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 II, claims 14-17 in the reply filed on Jun. 15, 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 claims 14-17, the Examiner notes while flowing molten material is recited in the active steps of the claim, the glass ribbon is not recited in the active steps of the claim.
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) 14 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami et al. (KR2012-0001673A – hereinafter Murakami).
Regarding claim 14, Murakami (abstract and Figs.1-7) discloses an apparatus for manufacturing a glass plate comprising a transferring pipe 10 that transfers molten glass from the melting bath to a molding unit. Murakami (Fig. 1) illustrates a flow direction of the molten glass from melting bath 20 through transfer pipe 10 to the molding unit. Accordingly, Murakami provides for flowing molten material within a channel (“transfer pipe 10”) of a conduit in a flow direction of the conduit.
Murakami (pg. 2) also discloses the transfer pipe comprising a conduit composed of a tube made of a platinum group metal and comprises refractory bricks that support and reinforce the conduit. Murakami teaches due to the passage of molten glass temperature changes occur in the pipe, for example, from a low temperature state to a high temperature state, and teaches the temperature changes may cause buckling of the conduit because the coefficient of thermal expansion of the platinum is larger than the refractory brick. Murakami (pg. 4 – last 2 paragraphs, pg. 5 1st 2 paragraphs, and Figs. 1-7) discloses the transfer pipe comprising a conduit tube composed of platinum also covered by an enclosure including a refractory layer 2 and refractory support (i.e. brick) 7. Murakami discloses refractory layer 2 allows expansion and movement of the conduit in the radial and longitudinal direction. Accordingly, based on the disclosures by Murakami above, Murakami provides for surrounding the conduit with an enclosure a comprising a refractory layer 2 and refractory support 7 and the enclosure contacts the conduit and accommodates dimensional changes of the conduit due to a temperature change when the molten material flows within the channel. Murakami fails to explicitly state the enclosure also reduces stress on conduit. However, since the refractory layer and refractory support is provided to support and reinforce the conduit and allows for thermal expansion of the conduit, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the enclosure contacts and reduces stress on the conduit, as claimed.
If it is interpreted the intended use of the method, specifically manufacturing a glass ribbon, further limits Murakami, Murakami teaches glass plates made by a downdraw method. Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, in the manufacturing of the glass plate by a molding unit in the method of Murakami, a downdraw method can be used to make the glass plate which is a prior art known process that creates a glass ribbon.
Regarding claim 16, as discussed in the rejection of claim 14 above, Murakami discloses the refractory layer 2 of the enclosure allows expansion and movement of the conduit in the longitudinal direction. Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the method of Murakami includes accommodating a thermal expansion or a thermal contraction of the conduit in a length direction substantially parallel to the flow direction, as claimed.
Regarding claim 17, s discussed in the rejection of claim 14 above, Murakami discloses the refractory layer 2 of the enclosure allow expansion and movement of the conduit in the radial direction. Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the method of Murakami includes accommodating a thermal expansion or a thermal contraction of the conduit in a radial direction substantially perpendicular to a length direction of the conduit.
Claim(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamamura et al. (US 2021/0147275A1 – hereinafter Tamamura).
Regarding claim 14, Tamamura (Figs. 1-3 and 8, and [0028]-[0037]) discloses glass supply passages 6a to 6d each formed of a transfer pipe 7 (corresponding to a conduit) having a channel formed by the main body portion 8, a sheet glass GR (corresponding to a glass ribbon) formed by the apparatus, and molten glass GM transferred via glass supply passages 6a to 6d. Tamamura ([0060] and [0074]) a method of using the apparatus including a transfer pipe including supplying molten glass through the supply passages. Accordingly, Tamamura discloses a method comprising flowing molten material within a channel of a conduit in a flow direction of the conduit.
Tamamura ([0037]-[0038], [0045], [0047]-[0048], [0051], [0056] and Figs. 2 and 8) discloses surrounding the conduit (i.e. transfer pipe 7) an enclosure comprising a refractory 10, casing 11, supporting material interposed between refractory 10 and the main body of the transfer pipe, pressing devices 18 to 20, and supporting members 24a and 24b comprising support column 25, supporting portion 26 and rollers 27a and 27b. Based on this disclosure, Tamamura provides for an enclosure that surrounds and contacts the conduit.
Tamamura fails to explicitly state the enclosure reduces stress on the conduit and accommodating a dimensional change of the conduit due to a temperature change when the molten material flows within the channel. However, Tamamura ([0047]) also discloses the enclosure (i.e. casing) comprising supporting members 24a and 24b is configured to support the transfer pipe, ([0056]) discloses a roller configured to travel on an upper surface of the supporting portion 26 when the main body portion of the transfer pipe is expanding by heating, ([0079]) discloses thermal stress generated by the transfer pipe in the course of manufacture of glass article, specifically molten glass supply step, and ([0086] and Figs. 5 and 7-8) discloses when expansion of the main body portion 8 is insufficient in the pre-heating step, external force promoting the expansion can be applied by the pressing devices 18 to 20, which is part of the enclosure. Accordingly, based on the additional disclosures by Tamamura above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, the enclosure reduces stress on the conduit and in the method accommodating a dimensional change of the conduit due to a temperature when molten material flows within the channel, as claimed.
Regarding claim 16, as discussed in the rejection of claim 14 above, Tamamura discloses an external force promoting the expansion of the main body portion 8 of the conduit. Therefore, it would be obvious in the method of Tamamura the accommodating comprises accommodating a thermal expansion of the conduit in a length direction substantially parallel to the flow direction.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamamura et al. (US 2021/0147275A1 – hereinafter Tamamura) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Aitoku (JP2010-228942A).
Regarding claim 15, as discussed in the rejection of claim 14 above, Tamamura discloses a supporting material interposed between refractory 10 and the main body portion 8 of the conduit. Tamamura ([0038]) also discloses the main body portion of the conduit made of a platinum material and Tamamura ([0045]-[0047] discloses a supporting material interposed between the refractory 10 and the main body portion 8. Tamamura discloses the supporting material is a filling powder (corresponding to a suspension material) that is diffusion bonded and discloses the filling powder as a mixture of alumina power and silica powder or may be a mixture of a plurality of kinds of powders. Tamamura fails to disclose delivering a suspension material in a gap surrounding the conduit and curing the suspension material to form the enclosure. However, Aitoku ([0011]) discloses platinum components comprising a dried coating/film layer of glass powder and ceramic powder on the outer surface of a platinum material. Aitoku ([0047]-[0048]) discloses the dried film can be formed by applying an aqueous slurry containing the glass powder and ceramic powder, the aqueous slurry may comprise a water-soluble organic binder, and discloses drying (corresponding to curing) the aqueous slurry. Both Tamamura and Aitoku disclose ceramic powders used as material contacting an outside of a platinum component. Accordingly, based on the additional teachings by Aitoku, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, delivering the filling powder (i.e. suspension material) in a gap surrounding the conduit, as taught by Tamamura, where the suspension material in a gap includes a step of curing the suspension material to form the enclosure.
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