DETAILED ACTION
Representative Figures
PNG
media_image1.png
417
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pending Elected Claims
PNG
media_image2.png
209
381
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 24 August 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
It is unclear how “dependent” claim 7 which recites in total, “A pressure fed filter, comprising the sieve panel of claim 1” further limits the “sieve panel” of claim 1, from which claim 7 depends. Beyond that, it is unclear what minimal, additional structural limitations are intended by the language of “dependent” claim 7, if any.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d), as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
By law, dependent claims must specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed in the claim from which they depend. Claim 7, being drawn to a “pressure fed filter” is not seen to further limit the subject matter of claim 1, which calls out a “sieve panel”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(2)
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1,3,5-7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CONNOLLY (U.S. 6,096,338 – Issued: 2000).
CONNOLY discloses a sieve panel (10) having a plurality of parallel, triangular shaped screen wire elements (26) having tilt angles that vary between adjacent shaped-wire screen elements such that the upper panel portion and lower panel portion are mirror images as clearly depicted in Figures 1 and 8 of CONNOLLY.
PNG
media_image3.png
859
933
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3, see col. 6, lines 25-35.
The concept of a “leading edge” the purpose thereof, is well known in this screening art, and is discussed throughout the disclosure of CONNOLLY, meeting the limitations of claim 5.
With respect to claim 6, triangular, or wedge wire screen elements are clearly depicted in Figures 2,3 and 6 of CONNOLY.
With respect to “dependent” claim 7, what could be construed as a “pressure fed filter” is depicted in Fig. 7.
Response to Arguments of 13 October 2025
Applicant’s arguments have been considered. While the Examiner does not acquiesce to the arguments made by Applicant with respect to the previous art rejections, they have nonetheless, been withdrawn in view of, now applied, CONNOLLY (US 6,095,338) which is seen to be a superior teaching/reference. Axiomatically, the most effective patent examination occurs when, at the time an application is being examined, the Office is aware of and evaluates the teachings of all information material to patentability. It is regrettable that the Examiner found this reference at such an advanced point in the prosecution of this application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT JAMES POPOVICS whose telephone number is (571) 272-1164. The examiner can normally be reached from 10:00 AM - 6:00 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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at (571) 272-1130. 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.
/ROBERT J POPOVICS/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights