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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/20/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 10/20/2025 with respect to the objection of claims 3 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claims 3 and 11 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12, 14-17, 19 and 20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Heino and Sanderson.
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejection of claim 8 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ware.
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the amended claim 9 being novel over the prior art of record have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ware.
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the amended claim 11 being novel over the prior art of record have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Heino.
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the amended claim 17 being novel over the prior art of record have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Heino and Sanderson.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris (US 4,760,779) in view of Heino (US 7,794,670) in view of Sanderson (US 3,360,867) and in view of Luker (6,189,234).
As for claim 1, Morris discloses a material drying apparatus, comprising: a fluidizing bed plate removably attached (4:52-55) to an interior surface of a fluid bed dryer (50, fig. 2, abstract); wherein the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures (51, fig. 3); a side entry for fluidizing air delivery to the fluid bed dryer to enable multiple fluid bed dryer modules to be connected in series, making possible drying of materials which require a high length-to-width ratio and for extended drying time (38, fig. 1, drying time can be extended by adding additional assemblies), wherein the side entry enables multi- temperature zone configuration (31-33, fig. 1); a fan to direct heated fluidizing air (37, 46, fig. 1, 3:7-12) through a perforated bottom of the fluidizing bed plate (39, 50, fig. 2, 3:62-68); expanded upper plenum to reduce upflow velocity within the fluid bed dryer (see sketch below) to allow entrained particles to return to the fluidizing bed (see sketch below).
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for each of said plurality of apertures comprising: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of said fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of said cylindrical shape to a bottom end of said fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein said first depth and said second depth are equal in size. Heino teaches each of said plurality of apertures comprising: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of said fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of said cylindrical shape to a bottom end of said fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein said first depth and said second depth are equal in size (33, 34, fig. 2, cols. 5-6, lines 61-02) in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. Morris would benefit equally from preventing holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with each of said plurality of apertures comprising: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of said fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of said cylindrical shape to a bottom end of said fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein said first depth and said second depth are equal in size as taught by Heino in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged.
PNG
media_image1.png
346
405
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for one or more turning vanes positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air. Sanderson teaches one or more turning vanes positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air (12, 10, fig. 1) in order to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. Morris would benefit equally from more efficient air delivery. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with one or more turning vanes positioned within the fluid bed dryer in order to produce more efficient air delivery. In this case the sloped wall of Sanderson reduces turbulence and is thus meets the definition of a vane as defined by applicant’s specification.
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for an access door to enable cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer. Luker teaches an access door to enable cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer (25, 45, fig. 1) in order to provide for convenient cleaning and repair purposes. Morris would benefit equally from providing for convenient cleaning and repair purposes. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with an access door to enable cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer as taught by Luker in order to provide for convenient cleaning and repair purposes.
As for claim 3, Morris discloses the claimed invention except for the plurality of apertures are non-plugging to reduce turbulence, to reduce plugging of the fluidizing bed plate, and the reduce the formation of powder. Heino teaches the plurality of apertures are non-plugging to reduce turbulence, to reduce plugging of the fluidizing bed plate, and the reduce the formation of powder (33, 34, fig. 2, cols. 5-6, lines 61-02) in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. Morris would benefit equally from preventing holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with the plurality of apertures are non-plugging to reduce turbulence, to reduce plugging of the fluidizing bed plate, and the reduce the formation of powder as taught by Heino in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged.
As for claim 4, Morris discloses the fluidizing bed plate is removably secured to the interior surface of the fluid bed dryer via a one or more fasteners to allow removal of the fluid bed plate for cleaning plugged apertures (50, 3:62-68, a removable fluidized bed would necessitate fastening means to maintain stability in the turbulent environment of a fluidized bed).
As for claim 6, Morris discloses the claimed invention except for the one or more turning vanes reduce air turbulence, thereby reducing the formation of a powder during the material drying process. Sanderson teaches the one or more turning vanes reduce air turbulence, thereby reducing the formation of a powder during the material drying process (similar structure of Sanderson, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant) in order to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. Morris would benefit equally from reducing turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with the one or more turning vanes reduce air turbulence, thereby reducing the formation of a powder during the material drying process as taught by Sanderson in order to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery.
As for claim 7, Morris discloses the expanded upper plenum allows particles entrained in exhaust gas to fall back onto the fluidizing bed and exit the fluidizing bed dryer (See sketch above. The similar structure of Morris, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris in view of Heino in view of Sanderson and Luker as for claim 1 above and further in view of Ware (US 8,257,767).
Morris discloses the fluid bed dryer is constructed as a multi-unit fluid bed dryer to enable drying of materials which require low temperature drying (31-33, fig. 1, residence time adjustable matter of design choice) and the claimed invention except for each unit of the multi-unit fluid bed dryer comprises at least one laterally enclosed upper plenum and at least one dedicated upper exhaust port. Ware teaches each unit of the multi-unit fluid bed dryer comprises at least one laterally enclosed upper plenum and at least one dedicated upper exhaust port (60, 64, 68, fig. 1, 6:20-28) in order to provide independent process control of each drying chamber enabling one or more drying chambers to be sequentially added. Morris would benefit equally from providing independent process control of each drying chamber enabling one or more drying chambers to be sequentially added. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with each unit of the multi-unit fluid bed dryer comprises at least one laterally enclosed upper plenum and at least one dedicated upper exhaust port as taught by Ware in order to provide independent process control of each drying chamber enabling one or more drying chambers to be sequentially added. It is noted that Morris contemplated the benefit of individual control of each drying unit exhaust by disclosing optional baffles for each drying unit in order to control the desired airflow pattern (3:30-34).
Claims 9, 11, 12, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris in view of Heino in view of Sanderson in view of Ware and in view of Luker.
As for claim 9, Morris discloses a multi-unit material drying apparatus, comprising: a plurality of fluid bed dryers connected in series (31-33, fig. 1, 3:3-6), each fluid bed dryer comprising: a fluidizing bed plate attached to an interior surface of a fluid bed dryer (50, fig. 2) wherein the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures (51, fig. 3); a side entry for fluidizing air delivery to the fluid bed dryer to enable the drying of materials which require a high length-to-width ratio and an extended drying time (38, fig. 1, drying time can be extended by adding additional assemblies), wherein the side entry enables multi- temperature zone configuration (31-33 , fig. 1); a fan to direct heated fluidizing air (37, 46, fig. 1, 3:7-12) through a perforated bottom of the fluidizing bed plate (39, 50, fig. 2, 3:62-68); an expanded upper plenum with side walls (See sketch above, the similar structure of Morris, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant), wherein the expanded plenum reduces upflow velocity to allow entrained particles to return to the fluidizing bed (see sketch above); wherein the plurality of fluid bed dryers form a multi-unit material drying apparatus to enable drying of materials requiring low temperature drying with longer solids residence time (31-33, fig. 1. The similar structure of Morris, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant).
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures each having a frusto-conical bottom half and a cylindrical top half. Heino teaches the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures each having a frusto-conical bottom half and a cylindrical top half (20, fig. 3, 5:60-67) in order to more uniformly and stably diffuse the gas to effectively prevent dead zones, and particle adherence to the opening. Morris would benefit equally from more uniformly and stably diffusing the gas to effectively prevent dead zones, and particle adherence to the opening. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures each having a frusto-conical bottom half and a cylindrical top half as taught by Heino in order to more uniformly and stably diffuse the gas to effectively prevent dead zones, and particle adherence to the opening.
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for one or more turning vanes positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air. Sanderson teaches one or more turning vanes positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air (12, 10, fig. 1, similar structure of Sanderson, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant) in order to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. Morris would benefit equally from more efficient air delivery. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with one or more turning vanes positioned within the fluid bed dryer as taught by Sanderson in order to produce more efficient air delivery.
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for an upper plenum with a dedicated upper exhaust port. Ware teaches an upper plenum with a dedicated upper exhaust port (60, 64, 68, fig. 1, 6:20-28) in order to provide independent process control of each drying chamber enabling one or more drying chambers to be sequentially added. Morris would benefit equally from providing independent process control of each drying chamber enabling one or more drying chambers to be sequentially added. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with an upper plenum with a dedicated upper exhaust port as taught by Ware in order to provide independent process control of each drying chamber enabling one or more drying chambers to be sequentially added. It is noted that Morris contemplated the benefit of individual control of each drying unit exhaust by disclosing optional baffles for each drying unit in order to control the desired airflow pattern (3:30-34).
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for an access door to enable cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer. Luker teaches an access door to enable cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer (25, 45, fig. 1) in order to provide for convenient cleaning and repair purposes. Morris would benefit equally from providing for convenient cleaning and repair purposes. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with an access door to enable cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer as taught by Luker in order to provide for convenient cleaning and repair purposes.
As for claim 11, Morris discloses the claimed invention except for each of the plurality of apertures comprise: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of the fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of the cylindrical shape to a bottom end of the fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein the first depth and said second depth are equal in size. Heino teaches each of the plurality of apertures comprise: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of the fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of the cylindrical shape to a bottom end of the fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein the first depth and said second depth are equal in size (33, 34, fig. 2, cols. 5-6, lines 61-02) in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. Morris would benefit equally from preventing holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with each of the plurality of apertures comprise: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of the fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of the cylindrical shape to a bottom end of the fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein the first depth and said second depth are equal in size as taught by Heino in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged.
As for claim 12, Morris discloses the fluidizing bed plate is removably secured to the interior surface of the fluid bed dryer via a one or more fasteners to allow removal of the fluid bed plate for cleaning plugged apertures (50, 3:62-68, a removable fluidized bed would necessitate fastening means to maintain stability in the turbulent environment of a fluidized bed).
As for claim 14, Morris discloses the claimed invention except for the one or more turning vanes reduce air turbulence, thereby reducing the formation of a powder during the material drying process. Sanderson teaches the one or more turning vanes reduce air turbulence, thereby reducing the formation of a powder during the material drying process (12, 10, fig. 1, similar structure of Sanderson, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant) in order to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. Morris would benefit equally from reducing turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with the one or more turning vanes in order to reduce air turbulence, thereby reducing the formation of a powder during the material drying process as taught by Sanderson in order to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery.
As for claim 15, Morris discloses the expanded upper plenum allows articles entrained in exhaust gas to fall back onto the fluidizing bed and exit the fluidizing bed dryer (See sketch above. The similar structure of Morris, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant).
Claims 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morris in view of Sanderson (US 3,360,867) in view of Heino in view of Ware and in view of Luker.
As for claim 17, Morris discloses a material drying apparatus, comprising: at least one fluid bed dryer, comprising: an air inlet to allow the ingress of fluidizing air driven by a fan (37, fig. 1), the fan to direct the flow of the fluidizing air to heat the fluidizing air (46), and the fan to direct the flow of air through a perforated fluidizing bed plate attached to an interior surface of a fluid bed dryer (50), the perforated fluidizing bed plate position in an interior of the one or more fluid bed dryers (50, 3:62-68), wherein the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures (51, fig. 3); a side entry for fluidizing air delivery to the fluid bed dryer to enable the drying of materials which require a high length-to-width ratio and an extended drying time (38, fig. 1, drying time can be extended by adding additional assemblies. The similar structure of Morris, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant), wherein the side entry enables multi- temperature zone configuration (31-33, fig. 1); an expanded upper plenum with side walls and at least one dedicated exhaust port (43, 44, fig. 1, 3:29-30) to increase the volume of the interior of the one or more fluid bed dryers, and to reduce upflow velocity (See sketch above, the similar structure of Morris, without further definition or limitation would be expected to produce the same results as applicant) to allow entrained particles to return to the fluidizing bed (see sketch above).
Morris discloses the fluidizing bed plate defines a plurality of apertures (53, fig. 3) and the claimed invention except for wherein each of the plurality of apertures comprise: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of the perforated fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of the cylindrical shape to a bottom end of the perforated fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein the first depth and said second depth are equal in size. Heino teaches wherein each of the plurality of apertures comprise: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of the perforated fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of the cylindrical shape to a bottom end of the perforated fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein the first depth and said second depth are equal in size (33, 34, fig. 2, cols. 5-6, lines 61-02) in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged. Morris would benefit equally from . It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with wherein each of the plurality of apertures comprise: a cylindrical shape extending from a top end of the perforated fluidizing bed plate and defining a first depth, a frusto-conical shape extending from a bottom of the cylindrical shape to a bottom end of the perforated fluidizing bed plate and defining a second depth, wherein the first depth and said second depth are equal in size as taught by Heine in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged as taught by Heino in order to prevent holes of the gas distributor from being plugged.
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for the fan to direct the flow of the fluidizing air to a burner to heat the fluidizing air; at least one turning vane defining a concave curvature positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air. Sanderson teaches the fan to direct the flow of the fluidizing air to a burner to heat the fluidizing air (13, 14, fig. 1); at least one turning vane defining a concave curvature positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air (12, 10, fig. 1) because a burner is a well-known and obvious substitution to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for a means to raise heat for drying; and to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. Morris would benefit equally from reducing turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with the fan to direct the flow of the fluidizing air to a burner to heat the fluidizing air; at least one turning vane defining a concave curvature positioned within the fluid bed dryer to reduce turbulence of the heated fluidizing air as taught by Sanderson because a burner is a well-known and obvious substitution to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for a means to raise heat for drying; and to reduce turbulence from a 90-degree transition for more efficient air delivery.
Morris discloses the claimed invention except for an access door to enable efficient cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer. Luker teaches an access door to enable efficient cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer (25, 45, fig. 1) in order to provide for convenient cleaning and repair purposes. Morris would benefit equally from providing for convenient cleaning and repair purposes. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Morris with an access door to enable efficient cleaning and maintenance access to an interior of the fluid bed dryer as taught by Luker in order to provide for convenient cleaning and repair purposes.
As for claim 19, Morris discloses the fluidizing bed plate is constructed as a non-plugging fluidizing bed plate to reduce turbulence and plugging of the fluidizing bed plate to reduce the formation of powder (50, fig. 2, it is presume that all fluidized bed plates are designed to be non-plugging), and wherein the fluidizing bed plate is removably secured to the interior surface of the fluid bed dryer via a one or more fasteners to allow removal of the fluid bed plate for cleaning plugged apertures (50, 3:62-68, a removable bed would necessitate fastening means to remain stable in the turbulent environment of a fluidized bed).
As for claim 20, Morris discloses the material drying apparatus is capable of drying a raw material formed into a uniform pellet shape, wherein the raw material requires an extended drying process at a low temperature (fig. 1, structure disclosed capable of drying pellets at low temperatures with control over the temperature of heat source 46, an obvious matter of design choice).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN PATRICK MCCORMACK whose telephone number is (571)270-7472. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 1:30 PST.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at 571-270-5614. 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.
/JOHN P MCCORMACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762