19-39)), where the interval is generally fixed and determined by experience for a given furnace (Col. 9 lines 40-41).
Umlauf, discussed above, is silent to the length of an interval between each of the times T0 to TN at which the dew point is sampled in the process described therein. However, it has long been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 (II) A-B. In the instant case, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to use a fixed sampling interval as determined by experience with the given furnace of Umlauf, as Baldo teaches such to be appropriate for using PID controllers to control the atmosphere of an annealing furnace based on values measured in the furnace.
Further, the mere recitation of a numerical parameter in an otherwise known process will not generally result in patentability of a claim directed to that process, absent evidence of criticality of the numerical parameter. In the instant case the numerical parameter (the interval between each of the times T0 to TN) does not appear to be critical to the invention, at least for the reason it is recited solely in a dependent claim.
Thus, the disclosure of Umlauf in view of Baldo is held to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of a method as presently claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nikolas T Pullen whose telephone number is (571)272-1995. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM 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 Hendricks can be reached at (571)-272-1401. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/NIKOLAS TAKUYA PULLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights