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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 20, 2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because the use of an unacceptable multiple dependent claim wording. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Claim 14 is an independent claim and refers to a preceding claim with the recitation “according to any of the preceding claims” in line 7. For purpose of compact prosecution, the examiner has considered the valves to be solely within the scope of claims 14-20.
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 14-20 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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. Claim 14 recites “a valve according to any of the preceding claims” in line 7. The valve being claimed in independent claim 14 and should be recited within the framework of claims 14-20. Therefore, this claim is considered to be an omnibus type claim since it refers “to any of the preceding claims.”
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the bleed orifices" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 14, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JPH0699386A.
As to claim 14, JPH0699386A discloses a vacuum manifold (40), as illustrated in Figures 1-6, comprising a vacuum chamber (2) configured to have a vacuum drawn therein such that a pressure in the vacuum chamber is less than a pressure in an ambient atmosphere outside of the vacuum manifold, and a plurality of ports (P1-P9) coupled in parallel to the vacuum chamber, wherein the plurality of ports are exposed to the ambient atmosphere; a plurality of valves (25), wherein each of the plurality of valves is located between the vacuum chamber and one of the plurality of ports; wherein the plurality of valves are configured to move between the open and closed positions independently of each other (see Figure 1 and paragraphs [0018] and [0023] of JPH0699386A – Google Patents English Translation).
With claim 16, it is best interpreted that a plurality of suction cups, wherein each is coupled to one of the plurality of ports (see annotated Figure 4 below).
With claim 17, a plurality of suction cups is integrally formed with the plurality of ports (see annotated Figure 4 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
327
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With claim 20, the vacuum manifold is coupled to a vacuum source configured to draw the vacuum in the vacuum chamber (“one suction source is provided with a plurality of suction pads to suck the printed board.” - see paragraph [0002] of JPH0699386A – Google Patents English Translation).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 are allowed. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination. In particular, the prior art of record does not teach the valve further having a bleed orifice extending through a moving component between a channel and a side of the moving component that is exposed to a vacuum chamber when the moving component is in a closed position and a biasing mechanism configured to bias the moving component to the closed position.
Claims 15 and 18-19 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Regan’744, Regan’745, Iwasaki, Schaaf, and Becker are cited as being relevant art, because each prior art discloses a vacuum manifold comprising a vacuum chamber and a plurality of ports.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 am - 3:30 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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
STEPHEN VU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/STEPHEN A VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights