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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 05-05-2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. Foreign Patent Documents 2-5 have been lined through because copies of the foreign patent documents have not been provided. Only translations were filed.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2: “the lengthwise direction” should be --a lengthwise direction-- because such a direction has not been previously recited.
Claim 2, line 2: “the cross-section” should be --a cross-section-- because a cross-section has not been previously recited.
Claim 3, line 2: “the cross-section” should be --a cross-section-- because a cross-section has not been previously recited.
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 1-11 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.
The term “hot air” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “hot” 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. It is unclear what temperature the air must be to be considered “hot”. In context of the general art, tempering air is often hotter than room temperature, but cooler than the glass. However, the claim also recites that the “furnace portions are configured to heat said glass to a tempering temperature”. Thus, the term “hot” could imply different meanings depending on the standard of comparison.
Claim 5 recites “the division channels of two furnace portions are connected”. Claim 1 already recites “said division channel of the first furnace portion is connected to the division channel of the second furnace portion”. It is unclear if claim 5 is referring to the division channels of the two furnace portions of the first furnace portion and the second furnace portion already recited in claim 1, or if it is referring to other division channels of other furnace portions. If it is referring to the same elements recited in claim 1, then claim 5 would not be further limiting to claim 1 and would necessitate an additional rejection under 35 USC 112(d).
Claim 6 recites “the division channels of at least three furnace portions are connected”. It is unclear if these at least three furnace portions include the first furnace portion and the second furnace portion, and their respective division channels, already recited in claim 1, or if claim 6 is referring to other furnace portions and division channels.
Claim 7 recites “the first furnace portion comprising the blower is arranged between two furnace portions”. It is unclear if the “two furnace portions” includes the second furnace portion already recited in claim 1, or if it is referring to other furnace portions.
Claim 8 recites “the division channel” in line 2 and “said division channel” in line 4. It is unclear if these are referring to the division channel of the first furnace portion, the division channel of the second furnace portion, each/both of the division channels of the first furnace portion and the second furnace portion, or some other division channel.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "both sides" in lines 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A furnace may have more than two sides, and thus it is unclear what sides are being referenced.
Claim 10 recites “the furnace consists of…” in line 6. The phrase “consists of” is exclusive, excluding any element that is not specified in the claim. See MPEP 2111.03. The use of “consists of” in claim 10 is unclear because claims 1 and 10 (prior to the phrase) recite other elements that are also part of the furnace (e.g., blower, blow enclosures, conveyor). Thus the furnace cannot consist of only the elements recited in lines 6-10.
Claim 10 recites “furnace portions” in line 6. It is unclear if this is referring to the first furnace portion and the second furnace portion already recited in claim 1, or if it is referring to other furnace portions.
Claim 11 recites “assembling the tempering furnace claimed in claim 1”. Claim 11 then recites “at least two furnace portions” and “division channel(s)”. It is unclear if claim 11 requires all of the structure recited in claim 1. If it does, then it is unclear if “at least two furnace portions” and “division channel(s)” are referring to the first furnace portion and its division channel and the second furnace portion and its division channel, or to other furnace portions and division channel(s). For purposes of examination, claim 11 will be interpreted to require all of the structure of claim 1.
Claim 11 recites “division channel(s)” in line 6. It is unclear what the “(s)” means for the scope of the claim. It is unclear if it is saying that there can be a single division channel connected to itself, or if each of the at least two furnace portions can have one or multiple division channels, or something else.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not fairly teach or suggest the combination of features as claimed.
Some prior art references suggest tempering furnace portions attached successively one after another in a lengthwise direction of the furnace (US 6,427,488 A1; US 5,078,774; US 4,481,025; US 4,300,937; US 4,204,845; US 4,004,901; US 3,996,035; US 3,994,711; US 3,923,488; US 2021/0380461 A1; US 2020/0131070 A1; US 2015/0353411 A1; US 2012/0171632 A1; US 2004/0093904 A1; CN 115650567 A), some of which include various division channels, blow enclosures with blow openings, and/or blowers, but which lack many of the other claimed features. The portions of these furnaces that include blowing air on glass sheets are also generally configured for cooling glass sheets, rather than heating them to tempering temperatures. References suggesting blowers do not suck air from the tempering furnace and feed that air to divisions channels. US 2,259,741 suggests sucking air from a tempering furnace, but the air is then blasted out into the open air of the furnace through a sidewall for circulation of furnace air.
Some prior art references suggest division channels inside a furnace arranged in the lengthwise direction of the furnace for dividing air to blow enclosures which have blow openings from which air is discharged as jets towards a glass sheet (US 6,279,350 B1; US 5,150,534; US 5,057,138; US 5,032,162; US 3,372,016; US 2005/0274373 A1; FI 111006 B). However, these references use cooling air to cool glass sheets for tempering, and thus the relevant furnace portions are not configured to heat glass sheets to a tempering temperature. Also, these references generally lack any suggestion of attaching successive furnace portions or connecting division channels as claimed.
US 6,848,725 B2 suggests a fluid channel which is dimensioned to extend inside another channel to connect the channels for use in applications with thermal expansion and shrinkage. The references cited above in the glass arts generally do not consider connections between channels, particularly not for an apparatus having all of the other features as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin Snelting whose telephone number is (571)272-7169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00 to 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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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.
/ERIN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741