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 .
Response to Interview
Applicant’s remarks, see interview summary herein, , with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 12-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/15/2026.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamamura (WO 2018146908) and Hamashima (KR 20070108397).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Tamamura discloses a glass manufacturing apparatus comprising:
A first conduit (7) comprising an interior passage defining a conduit cross-sectional footprint with a first cross-sectional area at a first position along a length of the conduit (Fig 2),
Tamamura does not disclose the at least one expansion drum as recited in claim 12.
In an analogous art of a conduit for homogenizing/ clarifying/ conditioning glass Hamashima discloses (Page 3, ¶2, Page 4, ¶1-7) having a ring made of platinum or platinum alloy thermally expanded drum (4) bonded to the outer circumference of the hollow tube connecting the flanges to the conduit (Page 4, ¶5, Page 6, last 3 paragraphs)
The ring is heated to thermal expansion until its inner diameter is larger than the outer diameter of the hollow tube. In this state, the hollow tube is inserted into the ring...
at a desired position of the outer circumference of the hollow tube, specifically, a position to be a joint with the flange
Thus teaching the claimed expansion drum cross-sectional footprint with a second cross-sectional area at the second position greater than the first cross-sectional area, the expansion drum cross-sectional footprint extending outside of the conduit cross-sectional footprint
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the expansion rings, or drums, taught by Hasmahima as motivated to increase the mechanical strength of the hollow tube and flange for the molten glass.
Regarding claim 2, Tamamura discloses multiple conduits connected with flanges therein (Fig 2) and Hamashima suggests providing the expansion drum at least adjacent the flange
Regarding claims 3-4, Tamamura does not disclose the at least one expansion drum as recited in claim 12.
In an analogous art of a conduit for homogenizing/ clarifying/ conditioning glass Hamashima discloses (Page 3, ¶2, Page 4, ¶1-7) having a ring made of platinum or platinum alloy thermally expanded drum (4) bonded to the outer circumference of the hollow tube (Page 4, ¶5, Page 6, last 3 paragraphs)
Hamashima discloses the at least one expansion drum preferably positioned at a second position along the length,
The ring is heated to thermal expansion until its inner diameter is larger than the outer diameter of the hollow tube. In this state, the hollow tube is inserted into the ring...
at a desired position of the outer circumference of the hollow tube, specifically, a position to be a joint with the flange
Thus teaching the claimed expansion drum cross-sectional footprint with a second cross-sectional area at the second position greater than the first cross-sectional area, the expansion drum cross-sectional footprint extending outside of the conduit cross-sectional footprint
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the expansion rings, or drums, taught by Hamashima as motivated to increase the mechanical strength of the hollow tube and flange for the molten glass.
Claim(s) 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamamura (WO 2018146908) and Hamashima (KR 20070108397) as applied above and further in view of and Lineman (TW 201420526) as cited in the machine translations provided herein.
Regarding claim 5, The combined disclosure of Tamamura and Hamashima of at least one reinforcing member attached to and extending along a portion of the length of the conduit, the at least one reinforcing member engaged in the casting.
In an analogous art of a glass a conduit (106) Lineman discloses comprising an interior passage defining a conduit cross-sectional footprint with a first cross-sectional area at a first position along a length of the conduit (Fig 1-7) with at least one reinforcing/ stiffening members member (106a, 420, 520, 620a-c) (Page 3; ¶3). Lineman recognizes the benefits of these stiffening members providing structural support and being heat sinks. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the Tamamura with the addition of the supports taught by Lineman as motivated to provide additional support to the conduit. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply at least one reinforcing member in each section as motivated to apply support to the conduit.
Regarding claim 6-8, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the reinforcement members of an optimized length to the conduit as motivated to provide support to the conduit wherein the placement is a mere matter of engineering choice for providing support .
Regarding claim 9, Lineman does not depict a stiffening member with a non0linear portion however it would be obvious to change the shape of the stiffening member to include a bend or curve along the conduit as motivated with the expected result that the stiffening rib still supports the conduit.
Regarding claim 10, The combined disclosure of Tamamura and Hamashima of at least one reinforcing member attached to and extending along a portion of the length of the conduit, the at least one reinforcing member engaged in the casting.
In an analogous art of a glass a conduit (106) Lineman discloses comprising an interior passage defining a conduit cross-sectional footprint with a first cross-sectional area at a first position along a length of the conduit (Fig 1-7) with at least one reinforcing/ stiffening members member (106a, 420, 520, 620a-c) (Page 3; ¶3). Lineman recognizes the benefits of these stiffening members providing structural support and being heat sinks. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the Tamamura with the addition of the supports taught by Lineman as motivated to provide additional support to the conduit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JODI COHEN FRANKLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3966. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am-4 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, Alison Hindelang 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.
JODI COHEN FRANKLIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1741
/JODI C FRANKLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights