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 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 1-14 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the salt" in lines 11-12, 14-16, 18-20,22-24,26-27,29-30,32-33 and 35. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 1, the term in the parathesis is indefinite. It is not clear that the limitation in the parenthesis is meant to be a part of the claim or not.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " admixture" in lines 10-12, 14-16, 18-20,22-23. 25,26-27,29-30,32-33 and 35. “Admixture” is not part of “a group consisting of corn syrup, corn molasses, sorghum molasses, pomegranate molasses, carob molasses, date molasses, desugared corn syrup, desugared corn molasses, desugared (brown) rice syrup, desugared maple syrup, desugared sorghum molasses, desugared agave syrup, desugared pomegranate molasses, desugared carob molasses, desugared date molasses”
Claim 1 recites “the anti-sticking and anti-icing agent is a material selected from a group consisting of corn syrup, corn molasses, sorghum molasses, pomegranate molasses, carob molasses, date molasses, desugared corn syrup, desugared corn molasses, desugared (brown) rice syrup, desugared maple syrup, desugared sorghum molasses, desugared agave syrup, desugared pomegranate molasses, desugared carob molasses, desugared date molasses”. However, claim 1 recites “(brown) rice syrup” in line 13, which is not a part of the group
Claim 1 recites “the anti-sticking and anti-icing agent is a material selected from a group consisting of corn syrup, corn molasses, sorghum molasses, pomegranate molasses, carob molasses, date molasses, desugared corn syrup, desugared corn molasses, desugared (brown) rice syrup, desugared maple syrup, desugared sorghum molasses, desugared agave syrup, desugared pomegranate molasses, desugared carob molasses, desugared date molasses”. However claim 1 recites “agave syrup” in line 17, which is not a part of the group.
Claim 1 recites “the anti-sticking and anti-icing agent is a material selected from a group consisting of corn syrup, corn molasses, sorghum molasses, pomegranate molasses, carob molasses, date molasses, desugared corn syrup, desugared corn molasses, desugared (brown) rice syrup, desugared maple syrup, desugared sorghum molasses, desugared agave syrup, desugared pomegranate molasses, desugared carob molasses, desugared date molasses”. However claim 1 recites “maple syrup” in line 14, which is not a part of the group
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US20030132419A1.
Regarding claim 1, US20030132419A1 discloses applying an anti-icing agent to an aggregate material and/or to the inside walls of the transporting equipment.
One preferred anti-icing material is high fructose corn syrup solids. High fructose corn syrup is an aqueous solution of fructose, glucose, and lower order polymers thereof. The high fructose corn syrup may be used as supplied or may be diluted or blended with other ingredients. See abstract, [0003] and [0015].
The method contemplates applying an anti-icing material to the aggregate material, by which is contemplated any suitable method of application. Generally, the anti-icing material is provided as a solution which can be sprayed onto the aggregate material. This can be done after the aggregate material has been loaded into a railcar or truck, but more preferably, the anti-icing material is applied as the aggregate material is being transported via a conveyor, i.e., a conveyor belt, a push cart, or other suitable means of conveyance. In some embodiments of the invention, the anti-icing material will be applied to the aggregate material as the coal is falling from a conveyor belt; this still should be considered as being within the purview of this embodiment of the invention. See [0013]. All methods described herein can be performed in any suitable order. See [0047].
A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). The prior art discloses a substantially similar process, it is obvious to expect that the prior art process has sthe same effect as the claimed process.
Regarding claim 2, US20030132419A1 discloses that applying an anti-icing agent to an aggregate material and/or to the inside walls of the transporting equipment.
One preferred anti-icing material is high fructose corn syrup solids. High fructose corn syrup is an aqueous solution of fructose, glucose, and lower order polymers thereof. The high fructose corn syrup may be used as supplied or may be diluted or blended with other ingredients. See abstract, [0003] and [0015]. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 3, US20030132419A1 discloses that applying an anti-icing agent to an aggregate material and/or to the inside walls of the transporting equipment. A solution is sprayed onto the top of a railcar or truck, the viscosity should be sufficiently low to allow the anti-icing material to flow down through substantially the entire mass of aggregate material. See [0018].
Regarding claim 4, US20030132419A1 discloses that anti-icing agents may be sprayed onto the coal as it is being handled by conveying equipment, such as a conveyor belt, prior to introduction into a railcar or truck. Alternatively, an anti-icing solution may be sprayed onto the pile of coal after it has been loaded onto the car or truck. See [0004]. The method contemplates applying an anti-icing material to the aggregate material, by which is contemplated any suitable method of application. Generally, the anti-icing material is provided as a solution which can be sprayed onto the aggregate material. This can be done after the aggregate material has been loaded into a railcar or truck, but more preferably, the anti-icing material is applied as the aggregate material is being transported via a conveyor, i.e., a conveyor belt, a push cart, or other suitable means of conveyance. In some embodiments of the invention, the anti-icing material will be applied to the aggregate material as the coal is falling from a conveyor belt; this still should be considered as being within the purview of this embodiment of the invention. See [0013]. A solution is sprayed onto the top of a railcar or truck, the viscosity should be sufficiently low to allow the anti-icing material to flow down through substantially the entire mass of aggregate material. See [0018].
Regarding claim 5, US20030132419A1 is silent about including spraying at a rate of about 5-20 gallons per rail car. However, it has been held "[W]here 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." In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The prior art discloses a substantial similar process, it is well settled that determination of optimum values of cause effective variables such as these process parameters is within the skill of one practicing in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 6, US20030132419A1 is silent about applying the anti-sticking and anti-icing agent to the aggregate material at a rate of about 2-6 pints per ton of aggregate material. However, it has been held "[W]here 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." In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The prior art discloses a substantial similar process and it is well settled that determination of optimum values of cause effective variables such as these process parameters is within the skill of one practicing in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claims 7-12, US20030132419A1discloses applying an anti-icing agent to the aggregate material and/or to the inside walls of the transporting equipment. See abstract, [0003] and [0015]. The anti-icing agents may serve under proper conditions to remove ice or snow already present on a surface; this function is known as de-icing, and the same agents that are used for anti-icing often may be used for deicing. Anti-icing agents may be sprayed onto the coal as it is being handled by conveying equipment, such as a conveyor belt, prior to introduction into a railcar or truck. Alternatively, an anti-icing solution may be sprayed onto the pile of coal after it has been loaded onto the car or truck. See [0004], The method contemplates applying an anti-icing material to the aggregate material, by which is contemplated any suitable method of application. Generally, the anti-icing material is provided as a solution which can be sprayed onto the aggregate material. This can be done after the aggregate material has been loaded into a railcar or truck, but more preferably, the anti-icing material is applied as the aggregate material is being transported via a conveyor, i.e., a conveyor belt, a push cart, or other suitable means of conveyance. In some embodiments of the invention, the anti-icing material will be applied to the aggregate material as the coal is falling from a conveyor belt; this still should be considered as being within the purview of this embodiment of the invention. See [0013]. A solution is sprayed onto the top of a railcar or truck, the viscosity should be sufficiently low to allow the anti-icing material to flow down through substantially the entire mass of aggregate material. See [0018]. All methods described herein can be performed in any suitable order. See [0047].
Regarding claims 13-14, US20030132419A1discloses apply an anti-icing agent to the aggregate material and/or to the inside walls of the transporting equipment. The anti-icing agent is an agent that prevents or inhibits the formation of ice in or near the aggregate material. Generally, anti-icing agents may serve under proper conditions to remove ice or snow already present on a surface; this function is known as de-icing, and the same agents that are used for anti-icing often may be used for deicing. Anti-icing agents may be sprayed onto the coal as it is being handled by conveying equipment, such as a conveyor belt, prior to introduction into a railcar or truck. Alternatively, an anti-icing solution may be sprayed onto the pile of coal after it has been loaded onto the car or truck. See [0004]. The method contemplates applying an anti-icing material to the aggregate material, by which is contemplated any suitable method of application. Generally, the anti-icing material is provided as a solution which can be sprayed onto the aggregate material. This can be done after the aggregate material has been loaded into a railcar or truck, but more preferably, the anti-icing material is applied as the aggregate material is being transported via a conveyor, i.e., a conveyor belt, a push cart, or other suitable means of conveyance. In some embodiments of the invention, the anti-icing material will be applied to the aggregate material as the coal is falling from a conveyor belt; this still should be considered as being within the purview of this embodiment of the invention. See [0013]. In embodiments where a solution is sprayed onto the top of a railcar or truck, the viscosity should be sufficiently low to allow the anti-icing material to flow down through substantially the entire mass of aggregate material. See [0018].
Although the prior art is silent about including initiating loading of the aggregate material into the aggregate material hauling equipment within five or one minutes of the applying of the anti-sticking and anti-icing agent, the prior art discloses a substantial similar process and it is well settled that determination of optimum values of cause effective variables such as these process parameters is within the skill of one practicing in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHUANGYI ABU ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-6453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am- 5:00 pm.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571)270-3149. 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.
/SHUANGYI ABU ALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights