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 Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to the claims filed on 10/24/2025 are acknowledged and entered. According to the Amendments to the claims, claims 1-5, 7-10, 12-14 and 16 has /have been amended. Accordingly, claims 1-16 are pending in the application. An action on the merits for claims 1-16 are as follow.
The previous 112 (b) Claim Rejections and 102 Claim Rejections are withdrawn in accordance with applicant's amendment to the claims with no new matter added.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation “configured to fit one another” in second to the last line. Suggest changing “configured to fit one another” to “configured to fit in one another” to obviate this objection. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-7, 10 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 211985120 U) in view of Berggren (US 6,539,864 B1).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Wang discloses a press device (a constant pressure coffee powder tamper, Title, Figs 1-5), comprising:
an operation element, comprising a first hollow cylinder (grip 9, comprising a first hollow cylinder: including 8, [0021], Fig 1);
a pressing element, detachably connected to a side of the operation element (a pressing element: bearing push rod 4, detachably connected to a side of the operation element, Fig 1), the pressing element comprising a second hollow cylinder (a second hollow cylinder of 4 with top of 5 inside, [0021], Fig 1) and having a pressing plate (powder pressing base 5, [0023], Fig 1) for pressing powders in a container (Note: “powders in a container” is not a part of the press device);
a first spring (constant force spring 21, [0021], Fig 1), and
a body having a first side (a body above seat 6 having a lower side, [0021], Fig 1) configured to abut against an end surface of the container (see Fig 1), the body having an inner flange disposed at a second side opposing to the first side (an inner flange disposed at upper side of 6 opposing to the lower side, Fig 1);
wherein the first hollow cylinder of the operation element, the second hollow cylinder of the pressing element, and the inner flange of the body are configured to fit one another (details see Fig 1).
Wang discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except does not disclose a first spring (Note: “a first spring” taught by Wang already), disposed between the operation element and the pressing element, the opposing ends of the first spring abutting against the operation element and the pressing element respectively;
Berggren further teaches a press device (a hand stamp set, see Title), comprising a first spring (flexible and compressible element 8… is made of a coil spring, Col 2 line 8-9, Fig 1), disposed between the operation element and the pressing element (8 disposed between the handle 5 and the stamp pad holder 3, Col 1 line 56-57, Fig 1. Note: “the operation element and the pressing element” taught by Wang already), the opposing ends of the first spring abutting against the operation element and the pressing element respectively (the holder 3 has a first tapered fixing means 10; a second tapered fixing means 13 extends inside the lower part 6 of the handle; 8 is made of a coil spring pressed on the tapered fixing means 10 and 13, Col 1 line 62- Col 2 line 10, Fig1);
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Wang with Berggren’s further teaching of a first spring, disposed between the operation element and the pressing element, the opposing ends of the first spring abutting against the operation element and the pressing element respectively; because Berggren teaches, in Col 1 line 38-41, of providing an excellent improved hand stamp set that composed of fewer and simpler parts for cost efficiency and easy maintain purpose.
Claim 2, further comprising: a second spring (support spring 20, [0021], Fig 1), disposed between the operation element and the body and opposing ends of the second spring abutting against the operation element and the body, respectively (20 disposed between the operation element and the body and the opposing ends of the second elastic element abutting against the operation element and the body, Fig 1), wherein the second spring surrounds the first spring (20 surrounds 21, Fig 1).
Claim3, wherein when the operation element is pressed, the operation element is moved together with the pressing element in relation to the body toward the container and compresses the second spring (details see Figs 1-2).
Claim 4, wherein when the pressing plate of the pressing element presses against the powders in the container and reaches an intermediate position, the operation element is further pressed and the operation element further compresses the second spring and initially compresses the first spring so that the first spring provides a force to the pressing plate of the pressing element to further compress the powders in the container (When pressing down, the support seat 6 will not move and ensure the verticality during the pressing process, thereby achieving flatness in the powder pressing process, [0024], Figs 1-2).
Claim 5, wherein when the powders in the container are further compressed, the first hollow cylinder of the operation element, the second hollow cylinder of the pressing element, and the inner flange of the body overlap along a radial direction of the press device (details see Fig 2).
Claim 6, wherein the operation element comprises a housing (see Fig 1), comprising an outer flange (handle 9, [0021], Fig 1) and wherein the first hollow cylinder of the operation element comprises a channel therein (a channel accommodated 8, Fig 1).
Claim 7, wherein the operation element comprises an adjuster, configured to be received in the channel for adjusting the initial length of the first spring (constant force mechanism 1 as a whole through threads and can move up and down in the support seat 6, [0024], Fig 1).
Claim 10, wherein the pressing plate of the pressing element has a pressing surface at the outer side of the pressing plate (5 of the pressing element 4 has a pressing surface at the lower side of 5, Fig 1) and wherein the second hollow cylinder is disposed at an inner side of the pressing plate (the second hollow cylinder of 4 is disposed at the inner side of 6, Fig 1) and configured to detachably receive at least a portion of the first hollow cylinder or the first spring (detachably receive at least a portion of the first hollow cylinder, Fig 1).
Claim 14, wherein the body comprises: an outer flange having a diameter greater than a diameter of the pressing element (an outer flange of 6 having a diameter greater than a diameter of the pressing element 4, Fig 1); and
a base having a first side and a second side opposing the first side (6 having a first side and a second side opposing the first side, Fig 1);
wherein the first side faces the operation element (see Fig 1), the outer flange extends from the edge of the first side toward the operation element (outer flange of 6 extends from the edge of the first side toward the operation element, Fig 1), and the second side faces the pressing element (the second side faces 4, Fig 1); and
wherein the outer flange of the operation element movably fits with the outer flange of the body along an axial direction of the press device (9 movably fits with 6 along the axial direction of the press device, Fig 1).
Claim 15, wherein the inner flange of the body extends from the base toward the operation element (the inner flange disposed at upper side of 6 extends from 6 toward the operation element, Fig 1) and is configured to match with at least one of the first hollow cylinder or the second hollow cylinder (see Fig 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record by itself or in combination does not disclose the limitations under Claim 8: a bolt having outer threads on an outer surface of the bolt and a top of the bolt having a slot therein, the slot being configured to be exposed in a through hole of the housing; and a nut having a through hole therein for receiving the bolt, the nut having inner threads in the through hole; and there is no motivation found to modify the prior art to obtain the claimed limitations. With respect to Claims 9 and 16, the dependency on Claim 8 makes them allowable.
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record by itself or in combination does not disclose the limitations under Claim 8: wherein the first hollow cylinder has a guiding hole passing through the first hollow cylinder in a transverse direction and a guiding rod disposed and fixed in the guiding hole; and there is no motivation found to modify the prior art to obtain the claimed limitations. With respect to Claims 12 and 13, the dependency on Claim 11 makes them allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1-16 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office Action as stated above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is advised to refer to the Notice of References Cited for pertinent prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUANGYUE CHEN whose telephone number is 571/272-8224. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, supervisor Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571/270-5569, supervisor Kosanovic Helena can be reached on 571/272-9059, supervisor Steven Crabb can be reached on 571/270-5095, or supervisor Edward Landrum can be reached on 571/272-5567. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571/273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866/217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800/786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571/272-1000.
/KUANGYUE CHEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761