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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Table 1 ([0026]) appears to be provided in a low-resolution quality and is difficult to read. Table 1 should be provided in a clearly-legible form.
Table 2 ([0029]) appears to be provided in a low-resolution quality and is difficult to read. Table 2 should be provided in a clearly-legible form.
Table 3 ([0034]) appears to be provided in a low-resolution quality and is difficult to read. Table 3 should be provided in a clearly-legible form.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Independent claim 1, lines 13-14 should recite “crush and dry the sludge cake to obtain [[the]] a sludge fine powder” (correcting the typo; because this is the first occurrence of “sludge fine powder” in claim 1 as opposed to “carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder”). Claims 4 and 5 are objected to by dependency.
Independent claim 1, lines 14-15 should recite “that an area fraction of unhydrated cement” (correcting the typo).
Independent claim 2, lines 10-11 should recite “highly concentration carbon dioxide” (correcting the typo; in line with claim 1). Claim 3 is objected to by dependency.
Independent claim 2, line 13 should recite “such quality that [[the]] an area fraction of unhydrated cement” (correcting the typo; because this is the first occurrence of “area fraction” in claim 2).
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 1-5 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.
Independent claims 1 and 2 each recite “hot air” and “high[ly] concentrated carbon dioxide.”
The term “hot air” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “hot air” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, it is unclear what specific temperatures for the air would be “hot air” vs. not “hot air,” such as 30°C, 40°C, 50°C, 100°C, 500°C, etc.
Similarly, the term “high[ly] concentrated carbon dioxide” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high[ly] concentrated carbon dioxide” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, it is unclear what specific concentration of carbon dioxide would be “high[ly] concentrated carbon dioxide” vs. not “high[ly] concentrated carbon dioxide,” such as a volume fraction of 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5, 0.99, etc.
Accordingly, the claim scopes are rendered Indefinite. The dependent claims are rejected by dependency, also failing to limit the claim scopes in a Definite manner.
The Office recognizes that, in the Specification, Applicant discloses “hot air and highly concentrated carbon dioxide can be supplied. Concentration of carbon dioxide in the rotary drum is set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower by volume fraction to air. Temperature is set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower. When a sludge cake is processed in the rotary drum, the sludge cake is crushed by the crushing-stirring blade, and the sludge cake fixes carbon dioxide during drying with the hot air and the carbon dioxide-fixing sludge fine powder is produced” ([0017]).
For examination purposes, claims will be read as though incorporating the disclosed 50-400°C temperature for the hot air and the 0.05-0.9 volume fraction for the carbon dioxide, e.g.:
“[Claim 1] (currently amended):
A production method of carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder comprising:
a slurrying step of adding water to residual concrete or returned concrete to form a slurry;
a separation step of separating-removing gravel and sand from the slurry to obtain sludge water;
a fine sand removal step of separating-removing fine sand from the sludge water by a wet cyclone to obtain concentrated sludge water;
a dehydration step of dehydrating the concentrated sludge water to obtain a sludge cake; and
a crushing-drying-carbonation step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air and highly concentrated carbon dioxide into the rotary drum, wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower, and wherein the highly concentrated carbon dioxide has a volume fraction to air set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower, and of crushing-drying the sludge cake while fixing the carbon dioxide to obtain the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder; wherein
if only the hot air is supplied into the rotary drum to crush and dry the sludge cake to obtain [[the]] a sludge fine powder, the sludge fine powder has such quality that an area fraction of unhydrated cement to the entire sludge fine powder is 0.5 or more.”
“[Claim 2] (currently amended):
A production method of carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder comprising:
a slurrying step of adding water to residual concrete or returned concrete to form a slurry;
a separating step of separating-removing gravel and sand from the slurry to obtain sludge water;
a fine sand removal step of separating-removing fine sand from the sludge water by a wet cyclone to obtain concentrated sludge water;
a dehydration step of dehydrating the concentrated sludge water to obtain a sludge cake;
a crushing-drying step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air into the rotary drum, wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower, and of crushing and drying the sludge cake to obtain sludge fine powder; and
a carbon dioxide fixing step of exposing the sludge fine powder to highly concentrated carbon dioxide, wherein the highly concentrated carbon dioxide has a volume fraction to air set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower, and of fixing the carbon dioxide to obtain the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder, wherein the sludge fine powder has such quality that [[the]] an area fraction of unhydrated cement to the entire sludge fine powder is 0.5 or more.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over JP 4472776 (English translation by Google Patents; <https://patents.google.com/patent/JP4472776B1/en>; accessed on 6 August 2026), as evidenced by Berlowitz (2014/0272641) and Steketee (2015/0315676).
As below, JP 4472776 appears to inherently or implicitly disclose the same as claimed, or it would be obvious.
Nevertheless, the Office observes that Applicant has disclosed “Concerning fluidity of mortar, it was confirmed that as exposure time of carbon dioxide increased to 3, 6, ... ' and 24 hours, any of flow values of mortars using the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder A3, A6, ... ' C24 as a binder became large (improved). That is, it was confirmed that if sludge fine powder fix carbon dioxide, workability of mortar using the sludge fine powder as the binder was improved” ([0030]) and “When a mortar is produced from the ordinary portland cement, flow value generally becomes 160 mm to 170 mm, but mortar using carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder A3, B3, ... ' C24 as binder has a flow value of 170 mm or more, and it can be said that this is a preferable result” ([0032]). Flow values ≥170mm are generally known, but the desired goal of a flow value of 170 mm or more, that is reached by carbonating the sludge fine powder to a sufficient degree using the hot air and highly concentrated carbon dioxide as claimed, appears to be unique to Applicant’s disclosure.
Accordingly, Applicant may incorporate this into the claims (e.g., “a crushing-drying-carbonation step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air and highly concentrated carbon dioxide into the rotary drum, wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower, and wherein the highly concentrated carbon dioxide has a volume fraction to air set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower, and of crushing-drying the sludge cake while fixing the carbon dioxide to obtain the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder, wherein the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder is configured to produce a mortar using the carbon dioxide fixing sludge powder that has a flow value of 170 mm or more”) to overcome the Prior Art.
Regarding independent claim 1, JP 4472776 discloses A production method of carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder (abstract “To provide a concrete sludge fine powder recovery method for obtaining high-quality concrete sludge fine powder”) comprising:
a slurrying step of adding water to residual concrete or returned concrete to form a slurry (e.g., “The slurry-like workpiece is a slurry obtained by adding a predetermined amount of water to residual concrete or return concrete, or washing waste water generated from a ready-mixed concrete factory” and “The washing waste water of the ready mixed concrete factory is once loaded on the mixer truck M and then sent to the first vibrating sieve 3 via a predetermined chute”);
a separation step of separating-removing gravel and sand from the slurry to obtain sludge water (e.g., “The first vibrating sieve 3 is an apparatus that first processes a slurry-like object to be processed, and is composed of upper and lower two-stage sieves arranged at an inclination. The slurry-like object to be processed is separated by the first vibrating sieve 3 in the process of being sent by vibration and gravity. … For example, gravel having a diameter of 7 mm to 25 mm is separated. The so-called net under the screen is sludge water containing sand and fine sand. The separated glass is discharged into the glass box 3c and processed as industrial waste, but the gravel is washed with a predetermined washing water and then sent to the gravel bottle 3b to be used as a concrete material. … As the washing water, the separated water separated by the filter press 12 described later can be used. The screen below the first vibrating screen 3 is sent to the spiral feeder 4. As is well known in the art, the spiral feeder 4 includes a cylindrical mesh having a mesh smaller than the diameter of sand and a screw that is driven to rotate within the mesh. Therefore, under the mesh of the first vibrating screen 3 sent to the spiral feeder 4, the sand is separated by the net in the process of being sent by the screw, and the sand is sent to the second vibrating screen 5”);
a fine sand removal step of separating-removing fine sand from the sludge water by a wet cyclone to obtain concentrated sludge water (e.g., “Sludge water containing fine sand in the underwater tank 6 may be directly supplied to the wet cyclone 10 for processing, but in the present embodiment, it is once sent to the supply water tank 7 and then the wet cyclone 10 is supplied. The wet cyclone 10 separates solids and liquids according to the difference in specific gravity as conventionally known, and can separate and remove fine sand from sludge water”);
a dehydration step of dehydrating the concentrated sludge water to obtain a sludge cake (e.g., “A conventionally known filter press 12 is applied to obtain a dehydrated cake having a moisture content of 25 to 45% by mass”); and
a crushing-drying-carbonation step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air … into the rotary drum (e.g., “The obtained dehydrated cake is supplied to the crushing / drying device 20 with a wheel loader as it is without being crushed as shown in FIG. As shown in FIG. 3, the crushing / drying device 20 is composed of a rotary dryer RD and related devices as described below”), wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower (e.g., “The temperature of the hot air is 80 to 150 ° C, more preferably 100 to 140 ° C, and still more preferably 110 to 140 ° C”), …, and of crushing-drying the sludge cake … to obtain the … sludge fine powder (e.g., “Then, the dehydrated cake K that has been crushed by the constant quantity feeder 41 and is thrown up is lifted by the lifters 35, 35,. The dewatered cake K is mainly crushed by the crushing stirring blades 31, 31,... That are rotationally driven at a high speed when falling, and comes into contact with hot air. Such an action continues from the supply side to the discharge side of the rotary drum 21. The bulk dehydrated cake K is gradually pulverized and dried in the course of being sent from the supply side to the discharge side. When reaching the discharge end, the dewatering cake K is being crushed, and falls from the lifters 35, 35,. The dehydrated cake falling in the form of an air curtain and hot air are in direct contact with each other and dried to form concrete sludge fine powder”)…
Regarding the highly concentrated carbon dioxide of 0.05-0.9 volume fraction to air, JP 4472776 discloses e.g. “On the supply side of the rotary drum 21, a burner 51 that is supplied from an oil supply tank 50 and burns, for example, heavy oil is also provided. The air heated by the combustion heat of the burner 51, the combustion exhaust gas, and a part of the exhaust gas to be described later are continuously supplied from the hot stove 52 to the rotary drum 21”; “Since the hydration reaction proceeds rapidly when the temperature of the cement is high, if the treatment time for drying is long, the time during which the material to be treated becomes high in water will become longer and the hydrate will be rapidly hydrated. The reaction proceeds. However, according to the present invention, since the drying treatment time is short, the progress of the hydration reaction during drying can be sufficiently suppressed”; and “Since a part of the exhaust gas is mixed in the hot air, the oxygen concentration in the hot air is small and the deterioration of the concrete sludge fine powder is small.”
Although JP 4472776 does not specify that the mixture of “combustion exhaust gas” that is mixed in the hot air to produce a “small” oxygen concentration in the hot air provides a carbon dioxide concentration of 0.05-0.9 volume fraction, it appears this would necessarily flow from mixing combustion exhaust gas with air to heat the air to e.g. 80-150°C with a “small” oxygen concentration for a “short” drying treatment time, as disclosed by JP 4472776.
For example, the reference to Berlowitz provides evidence of this, stating “One example of a suitable CO2-containing stream for use as a cathode input flow can be an output or exhaust flow from a combustion source. Examples of combustion sources include, but are not limited to, sources based on combustion of natural gas, combustion of coal, and/or combustion of other hydrocarbon-type fuels (including biologically derived fuels). ... To a first approximation, the CO2 content of the output flow from a combustion source can be a minor portion of the flow. Even for a higher CO2 content exhaust flow, such as the output from a coal-fired combustion source, the CO2 content from most commercial coal-fired power plants can be about 15 vol % or less. More generally, the CO2 content of an output or exhaust flow from a combustion source can be at least about 1.5 vol %, or at least about 1.6 vol %, or at least about 1.7 vol %, or at least about 1.8 vol %, or at least about 1.9 vol %, or at least greater 2 vol %, or at least about 4 vol %, or at least about 5 vol %, or at least about 6 vol %, or at least about 8 vol %. Additionally or alternately, the CO2 content of an output or exhaust flow from a combustion source can be about 20 vol % or less, such as about 15 vol % or less, or about 12 vol % or less, or about 10 vol % or less, or about 9 vol % or less, or about 8 vol % or less, or about 7 vol % or less, or about 6.5 vol % or less, or about 6 vol % or less, or about 5.5 vol % or less, or about 5 vol % or less, or about 4.5 vol % or less” ([0141]) and “An example of a suitable combustion source is a gas turbine. … Modern natural gas combined cycle efficiencies are about 60% for the largest and newest designs. The resulting CO2-containing exhaust gas stream can be produced at an elevated temperature compatible with the MCFC operation, such as 300°C-700°C and preferably 500°C-650°C” ([0181]); i.e. combustion burners typically produce combustion exhaust gas in a range of 1.5-20 vol% CO2 at a temperature of 300-700°C.
Similarly, the reference to Steketee provides evidence of this, stating “The carbon dioxide-containing gas may be any suitable carbon dioxide containing gas, for example a mixture of air and carbon dioxide, or a flue gas from a combustion process. Preferably, the carbon dioxide-containing gas is a mixture of air and carbon dioxide, more preferably a mixture of air and carbon dioxide comprising in the range of from 4 to 16 vol % carbon dioxide based on the total volume of the mixture. In case flue gas is available at the location at which the carbonation will take place, it may be advantageous to use the available flue gas” ([0021]).
Accordingly, the CO2 volume fraction of the mixture of “combustion exhaust gas” that is mixed in the hot air to produce a “small” oxygen concentration in the hot air is presumably on the order of 1.5-20 vol% CO2 but with a preference to the higher 20 vol% CO2 i.e. 0.2 volume fraction.
Accordingly, it appears that JP 4472776 inherently or implicitly discloses:
“a crushing-drying-carbonation step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air and highly concentrated carbon dioxide into the rotary drum, wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower, and wherein the highly concentrated carbon dioxide has a volume fraction to air set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower, and of crushing-drying the sludge cake while fixing the carbon dioxide to obtain the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder;” by mixing combustion exhaust gas with air to heat the air to e.g. 80-150°C with a “small” oxygen concentration for a “short” drying treatment time.
Alternatively, even if it were found that JP 4472776 fails to disclose a CO2 volume fraction of 0.05-0.9 per se, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JP 4472776 to include higher amounts of CO2, such as 0.05-0.9 volume fraction, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide “the oxygen concentration in the hot air is small and deterioration of the concrete sludge fine powder can be suppressed.” Applicant may note that, after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process. See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding the area fraction of ≥0.5 of unhydrated cement to sludge fine powder, Applicant should note that "the discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer." See MPEP 2112. Also, mere recognition of latent properties in the prior art does not render nonobvious an otherwise known invention, and "[t]he fact that appellant has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious." See MPEP 2145.
In this case, it appears that Applicant has merely discovered a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition or otherwise merely recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art. Moreover, since JP 4472776 discloses the same composition as claimed, the sludge cake, if subjected to testing, would act in the same manner as claimed, i.e., it would be capable of “wherein,
if only the hot air is supplied into the rotary drum to crush and dry the sludge cake to obtain a sludge fine powder, the sludge fine powder has such quality that an area fraction of unhydrated cement to the entire sludge fine powder is 0.5 or more.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties Applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Alternatively, if there is any difference between the composition and that of the instant claims, the difference would have been minor and obvious insofar as because it has been held "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." See MPEP 2112.
Regarding independent claim 2, JP 4472776 discloses A production method of carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder (abstract “To provide a concrete sludge fine powder recovery method for obtaining high-quality concrete sludge fine powder”) comprising:
a slurrying step of adding water to residual concrete or returned concrete to form a slurry (e.g., “The slurry-like workpiece is a slurry obtained by adding a predetermined amount of water to residual concrete or return concrete, or washing waste water generated from a ready-mixed concrete factory” and “The washing waste water of the ready mixed concrete factory is once loaded on the mixer truck M and then sent to the first vibrating sieve 3 via a predetermined chute”);
a separating step of separating-removing gravel and sand from the slurry to obtain sludge water (e.g., “The first vibrating sieve 3 is an apparatus that first processes a slurry-like object to be processed, and is composed of upper and lower two-stage sieves arranged at an inclination. The slurry-like object to be processed is separated by the first vibrating sieve 3 in the process of being sent by vibration and gravity. … For example, gravel having a diameter of 7 mm to 25 mm is separated. The so-called net under the screen is sludge water containing sand and fine sand. The separated glass is discharged into the glass box 3c and processed as industrial waste, but the gravel is washed with a predetermined washing water and then sent to the gravel bottle 3b to be used as a concrete material. … As the washing water, the separated water separated by the filter press 12 described later can be used. The screen below the first vibrating screen 3 is sent to the spiral feeder 4. As is well known in the art, the spiral feeder 4 includes a cylindrical mesh having a mesh smaller than the diameter of sand and a screw that is driven to rotate within the mesh. Therefore, under the mesh of the first vibrating screen 3 sent to the spiral feeder 4, the sand is separated by the net in the process of being sent by the screw, and the sand is sent to the second vibrating screen 5”);
a fine sand removal step of separating-removing fine sand from the sludge water by a wet cyclone to obtain concentrated sludge water (e.g., “Sludge water containing fine sand in the underwater tank 6 may be directly supplied to the wet cyclone 10 for processing, but in the present embodiment, it is once sent to the supply water tank 7 and then the wet cyclone 10 is supplied. The wet cyclone 10 separates solids and liquids according to the difference in specific gravity as conventionally known, and can separate and remove fine sand from sludge water”);
a dehydration step of dehydrating the concentrated sludge water to obtain a sludge cake (e.g., “A conventionally known filter press 12 is applied to obtain a dehydrated cake having a moisture content of 25 to 45% by mass”);
a crushing-drying step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air into the rotary drum (e.g., “The obtained dehydrated cake is supplied to the crushing / drying device 20 with a wheel loader as it is without being crushed as shown in FIG. As shown in FIG. 3, the crushing / drying device 20 is composed of a rotary dryer RD and related devices as described below”), wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower (e.g., “The temperature of the hot air is 80 to 150 ° C, more preferably 100 to 140 ° C, and still more preferably 110 to 140 ° C”), and of crushing and drying the sludge cake to obtain sludge fine powder (e.g., “Then, the dehydrated cake K that has been crushed by the constant quantity feeder 41 and is thrown up is lifted by the lifters 35, 35,. The dewatered cake K is mainly crushed by the crushing stirring blades 31, 31,... That are rotationally driven at a high speed when falling, and comes into contact with hot air. Such an action continues from the supply side to the discharge side of the rotary drum 21. The bulk dehydrated cake K is gradually pulverized and dried in the course of being sent from the supply side to the discharge side. When reaching the discharge end, the dewatering cake K is being crushed, and falls from the lifters 35, 35,. The dehydrated cake falling in the form of an air curtain and hot air are in direct contact with each other and dried to form concrete sludge fine powder”)…
Regarding the carbon dioxide fixing step with exposing highly concentrated carbon dioxide of 0.05-0.9 volume fraction to air, JP 4472776 discloses e.g. “On the supply side of the rotary drum 21, a burner 51 that is supplied from an oil supply tank 50 and burns, for example, heavy oil is also provided. The air heated by the combustion heat of the burner 51, the combustion exhaust gas, and a part of the exhaust gas to be described later are continuously supplied from the hot stove 52 to the rotary drum 21”; “Since the hydration reaction proceeds rapidly when the temperature of the cement is high, if the treatment time for drying is long, the time during which the material to be treated becomes high in water will become longer and the hydrate will be rapidly hydrated. The reaction proceeds. However, according to the present invention, since the drying treatment time is short, the progress of the hydration reaction during drying can be sufficiently suppressed”; and “Since a part of the exhaust gas is mixed in the hot air, the oxygen concentration in the hot air is small and the deterioration of the concrete sludge fine powder is small.”
Although JP 4472776 does not specify that the mixture of “combustion exhaust gas” that is mixed in the hot air to produce a “small” oxygen concentration in the hot air provides a carbon dioxide concentration of 0.05-0.9 volume fraction, it appears this would necessarily flow from mixing combustion exhaust gas with air to heat the air to e.g. 80-150°C with a “small” oxygen concentration for a “short” drying treatment time, as disclosed by JP 4472776.
For example, the reference to Berlowitz provides evidence of this, stating that combustion burners typically produce combustion exhaust gas in a range of 1.5-20 vol% CO2 ([0141]) at a temperature of 300-700°C ([0181]).
Similarly, the reference to Steketee provides evidence of this, stating combustion typically produce “a mixture of air and carbon dioxide comprising in the range of from 4 to 16 vol % carbon dioxide based on the total volume of the mixture” ([0021]).
Accordingly, the CO2 volume fraction of the mixture of “combustion exhaust gas” that is mixed in the hot air to produce a “small” oxygen concentration in the hot air is presumably on the order of 1.5-20 vol% CO2 but with a preference to the higher 20 vol% CO2 i.e. 0.2 volume fraction.
Accordingly, it appears that JP 4472776 inherently or implicitly discloses:
“a carbon dioxide fixing step of exposing the sludge fine powder to highly concentrated carbon dioxide, wherein the highly concentrated carbon dioxide has a volume fraction to air set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower, and of fixing the carbon dioxide to obtain the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder…,” by mixing combustion exhaust gas with air to heat the air to e.g. 80-150°C with a “small” oxygen concentration for a “short” drying treatment time.
Alternatively, even if it were found that JP 4472776 fails to disclose a CO2 volume fraction of 0.05-0.9 per se, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JP 4472776 to include higher amounts of CO2, such as 0.05-0.9 volume fraction, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide “the oxygen concentration in the hot air is small and deterioration of the concrete sludge fine powder can be suppressed.” See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding the area fraction of ≥0.5 of unhydrated cement to sludge fine powder, Applicant should note that "the discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer." See MPEP 2112. Also, mere recognition of latent properties in the prior art does not render nonobvious an otherwise known invention, and "[t]he fact that appellant has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious." See MPEP 2145.
In this case, it appears that Applicant has merely discovered a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition or otherwise merely recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art. Moreover, since JP 4472776 discloses the same composition as claimed, the sludge cake, if subjected to testing, would act in the same manner as claimed, i.e., it would be capable of “wherein the sludge fine powder has such quality that an area fraction of unhydrated cement to the entire sludge fine powder is 0.5 or more.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties Applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Alternatively, if there is any difference between the composition and that of the instant claims, the difference would have been minor and obvious insofar as because it has been held "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 3, JP 4472776 discloses wherein exhaust heat generated from the rotary drum is recovered in the crushing-drying step, and the carbon dioxide fixing step is carried out in a state where the sludge fine powder and the highly concentrated carbon dioxide are stirred and they are heated utilizing the exhaust heat (“The above object of the present invention is achieved by applying a rotary dryer or rotary dryer. According to this rotary dryer, crushing, crushing, and drying can be performed substantially simultaneously. Thereby, a high-quality concrete sludge fine powder can be obtained” and “a horizontal rotary drum with a predetermined length in the axial direction of dehydrated cake is continuously fed, A hot air furnace that blows hot air into the rotating drum and a bag filter that filters exhaust gas discharged from the rotating drum, and an internal space of the rotating drum has a plurality of shafts attached to a rotating shaft in the axial direction. A crushing and stirring blade is provided, and an inner peripheral wall is provided with a lifter for scooping up and dropping the supplied dehydrated cake to a predetermined height, and driving the rotary drum, the rotary shaft, and the lifter, When blowing hot air from the hot air oven supplies dewatered cake from one end of the rotary drum, configured so that concrete sludge powder from the other end is recovered”).
Regarding claim 4, JP 4472776 as in claim 1 discloses:
“a crushing-drying-carbonation step of putting the sludge cake into a rotary drum to supply hot air and highly concentrated carbon dioxide into the rotary drum, wherein the hot air has a temperature set to 50°C (degree Celsius) or higher and 400°C or lower, and wherein the highly concentrated carbon dioxide has a volume fraction to air set to 0.05 or higher or 0.9 or lower, and of crushing-drying the sludge cake while fixing the carbon dioxide to obtain the carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder;” by mixing combustion exhaust gas with air to heat the air to e.g. 80-150°C with a “small” oxygen concentration for a “short” drying treatment time.
Accordingly, JP 4472776 discloses “Carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder produced by the production method according to any one of claim 1.”
Alternatively, even if it were found that JP 4472776 fails to disclose a CO2 volume fraction of 0.05-0.9 per se, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JP 4472776 to include higher amounts of CO2, such as 0.05-0.9 volume fraction, thereby producing “Carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder produced by the production method according to any one of claim 1,” with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide “the oxygen concentration in the hot air is small and deterioration of the concrete sludge fine powder can be suppressed.” See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 5, JP 4472776 discloses “Accordingly, the present invention provides a method for recovering a high-grade concrete sludge fine powder, that is, a concrete sludge fine powder capable of obtaining a high-grade concrete sludge fine powder having a high cement content that has not undergone hydration, and an inexpensive facility, and It aims at providing the collection | recovery apparatus used for implementation of this collection | recovery method. Another object of the present invention is to provide high-quality concrete sludge fine powder suitable for reuse.” Reusing the high-grade concrete sludge fine powder having a high cement content that has not undergone hydration, which was produced from residual concrete or return concrete, presumably would mean incorporating the product back into a concrete, and thus JP 4472776 inherently or implicitly discloses A hydraulically hardened body including carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder produced by the production method according to claim 1 as at least a portion of the binder.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
The reference to Einarsdottir (2023/0406768) discloses carbonation of recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) (abstract), such as wherein “A supply of returned concrete can be transported in a container to a treatment system. Transport of the returned concrete can be in a concrete truck that is returning from a job or otherwise collecting excess fresh concrete. The concrete can be delivered to a processing vessel. The processing vessel prepares the concrete for CO2 treatment. In certain embodiments, the drum of the truck may itself be used as a processing vessel and concrete carbonated in the truck itself, then discharged to harden” ([0068]). However, this reference desires producing aggregates from hardened concrete, and thus it would not be obvious to modify this reference to instead separate gravel/sand and fine sand with a wet cyclone to produce a carbon dioxide fixing sludge fine powder comprising active unhydrated cement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SUE-AKO whose telephone number is (571)272-9455. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 571-272-24137. 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.
/ANDREW SUE-AKO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
Prosecution Insights