DETAILED ACTION
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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 1. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim 3 is 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 3 recites a pipe axis of the vent pipe. However, claim 3 depends on claim 1 and claim 2 recites a plurality of vent pipes. It is unclear which of the vent pipes of claim 1 is being referenced.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by Jiang et al. (CN 107827338 machine translation provided). Regarding claims 1 and 10, Jiang teaches a fining device (top two passages on p. 2) comprising a fining pipe 4 which is disposed in a lateral orientation and is configured to allow a molten glass to flow therethrough, and a vent pipe which extends upward from the fining pipe and is configured to discharge gas bubbles from the molten glass to an outside of the fining pipe (5th passage on p. 2, 1st - 2nd passages on p. 4), wherein a plurality of vent pipes (2 and 6) is arranged at multiple positions along the fining pipe in a flowing direction of the molten glass (description of fig. 1 on p.3, 1st passage on p. 4), and wherein the plurality of vent pipes is arranged such that their lengths increase progressively toward an upstream side in the flowing direction (6th passage on p. 2, 4th passage on p. 4, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Jiang teaches a pipe axis each of the vent pipes (2/6) extends parallel to a vertical direction (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Jiang further teaches a fining step of discharging gas bubbles from a molten glass that fills the fining pipe to the outside of the fining pipe through the vent pipe (p. 4, especially 3rd passage).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Noda et al. (JP2014-94843 machine translation). Noda teaches fining device comprising a fining pipe which is disposed in a lateral orientation and is configured to allow a molten glass to flow therethrough (5th passage on p. 3, 3rd passage on p. 5), and a vent pipe which extends upward from the fining pipe and is configured to discharge gas bubbles from the molten glass to an outside of the fining pipe, wherein the vent pipe comprises a large diameter portion having a relatively large inner diameter and a small diameter portion having a relatively small inner diameter, wherein the large diameter portion constitutes a lower end portion of the vent pipe which is connected to the fining pipe, and the smaller diameter portion constitutes an upper end portion of the vent pipe in which an opening is formed (fig.4, 2nd passage p. 6).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN 107827338 machine translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above. From figure 1, Jiang teaches the fining pipe has a sloped bottom and sloped ramps (3/9) within, which suggests a pipe axis that is inclined with the horizontal plane. Furthermore, since the direction of glass flow within the fining device is considered a process limitation that defines a manner of operating the device, it does not further limit the structure of the fining device. Accordingly, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that flowing glass into opening at 5 would result in a fining pipe that forms an upward slope from the opening 5 (upstream side) toward opening 1 (downstream side).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN 107827338 machine translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Noda et al. (JP2014-94843 machine translation). Jiang doesn’t specify vent pipes with different diameter portions. In a similar field of endeavor, Noda also teaches a fining device comprising a fining pipe which is disposed in a lateral orientation and is configured to allow a molten glass to flow therethrough (5th passage on p. 3, 3rd passage on p. 5), and a vent pipe which extends upward from the fining pipe and is configured to discharge gas bubbles from the molten glass to an outside of the fining pipe (2nd passage on p. 5, fig. 4). Noda further teaches the vent pipe comprises a large diameter portion having a relatively large inner diameter and a small diameter portion having a relatively small inner diameter, wherein the large diameter portion constitutes a lower end portion of the vent pipe which is connected to the fining pipe, and the smaller diameter portion constitutes an upper end portion of the vent pipe in which an opening is formed (fig.4, 2nd passage p. 6). Noda teaches the structure of the vent pipe allows for opening and closing of the flow path when needed. Absent any criticality to the shape of the vent pipe, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided a similarly shaped vent pipe as Noda for the vent pipes of Jiang, as a matter of choice.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN 107827338 machine translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gekko et al. (CN203513469 machine translation provided). Regarding claims 5-6, Jiang doesn’t specify a supporting brick. In a similar field of endeavor, Gekko teaches a fining device comprising a fining pipe 202 which is disposed in a lateral orientation and is configured to allow a molten glass to flow therethrough (fig. 3), and a vent pipe 212 which extends upward from the fining pipe and is configured to discharge gas bubbles from the molten glass to an outside of the fining pipe ([0087]-[0089]). Jiang further teaches a supporting brick 222b that surrounds and supports the fining pipe, the vent pipe penetrates the supporting brick, and a retaining brick 222a which supports a portion of the vent pipe protruding upward from the supporting brick (fig. 4c, [0104]-[0108]). Gekko teaches the supporting brick and the retaining brick are heat-resistant bricks, which is expected to have an erosion resistance to the molten glass. Gekko teaches the heat resistant bricks help prevent heat from radiating from the pipes ([0105]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided for supporting bricks around the fining pipe and retaining bricks around the vent pipe to provide support and heat insulation to the fining pipe and vent pipe, as taught by Gekko.
Regarding claim 7, Gekko further teaches a surrounding member that surrounds an upper end portion of the vent pipe in which an opening is formed, such as heat resistant bricks 222c. Gekko teaches heat resistant bricks help prevent volatile gases from condensing near the vent pipe ([0108]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided the surrounding bricks around the upper end portion of the vent pipe so as to further prevent the condensation of the volatile gases on the vent pipe, as taught by Gekko.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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.
/QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights