DETAILED ACTION
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.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-16 and 21-22 in the reply filed on Jun. 5, 2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim Interpretation
In claim 8, the Examiner interprets “the insulation material” as referencing “a thermal insulation material outside” in claim 7.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: typographical error in line 4. The Examiner has interpreted “the feed inner pipe and the feed outer pipe” should be “the feeding inner pipe” and “the feeding outer pipe”. Additionally, Applicant uses the term “wherein” to recite additional features, such as an inner filling gap and an outer filling gap, the Examiner suggests the term “wherein” should be replaced with “further comprising” to positively recite the additional features. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant uses the term “wherein” to recite additional features, such as filling materials, the Examiner suggests the term “wherein” should be replaced with “further comprising” to positively recite the additional features. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant uses the term “wherein” to recite additional features, such as a plurality of downward-sloping bumps, the Examiner suggests the term “wherein” should be replaced with “further comprising” to positively recite the additional features. 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 1-16 and 21-22 is/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 claims the feeding upper outer pipe is mounted on an upper end of the feeding middle outer pipe and the feeding lower outer pipe is mounted on a lower end of the feeding middle outer pipe. Then Applicant claims the feeding upper outer pipe, the feeding middle outer, and the feeding lower outer pipe are connected through the tapered pipe, since the feeding upper outer pipe is mounted on an upper end of the feeding middle outer pipe and the feeding lower outer pipe is mounted on a lower end of the feeding middle outer pipe. Based on the specification (Figs. 1 and 4), it appears the feeding device is structured with the feeding upper outer pipe mounted above the feeding middle outer pipe by a tapered pipe mounted on the feeding middle outer pipe and the feeding lower outer pipe mounted below the feeding middle outer pipe by another tapered pipe mounted on the feeding middle outer pipe. Additionally Applicant uses the term “installed by fitting”, and it is unclear to the Examiner what Applicant is attempting to claim with the term “installed by fitting”. Please clarify claim 1. Claims 2-16 and 21-22 depend from claim 1 and are also indefinite.
Claim 11 claims a diameter of the pure platinum wire, but claim 10 provides for the inner heater embedded with a pure platinum wire and the outer heater embedded with a pure platinum wire, and it is unclear to the Examiner which platinum wire is being referenced.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han).
Regarding claim 1, Li (Fig. 1, Claims, pg. 2, and pg. 4) discloses a platinum channel structure (corresponding to a device) for delivering molten glass comprising a feeding device including a feeding outer pipe including outer walls/sidewalls of a reducing section 12, a first section 121, a second section 122, a third section 123, and a fourth section 124. Below is an annotated drawing of Fig. 1with the feeding device including an outer pipe. The annotated drawing illustrates the feeding outer pipe includes a feeding upper outer pipe, a feeding middle outer pipe, a feeding lower outer pipe, and two tapered out pipes annotated as a tapered pipe and another tapered pipe.
PNG
media_image1.png
447
550
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated Fig. 1 of Li
The feeding upper outer pipe is mounted above the feeding middle outer pipe by a tapered pipe mounted on the feeding middle outer pipe, the feeding lower outer pipe is mounted below the feeding middle outer pipe by another tapered pipe mounted on the feeding middle outer pipe. (Please see the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) interpretation of claim 1).
Li (pg. 6) discloses the feeding device includes heating tile/shoe 30 covering the outer walls of the reducing section 12, which provides for a first heating means (corresponding to an outer heater) and includes an electric heating rod (20) (corresponding to an inner heater). The outer heater and inner heater provide for the claimed auxiliary heating device. Since Li discloses the heating shoe 30 covering the outer wall of the reducing section, this provides for the outer heater wraps the feeding outer pipe and is installed by fitting with the feeding outer pipe.
Li discloses an inner heater (i.e. electric heating rod), but fails to disclose details of the inner heater, such as the inner heater is disposed inside a feeding inner pipe and is installed by fitting with the feeding inner pipe. However, Han (abstract and Figs. 1 and 2) teaches the structure of a platinum channel for liquid glass (i.e. molten glass). Han (pg. 4 and Figs. 1 and 2) teaches a platinum channel with an internal heating device. Han teaches the internal heating device within a platinum channel 5 with molten glass 4. Han teaches the internal heating device comprises a solid platinum pipe 1 with a plurality of coils 6 wound around the solid platinum pipe 1. The solid platinum pipe 1 is disposed within a platinum channel 3. Both Li and Han discloses an internal heating of a platinum channel. Based on the additional teachings by Han, it would be obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art, the inner heater of Li could be substituted by the internal heating device of Han, since both devices are used for internal heating of molten glass in a pipe/channel. With the substitution of the internal heating device of Han for the inner heater of Li, this provides for an inner heater (solid platinum pipe 1 with coils 6) disposed inside of a feeding inner pipe (“platinum channel 3”) and is installed by fitting with the feeding inner pipe. Accordingly, the combination of Li in view of Han provides for the claimed feeding device and auxiliary heating device having the structure claimed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, in addition to the rejection of claim 1 above, Li (pg. 2 and annotated Fig. 1 of Li) discloses longitudinal sections with a rectangular shape corresponding to the feeding upper outer pipe, the feeding middle outer pipe, and the feeding lower outer pipe and a trapezoidal shape corresponding to the tapered sections of pipe to connect parts having different size sections. While Li fails to disclose the feeding upper outer pipe, the feeding middle outer pipe, and the feeding lower outer pipe are rectangular and tapered sections as a circular straight pipe with a shape of a hollow cylinder, and the shape of each tapered pipe is a hollow frustum of a cone, it would be obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art, the pipes as having circular cross sections with the longitudinal rectangular sections as a straight section and a tapered section as a hollow frustum of a cone. Therefore, each of the feeding upper outer pipe, the feeding middle outer pipe, and the feeding lower outer pipe with a circular cross section provides for a circular straight pipe with a shape of a hollow cylinder, and each tapered pipes with a circular cross section provides for a shape of a hollow frustum cone.
Regarding claim 3, in addition to the rejection of claims 1 and 2 above (See annotated Fig. 1 of Li), the illustrations of Han suggest the feeding middle outer pipe is larger than a cross-sectional diameter of the feeding lower outer pipe, and the cross sectional diameter of the feeding lower outer pipe is greater than a cross sectional area of the feeding upper outer pipe (see clearance between electric heating rod 20 and the feeding upper outer pipe and feeding lower outer pipe).
Regarding claim 4, Li fails to explicitly state a length of the feeding middle outer pipe is greater than a length of the feeding lower outer pipe and the length of the feeding lower outer pipe is greater than a length of the feeding upper outer pipe. However, it would be obvious to try various lengths of pipe. The obviousness to try various lengths of pipe would provide for a combination where a length of the feeding middle outer pipe is greater than a length of the feeding lower outer pipe, and the length of the feeding lower outer pipe is greater than a length of the feeding upper outer pipe.
Regarding claim 5, in addition to the rejection of claim 1 above, Li in view of Han provides for the feeding inner pipe includes a circular straight pipe. Li in view of Han fails to disclose a conical pipe mounted at an end of the circular straight pipe of the feeding inner pipe. However, the addition of a conical pipe at an end of the circular pipe is merely a change in shape, and therefore obvious. (MPEP 2114.04 IV).
Regarding claim 9, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li in view of Han provides for an inner heater (solid platinum pipe 1 with coils 6) disposed inside of a feeding inner pipe (“platinum channel 3”) and Han (Figures) discloses the inner heater is cylindrical-shaped. Accordingly, Li in view of Han provides for the inner heater is cylindrical-shaped.
Regarding claim 15, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li in view of Han provides for an inner heater and the inner heater disposed inside the feeding inner pipe. Also discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li discloses a feeding outer pipe including outer walls/sidewalls of a reducing section 12, a first section 121, a second section 122, a third section 123, and a fourth section 124. Li (see annotated Fig. 1 of Li) illustrates the length of the inner heater is less than a length of the feeding outer pipe. Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the modified device of Li would include the length of the feeding inner pipe as the same length as the inner heater, and therefore, the modified device of Li provides for a length of the feeding inner pipe is less than a length of the feeding outer pipe.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Peng et al. (US 2022/0402798 – hereinafter Peng).
Regarding claim 6, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li and Han disclose platinum channel structures and therefore, provide for the feeding inner pipe and the feeding outer pipe made of platinum. Li and Han fail to disclose the pipes are made of platinum-rhodium alloy. However, Peng ([0011] and [0020]) teaches channels and tanks in contact with molten glass made of platinum rhodium alloy. Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the feeding inner pipe and feeding outer pipe made of platinum-rhodium alloy, since is a known prior art material for channels in contact with molten glass.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Peng et al. (US 2022/0402798 – hereinafter Peng) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Kocatulum et al. (US 2020/0095152A1 – hereinafter Kocatulum).
Regarding claim 7, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li discloses the outer heater, but fails to disclose the outer heater is wrapped with a thermal insulation material outside. However, Kocatulum (abstract, Fig. 5 and [0045]) teaches heaters along a tube in contact with molten glass comprising heating elements (122, 178, 156) that may in the form of a wire. Kocatulum (Fig. 5 and [0029]) teaches insulation material (120) positioned around the tube along with heating elements
Both Li and Kocatulum teaches a heated pipe in contact with molten glass. Therefore, based on the additional teachings by Kocatulum, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, for a pipe having an outer heater to be wrapped with a thermal insulation material outside.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Peng et al. (US 2022/0402798 – hereinafter Peng) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Kocatulum et al. (US 2020/0095152A1 – hereinafter Kocatulum) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of DeAngelis et al. (US 2023/0365451A1 – hereinafter DeAngelis).
Regarding claim 8, as discussed in the rejection of claim 7 above, Kocatulum teaches insulating material as part of the heater. In addition to the rejection of claim 7 above, DeAngelis teaches insulating materials, such as ([0083]) alumina, zirconia, or other refractory materials. Based on the additional teachings by DeAngelis, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art the insulation material as a known prior art insulation material, such as alumina, as taught by DeAngelis. Since the insulation material is part of the outer heater, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the insulation material and the inner heater and outer heater are made of aluminum oxide.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Coppola et al. (US 2014/0318182A1 – hereinafter Coppola).
Regarding claim 10, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li in view of Han provides for an inner heater comprising a solid platinum pipe 1, which corresponds to the claimed pure platinum inner heater embedded with a pure platinum wire inside. Additionally, Li discloses a heating wire disposed in the heating shoe, which provides for a heating wire disposed in the heating shoe. Li fails to disclose the heating wire as a platinum wire. However, Coppola ([0010]) teaches a resistive heating wire made of platinum.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Coppola et al. (US 2014/0318182A1 – hereinafter Coppola) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of T. Xu et al. ("Research on Structure Optimization Based on Solid Heating Elements").
Regarding claim 11, Li, Han, and Coppola fail to disclose the diameter of the platinum wires. However, Xu (abstract) teaches it is known in the prior art to varying the structure, specifically a diameter of the heating wire. Xu teaches the diameter of the heating wire may improve the service life of the heating wire. Therefore, based on the additional teachings of Xu, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to optimize the diameter of the pure platinum heating wire.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kocatulum et al. (US 2020/0095152A1 – hereinafter Kocatulum).
Regarding claim 12, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li in view of Han provides for the inner heater is disposed inside the feeding inner pipe (“platinum channel 3”). Han (Figs. 1 and 2) also discloses a gap (corresponding to an inner filling gap) is formed between the inner heater (solid platinum pipe 1) and the feeding inner pipe (“platinum channel 3”), and therefore, Li in view of Han provides for the inner filling gap. Han (Figs. 1 and 2) discloses for a gap (corresponding to a feeding inner space) between the feeding inner pipe, and therefore Li in view of Han provides for the feeding space.
Li (pg. 6) also discloses the heating shoe 30 covers an outer wall of the reducing section 12, and discloses a heating wire disposed in the heating shoe (i.e. outer heater). Li fails to disclose details of the outer heater, such as an outer filling gap is disposed between the outer heater and the feeding outer pipe. However, Kocatulum (abstract, Fig. 5 and [0045]) teaches heaters along a tube in contact with molten glass comprising heating elements (122, 178, 156) that may in the form of a wire. Kocatulum illustrates in the heating zones (110, 150, 171) a gap (corresponding to an outer filling gap) disposed between the heating elements and the pipe. Both Li and Kocatulum disclose heating an outer wall of a pipe with a heating wire. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, in the heating of an outer wall of a pipe with a heating wire, as disclosed by Li, there is an outer filling gap disposed between the outer heater and the feeding outer pipe, since it is a known prior art heater configuration, as taught by Kocatulum.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kocatulum et al. (US 2020/0095152A1 – hereinafter Kocatulum) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Xu et al. ("Research on Structure Optimization Based on Solid Heating Elements").
Regarding claim 13, as discussed in the rejection of claim 12 above, the modified device of Li provides for an inner filling gap and an outer filling gap, but fails to disclose the width of the inner filling gap and a width of the outer filling gap are within a range of 10 mm to 20 mm. However, Xu (Table II) teaches heating elements ranging from 5-9 mm in diameter. Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the width of the inner filling gap and a width of the outer filling gap would be wide enough to provide for known prior art heating wires diameters, such as the 5-9 mm diameter heating elements taught by Wu, which would provide for the inner filling gap and the outer filling gap to be within the claimed range of 10 mm to 20 mm, as claimed.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kocatulum et al. (US 2020/0095152A1 – hereinafter Kocatulum) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Peng et al. (CN 109336366A – hereinafter Peng2).
Regarding claim 14, as discussed in the rejection of claim 12 above, the modified device of Li provides for an inner filling gap and an outer filling gap, but fails to disclose filling materials of the inner filling gap and the outer filling gap are alumina powder. However, Kocatulum (Fig. 5 and [0029]) teaches insulation material (120) positioned around the tube along with heating elements and Peng2 (claims) teaches a platinum structure with alumina powder as insulating layer. Accordingly, based on the additional teachings by Kocatulum and Peng2, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to provide for an insulating layer/material along with heating elements in the modified device of Li, and to include an prior art known insulating material, such as an alumina powder.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN113185093A – hereinafter Li) in view of Han et al. (CN21694712U – hereinafter Han) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kocatulum et al. (US 2020/0095152A1 – hereinafter Kocatulum) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Schwenninger (US 4,874,313).
Regarding claim 21, in addition to the rejection of claim 12 above, Kocatulum (Fig. 5 and [0029] and [0042]) further teaches insulation material (120, 176) positioned around the tube and heating elements, which provides for the outer heater is wrapped with an insulation material, but fails to disclose the thickness of the insulation material. However, Schwenninger (Col. 5, lines 20-26) teaches a block having an insulating affecting and that as the block thickness increases, heat loss decreases. Accordingly, based on the additional teachings by Schwenninger, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, that the insulation material thickness affects heat loss, and is therefore, the insulation thickness is a result effective variable, that would be obvious to optimize.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), since it is dependent from claim 1. Allowability of claims 16 and 22 will be revisited once the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issues are resolved, and if claim 16 is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the device for controlling an extraction amount and homogenizing glass liquid of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of downward-sloping bumps arranged in a staggering manner on an outer side of the feeding inner pipe and on an inner side of the feeding outer pipe.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA HERRING whose telephone number is (571)270-1623. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: EST 8:15am-4:15pm.
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.
/LISA L HERRING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights