DETAILED ACTION
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 11 and 17 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 11 recites, “The apparatus of claim 8, wherein, for each roller mechanism:
a first side of the leaf spring of that roller mechanism is supported by two spaced-apart support features of that roller mechanism, and
the first end of the yoke of that roller mechanism is configured to contact a second side of the leaf spring of that roller mechanism opposite the first side of that leaf spring at a location midway between the spaced-apart support features of that roller mechanism.”
There is no antecedent basis for the terms “the leaf spring” and “the 1st end”, as shown above.
Claim 17 recites, “The apparatus of claim 16, wherein, for each roller mechanism:
the axle for that roller mechanism has a length along the corresponding axis of rotation for the roller of that roller mechanism that is less than a width of the yoke for that roller mechanism along the corresponding axis of rotation for the roller for that roller mechanism,
the roller for that roller mechanism has a width along the corresponding axis of rotation of that roller that is less than the width of the yoke for that roller mechanism along the corresponding axis of rotation of that roller,
the yoke for that roller mechanism has two protruding portions that overlap both the roller and the axle for that roller mechanism when viewed along the corresponding axis of rotation for the roller of that roller mechanism, and
both the roller and the axle for that roller mechanism are interposed between the two protruding portions of the yoke for that roller mechanism.”
There is no antecedent basis for the term “the yoke”, as shown above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10, 12-16, and 18-19 are allowed.
Claims 11 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 closest prior art is Scales et al., US 6,126,382, which shows an apparatus that includes a ring structure having a circular opening defining a ring center access (300 Figs. 10-14), a plurality of roller mechanisms (304A, 304B, 304C, Fig. 12), each roller mechanism having a noncompliant support structure (334), and axle (310), a roller (310), and a cantilever beam structure (303), the roller and axle being located near the end of the beam adjacent the ring opening. However, Scales fails to teach the axle being located in a slot and able to move the roller along the length of the slot, and a spring element that urges the axle of the roller mechanism towards the ring center access. `
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following references teach a spring-biased roller, however the roller is biased to vertically clamp a plate against a substrate: US 6,299,153, and US 2003/0019583.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNN E SCHWENNING whose telephone number is (313)446-4861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5 pm 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, the examiner’s supervisor, Saul Rodrigue can be reached at (571) 272 -7097. 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.
/LYNN E SCHWENNING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652