DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/28/2026 has been entered.
Claim 12 has been amended and claim 18 has been cancelled
Claims 12-17 and 19-20 are presented for examination
This action is Non-Final
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 12 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. Applicant’s added limitation includes the powder inside the tank. The powder was not previously positively claimed but is relied upon to perform the action of discharging from the tank, therefore the claim is indefinite. Because the tank is configured to move granular products into and out of the container with the aid of gravitational force, it is the Examiner’s position the tank needs on the ability to perform the operation, therefore meeting the claim limitation.
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.
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) 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holden et al. (US 2019/0106162) in view of Takayuki (JP 2004263803).
Claim 12. Holden discloses a tank container 2, comprising:
a tank main body portion 12 formed into a cylindrical shape [0044], which is configured to accommodate powder therein (granular material), and which is closed at both ends along a longitudinal direction (fig. 2);
a container frame portion 14 having the tank main body portion fixed thereto [0043];
a plurality of accommodation and discharge portions 34, which are arranged so as to be adjacent to each other along the longitudinal direction in a lower portion of the tank main body portion (fig. 1), which have upper end portions each airtightly joined to an inner wall 2 of the tank main body portion and to an adjacent portion, and which have lower end portions @78 each formed into a downward tapered shape so as to protrude outward respectively from a plurality of openings 78 formed on an outer peripheral surface of the tank main body portion ([0048]; fig. 2);
wherein an inner peripheral surface of the tank main body portion is reinforced with a reinforcing member 30 having an annular shape [0046];
wherein a width of each of the accommodation and discharge portions along a direction intersecting the longitudinal direction of the tank main body portion is set to a value equal to an inner diameter of a cylindrical portion of the tank main body portion (fig. 2, 4, 13);
wherein the powder accommodated inside the tank main body portion is discharged by falling downward with gravity from the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions ([0044]; fig. 2).
Holden fails to disclose heat insulating portions formed on the outer surface. Takayuki teaches a plurality of accommodation and discharge portions 6a-d, which are arranged so as to be adjacent to each other along the longitudinal direction in a lower portion of the tank main body portion, which have upper end portions each airtightly joined to an inner wall 2 of the tank main body portion and to an adjacent portion ([0019-0020]; fig. 3);
a heat insulating portion 3 formed on the outer peripheral surface of the tank main body portion (fig. 4-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the storage vessel of Takashi to include the accommodation and discharge portions of Takayuki to assist in a controlled release and storage of the stored products.
Claim 13. Holden -Takayuki discloses the tank container according to claim 12, wherein the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions each have an inclination angle set to be equal to or larger than an angle of repose of the powder (Takayuki; [0020-0021]).
Claim 14. Holden-Takayuki discloses the tank container according to claim 12, wherein one or more introduction ports each configured to introduce pressurized gas into the tank main body portion are formed along the longitudinal direction in an upper end portion of the tank main body portion (Takayuki; [0008-0009]).
Claim 15. Holden-Takayuki discloses the tank container according to claim 12, wherein supply ports each configured to supply the powder into the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions are formed so as to correspond respectively to the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions in an upper end portion of the tank main body portion (Takayuki; [0020-0021], fig. 1).
Claim 16. Holden-Takayuki discloses the tank container according to claim 12, wherein injection ports each configured to inject pressurized gas onto the powder accommodated in the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions are formed respectively in the lower end portions of the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions (Takayuki; [0007-0009]).
Claim 17. Holden-Takayuki discloses the tank container according to claim 12, wherein the plurality of accommodation and discharge portions are each formed into a downward conical shape, and a discharge port configured to discharge the powder is opened in each of the lower end portions and is opened and closed by a discharge valve formed of a ball valve (Takayuki; fig. 3).
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holden et al. (US 2019/0106162) in view of Takayuki (JP 2004263803) in view of Meints et al. (US 2017/0350532).
Claim 19. Holden-Takayuki disclose the tank container according to claim 12, but fails to disclose mounting members. Meints teaches wherein the tank main body portion has mounting members each formed into an annular shape fixed respectively to both end portions along the longitudinal direction, and
wherein the tank main body portion is fixed to the container frame portion through intermediation of the mounting members (Meints; fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the frame members of Holden-Takayuki to protect the container during transport and storage.
Claim 20. Holden-Takayuki the tank container according to claim 12, where Takashi teaches an opening in the upper end portion of the main body but fails to disclose a spill box. Meints teaches wherein, in an upper end portion of the tank main body portion, a spill box portion 22 formed into a rectangular frame shape in plan view is formed so as to surround an outer periphery of an opening formed in the upper end portion of the tank main body portion, and
wherein an outer surface of the spill box portion is covered with a heat insulating material (Meints; [0026]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the upper opening of Holden-Takayuki to protect the opening for dispensing or removing products.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but in view of the amendment the search has been updated, new prior art has been identified and applied, and a new rejection has been made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEN COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-1672. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm 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, ANTHONY STASHICK can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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.
/RAVEN COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735