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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities.
On page 5 of the specification, the listing of figures (e.g. figure 1, figure 2, etc.) should be capitalized (e.g. Figure 1, Figure 2, etc.)
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 3 are objected to because of the following informalities.
In Claim 1, “(or draft roller)” (lines 7-8) and “(or mould roller)” (line 9) should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
In Claim 1, “means of a bonding with mono- or bi- component glue” (line 3), “means for applying a quantity of glue” (lines 4-5), “means for depositing said glue” (line 8), and “means of a transmission” (line 12).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
For example in Claim 1, “means of a bonding with mono- or bi- component glue” (line 3) further recites the structure of “comprises a device” (line 4) which is sufficient to entirely perform the recited function. The same can be said for the remaining recitations of “means”.
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 1 through 8 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.
In Claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “means of a bonding with mono- or bi- component glue…the advancement of said sheet” (lines 3-6). How many structures or structural elements are recited in this phrase? A great deal of confusion is raised here because it is unclear if the latter means (e.g. “means for applying a quantity of glue”) is attempting to further limit the earlier recited means (e.g. “means of a bonding with mono- or bi- component glue”). Also, “the advancement pitch” (line 6) and “the advancement of the sheet” (lines 11-12) each lack positive antecedent basis. Moreover, each occurrence of “one” (at line 15 and at line 16) is unclear as to what previous structural element is being referred to. Are they each referring to the ”means of a transmission” (line 12) in general, or to some other structural element recited in the claim? Also, it is unclear if the latter phrase of “a drive” (line 17) is referring to earlier phrase of “a drive” (lines 15-16).
Further regarding Claim 1, the phrase "such as" (line 2) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
In Claim 2, “the entire circumferential surface” (line 3) lacks positive antecedent basis.
In Claim 3, “the entire circumferential profile” (lines 2-3) lacks positive antecedent basis.
In Claim 4, “the advancement of the sheet” (line 4) lacks positive antecedent basis.
In Claim 5, “the thickness thereof” (line 3) lacks positive antecedent basis, or is unclear as to what previous element is referring to. Is this phrase referring to the thickness of “glue draft means” (line 1), or “inserts or pockets” (line 2)?
In Claim 6, it is unclear what structure “it” (line 2) is referring to. For examination purposes, “it” will refer to the “apparatus” (line 1 of Claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1 through 3 and 6 through 8, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2019/0315112 to Salje et al (hereinafter “Salje”) in view of the teachings of Chinese Publication CN 110064562 (hereinafter “CN’562”)1 and U.S. Publication 2003/0121392 to Cho (hereinafter “Cho”).
Claim 1: Salje discloses an apparatus (Fig. 1) for assembling lamellar packages (e.g. 17, 17’, Fig. 2) for electrical use in electric machines by means of a bonding with mono- or bi-component glue (adhesive), arranged outside a shearing mould (e.g. 6, Fig. 1) and characterized in that the means of bonding comprises a device (e.g. 3) comprising means for applying a quantity of glue on a lower surface (20) of a sheet (2) according to a pitch corresponding to an advancement pitch of the sheet (by 1), the means for applying the quantity of glue comprising means for withdrawing the glue from a container element (e.g. 5) comprising a first roller (e.g. 4) and means for depositing the glue comprising a second roller (e.g. 4’), the first roller and second roller with rotation axes parallel to each other and with their respective circumferential surfaces in contact and in simultaneous and synchronous movement with an advancement of the sheet (e.g. ¶ [0043]) and shearing the laminations comprising a first wheel (e.g. 7) arranged opposite the first roller and a second wheel (e.g. 7’) arranged opposite the second roller.
Claim 2: Salje discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, characterized in that the first roller is arranged partially immersed in the glue container element defined by a tray (e.g. 5, Fig. 1) arranged below the first roller for depositing a layer of glue along an entire circumferential surface of the first roller (e.g. ¶ [0043]).
Claim 3: Salje discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, characterized in that the second roller comprises glue draft means (e.g. outer surface of 4’) formed and extending along an entire circumferential profile of said second roller (e.g. ¶ [0043]).
Claim 6: Salje discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, characterized in that the apparatus comprises a feeding means (e.g. 1, 10, 10’, Fig. 1) for a second component of a bi-component glue on an upper surface of a sheet (e.g. 2) arranged outside the shearing mould.
Claim 7: Salje discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, characterized in that the means for feeding the second glue component comprise a sprayer adapted to deposit a layer of second glue component on said upper surface of the sheet (e.g. ¶ [0014]).
Claim 8: Salje discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, characterized in that the feeding means of the second glue component comprise a further device with a tray (e.g. 5, not shown) containing a quantity of second glue component (e.g. adhesive, ¶ [0043]).
Salje does not teach that the first roller is rotatably supported by a first body and that the second roller is rotatably supported by a second body. Salje also does not teach a means of a transmission that includes at least one among the first wheel and the second wheel being a drive and one between the first wheel and the second wheel being conducted and driven in rotation by means of the drive comprising a motor [all of which is required in Claim 1].
CN’562 teaches an apparatus (e.g. Fig. 2) for assembling lamellar packages that includes a means for applying a quantity of glue (e.g. 2) comprising means for withdrawing the glue from a container element (e.g. 21) comprising a first roller (e.g. 23) rotatably supported by a first body (e.g. 20, 25) and means for depositing the glue comprising a second roller (e.g. 24) rotatably supported by a second body (e.g. 20, 26) to support and drive the first and second rollers (e.g. ¶ [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Salje by adding a first body for the first roller and a second body for the second roller, as taught by CN’562, to support, rotate and drive the first and second rollers to achieve the same purpose for applying a quantity of glue (adhesive/coating).
Cho teaches an apparatus (e.g. Figs. 1A, 1B) that includes shearing laminations by means of a transmission (e.g. 30) comprising a first wheel (e.g. lower 33, Fig. 1B) coaxial to the means of the transmission (at 32) to share the same rotation axis, a second wheel (e.g. upper 33, Fig. 1B) coaxial to the means of the transmission (also at 32) to share the same rotation axis, and one (e.g. portion of 32 outside of each 33, Fig. 1B) among the first wheel and the second wheel being a drive and one (e.g. portion of 32 in-between each 33, Fig. 1B) between the first wheel and the second wheel being conducted and driven in rotation by means of the drive comprising a motor (e.g. 31, ¶ [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Salje by adding a means of a transmission, in the manner taught by Cho, to support and drive the first and second wheels in performing equivalent shearing (cutting) of laminations.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The prior art references do not disclose the structure of “a plurality of externally protruding reliefs” (in Claim 4) or “a plurality of inserts or pockets” (in Claim 5).
Accordingly, Claims 4 and 5 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.
a) Japanese Patent Publication, JP 2019-150813, discloses an apparatus that includes a means for applying glue (e.g. 3, Fig. 1) with a glue container element (e.g. 7, Fig. 2).
b) Non-Patent Literature IEEE Publication to Kraemer et al, entitled "Influences of separation and joining processes on single tooth laminated stacks", discloses an apparatus for assembling lamellar packages that includes a shearing mould (Laser cutting, Fig. 1, see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 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, JESSICA HAN can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896
1 The interpretation of CN’562 has been taken from a Machine Translation in English, a copy of which is attached herein.
Prosecution Insights