DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the filing of an amendment to the claims on 11/05/2025. As per the amendment, claims 1, 19, and 21 are amended, claims 2, 12, 14, 17, and 18 are cancelled, and no claims are added. Thus, claims 1, 3-11, 13, 15-16, 19 and 21 are pending in the application.
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 .
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 3-4, 7-11, 13, 15 and 21 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.
Claims 3 and 4 both recite dependency on cancelled claim 2. Hence, it is unclear what the scope of the claims is, and which limitations are and are not included by the dependency of the claims. For the purposes of examination, claims 3 and 4 will be treated as dependent on claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the protrusion structure is fixed relative to the tray.” in line 2. This limitation implies that the protrusion structure is connected to the tray in a manner where it cannot move relative to the tray (emphasis added). However, this is contradictory to the limitations of claim 1. Claim 1 recites that the protrusion structure is in “one-to-one sliding fit with the sliding slots” of the tray in line 27. Hence, the protrusion structure (and the connecting block that the protrusion structure is part of, as seen in lines 39-40). As the sliding slots are provided in the tray, and the protrusion structure is able to have a “sliding fit” with them, it is understood that claim 1 requires that the protrusion structure be capable of sliding relative to the tray, via the sliding slots. This is contradictory to the limitations of claim 7. For the purposes of examination, the protrusion structure being connected to the tray by some means will be understood to be “fixed relative to the tray.”
Claim 21 recites the limitation "a plurality of protrusion structures" in line 11. It is unclear whether or not these are the same or different from the “protrusion structure” recites in line 4. For the purposes of examination, the plurality of protrusions structures will be understood to refer to a plurality of the same protrusion structure as earlier recited.
Any remaining claims are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
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, 3-5, 7-8, 10, 13, and 15-16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heesch (US Pub. 2013/0000637) in view of Chen et al. (US Pub. 2009/0056720) in view of Horton (US Pat. 0,013,787) in view of Ney et al. (US Pat. 5,897,041).
Regarding claim 1, Heesch discloses an anesthesia machine (the system of Fig. 1), comprising a fresh gas circuit (see Fig. 1, the part of the circuit leading to first port 50, including the flow of fresh gas from fresh gas supply unit 51), a driving gas circuit (see Fig. 1, the portion of the circuit from radial compressor 33, to nonreturn valve 9), an anesthetic gas recovery branch (see Fig. 1, the portion of the circuit from nonreturn valve 19 and leading to and including rebreathing line 99), a patient's inspiratory branch (see Fig. 1 inspiratory branch 3/ 5) and a patient's expiratory branch (see Fig. 1 expiratory branch 13/ 15), wherein the driving gas circuit comprises a gas driving device configured to force a driving gas into the patient's inspiratory branch (see Fig. 1 radial compressor 33); the fresh gas circuit comprises an anesthetic evaporation tank (see Fig. 1 anesthetic evaporator 53, having some housing and reservoir within it, and thus being a tank), a fresh gas carries an anesthetic gas in the anesthetic evaporation tank to the patient's inspiratory branch via the fresh gas circuit (see Fig. 1 where the fresh gas from fresh gas supply unit 51 carries the anesthetic gas from the anesthetic evaporate 55 to the first port 50, to then be brought to the patient via inspiratory branch 3/ 5), to be mixed with the driving gas to form a mixed gas which is then delivered to a patient side (see Fig. 1 where the gas from radial compressor 33 mixes with the fresh air/ anesthetic gas at first port 50, to then be carried to the patient); and the anesthetic gas recovery branch is connected to the patient's expiratory branch (see Fig. 1 where the portion of the circuit from nonreturn valve 19 to the rebreathing line 99 is connected to expiratory branch 13/ 15), a waste anesthetic gas exhaled by the patient side enters a waste anesthetic gas recovery branch via the patient's expiratory branch (see Fig. 1 where gas enters the rebreathing line 99 from the expiratory branch 13/ 15), and the waste anesthetic gas recovery branch comprises a waste gas absorption tank (see Fig. 1 CO2 absorber 29, which is understood to have a housing and a reservoir within it, and thus is a tank).
Heesch lacks a detailed description of a waste gas absorption tank supporting device; wherein the waste gas absorption tank supporting device comprises: a tray provided with a tray recess; and a protrusion structure provided on the tray, the protrusion structure being capable of forming a circumferential protective structure located on an outer side of the tray recess and configured to protect the waste gas absorption tank, and an inner side surface and an outer side surface of the protrusion structure being both protective surfaces capable of protecting the waste gas absorption tank.
However, Chen teaches a system for installing a CO2 absorbent canister, having a CO2 absorption tank supporting device (see body 1 in Figs. 2-4); wherein the CO2 absorption tank supporting device comprises: a tray (see Fig. 3 seat 11) provided with a tray recess (see Fig. 3 the recess of seat 11, in which adapter 131 resides); and a protrusion structure provided on the tray (see Fig. 3 positioning portions 23), the protrusion structure being capable of forming a circumferential protective structure located on an outer side of the tray recess and configured to protect the CO2 absorption tank (see Figs. 3-5 where the positioning portions 23 are circumferentially located on seat 11 on the outer parts of the recess of the seat 11, and position themselves over the outside of the CO2 absorbent canister 4 so as to protect it by some amount), and an inner side surface and an outer side surface of the protrusion structure being both protective surfaces capable of protecting the waste gas absorption tank (see Figs. 3-5 where positioning portions 23 have an inner surface touching the canister 4, and an outer surface facing way from the canister 4, the outer surface protecting some amount of canister 4 from outside influence, and the inner surface holding fast to the canister 4 to protect it by keeping it secure and in place).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the CO2 absorber of Heesch to have a supporting device for attaching to it and holding onto it as taught by Chen, as it would a means of quickly connecting and disconnecting a CO2 absorber from an anesthesia circuit, in order to easily replace the canister as needed.
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of wherein: a plurality of sliding slots are provided in the tray, and extension directions of the sliding slots are oriented in a radial direction of the tray; a plurality of protrusion structures are provided and arranged in a circumferential direction and shaped as segments of an annular flange, and the protrusion structures are in one-to-one sliding fit with the sliding slots; a connecting block is provided on the tray; the connecting block comprises a primary face and a secondary face that are arranged in a direction away from the center of the tray, the primary face and the secondary face being located on a side of the connecting block facing away from the tray; the connecting block further comprises a primary facade connected to an end of the primary face away from the secondary face, and a secondary facade connecting the primary face to the secondary face, wherein the primary facade and the secondary facade face the center of the tray and are orthogonal to the primary face and the secondary face; the primary facade is the inner side wall of the tray recess; and the secondary facade, the secondary face and an outer wall of the connecting block form the protrusion structure.
However, Horton teaches a system for selectively holding onto a cylindrical object, where a plurality of sliding slots are provided in the tray (see Fig. 1 where slots E are shown on the tray, the tray being the base of the shown device), and extension directions of the sliding slots are oriented in a radial direction of the tray (see Fig. 1 where the direction of slots E is radial, centered around projecting hub L); a plurality of protrusion structures are provided and arranged in a circumferential direction and shaped as segments of a flange (see Fig. 1 where each jaw D of the sets of jaws has an upper circumferentially arranged protrusion, arranged about the center of projecting hub L, and together the upper protrusion of jaws D form segments of a flange; see also annotated Fig. 5 below), and the protrusion structures are in one-to-one sliding fit with the sliding slots (see Fig. 1 where each jaw D is fit within and has a one-to-one sliding connection with its corresponding slot E, such that the protrusions carried on each jaw D also have a one-to-one sliding connection with slots E); a connecting block is provided on the tray (the body of the jaw D in Fig. 1; see annotated Fig. 5 below); the connecting block comprises a primary face and a secondary face that are arranged in a direction away from the center of the tray (see annotated Fig. 5 below, the primary and secondary face arranged spatially above the center and bottom of the tray body as seen in Fig. 1), the primary face and the secondary face being located on a side of the connecting block facing away from the tray (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the primary and secondary face are facing up and away from the tray body as seen in Fig. 1); the connecting block further comprises a primary facade connected to an end of the primary face away from the secondary face (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the primary façade connects to one end of the primary face, and spatially away from the secondary face), and a secondary facade connecting the primary face to the secondary face (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the secondary façade connects the primary and secondary face to one another), wherein the primary facade and the secondary facade face the center of the tray and are orthogonal to the primary face and the secondary face (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the primary and secondary façade face the center of the tray, and are orthogonal to the primary and secondary faces); the primary facade is the inner side wall of the tray recess (see annotated Fig. 5 below and Fig. 1, where the primary façade forms an inner wall of the device, defining a recess between each jaw D); and the secondary facade, the secondary face and an outer wall of the connecting block form the protrusion structure (see annotated Fig. 5 below, where the secondary façade, secondary face, and an outer wall (back surface of the protrusion structure facing radially away from the center) together form and define the protrusion structure).
PNG
media_image1.png
431
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protrusion structure connection system between the tray and tank of the modified Heesch device to be a set of slidable jaws as taught by Horton, as it would be a simple substitution of one means for firmly and removably holding a cylindrical object for another for another means, to yield the predictable result of allowing for selectively attachment and detachment of a cylindrical object (e.g. tank) from the tray. It is further noted that the structure described in Horton is over 150 years old, to the point where it is a well-established and known system for removably clamping down on a cylindrical body to hold it firmly in place.
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of wherein the protrusion structure is shaped as segments of an annular flange.
However, Ney teaches a system for holding a container, where the supporting device has a protrusion structure that is an annular flange (see Fig. 2 where upper edge 34 is a protrusion structure extending out of apparatus 10, to be secured against a container).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the protrusion structures of the modified Heesch device to be an annular flange as taught by Ney, as it would be a simple substitution of one shape of circumferentially located protrusion structure for another shape of circumferentially located protrusion structure, with the benefit of conforming to the shape of both the held cylindrical object and the cylindrical tray.
Regarding claim 3, the modified Heesch device has wherein an outer side surface of the annular flange is aligned with an outer circumferential surface of the tray (Ney; see Fig. 2 where the outer surface of upper edge 34 is aligned with upper portion 20, which is analogous to the tray of Chen, such that the protrusions of Horton have the annular shape as modified).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Heesch device has wherein there is a predetermined dimension between an outer side surface of the annular flange and an outer circumferential surface of the tray (Ney; see Fig. 2 where there is some dimension between the outer side surface of the upper edge 34 and the surface of upper portion 20).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Heesch device has wherein a plurality of protrusion structures are provided and arranged in a circumferential direction of the tray (Horton; see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 above, where each jaw D has a protrusion structure, such that they are circumferentially located on the modified Chen tray)
Regarding claim 7, the modified Heesch device has wherein the protrusion structure is fixed relative to the tray (Horton; see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 above, where each jaw D has a protrusion structure, and the jaws are connected to the tray by nut parts B so as to be fixed thereon. See above 112(b) rejection for interpretation of the claim).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Heesh device has wherein the protrusion structure is fixedly connected to the tray by assembly (Horton; see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 above, where each jaw D has a protrusion structure, and the jaws are connected to the tray by nut parts B so as to be fixed thereon when assembled).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Heesch device has wherein a connecting block is provided on the tray (Horton; see Fig. 1 where each jaw D is on the body of the tray, the tray being the modified tray of Chen); and an inner wall of the connecting block close to the center of the tray is an inner side wall of the tray recess (Horton; see annotated Fig. 5 above, where each primary façade is an inner wall of the jaw D, which forms an inner side wall of the recess formed between each jaw D), and the protrusion structure is a part of the connecting block away from the center of the tray (Horton; see annotated Fig. 5 above, where each protrusion structure extends from the connecting block of jaw D, away from the center).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Heesch device has all of the structural elements of the connecting block as recited in claim 1, and further includes a plurality of connecting blocks that each have the elements recited in claim 1 (Horton; see annotated Fig. 5 above and Fig. 1, where there are a plurality of jaws D forming a plurality of connecting blocks).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Heesch device has wherein the protrusion structure and the tray are integrated with each other (Horton; see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 above, where each jaw D has a protrusion structure, and the jaws are connected to the tray by nut parts B so as to be part of the same system as the seat tray of Chen, and thus is integrated with it).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Heesch device has wherein the protrusion structure is movably arranged on the tray (Horton; see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 above, where each jaw D has a protrusion structure, and the jaws are connected to the tray by nut parts B so as to be movable within slots E on the modified Chen tray).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heesch in view of Chen in view of Horton in view of Ney as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Porter (US Pat. 5,533,700).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Heesch device has the protrusion structure.
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of wherein the protrusion structure is made of a flexible material.
However, Porter has a container holder device, where the protrusion structures are made of a flexible material (see Col. 2 lines 4-9; see also fingers 3, 4, 5 in Fig. 1).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protrusion structure of the modified Heesch device to be flexible as taught by Porter, as it would allow the protrusion structure to adjust to different sized containers more easily (Porter; see Col. 2 lines 4-9).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heesch in view of Chen in view of Horton in view of Ney as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Camarota et al. (US Pat. 7,748,678).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Heesch device has the protrusion structure and the tray.
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of wherein the protrusion structure is provided with a mounting hole, and the tray is provided with a threaded hole; and a fixing screw is further comprised, the fixing screw passing through the mounting hole to be in thread engagement with the threaded hole.
However, Camarota teaches a device for affixing a container to a support structure, where a protrusion structure (see Fig. 4 mounting ring 12) is provided with a mounting hole (see Figs. 4-5 where the mounting ring 12 has mounting holes where screws 14 fit in), and the tray is provided with a threaded hole (see support platform 32 in Fig. 4, which receives screw 14 and thus is threaded as seen in Col. 3 lines 55-63); and a fixing screw is further comprised (see Fig. 4 screw 14), the fixing screw passing through the mounting hole to be in thread engagement with the threaded hole (see Fig. 4 and Col. 3 lines 55-63 where the screw 14 passes through the holes of mounting ring 12 and into the threaded hole of support platform 32).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection between the protrusion structure and tray of the modified Heesch device to be aligned threaded screw holes as taught by Camarota, as it would be a simple substitution of one means of attaching the protrusion structure to the tray for another means, to yield the predictable result of affixing the protrusion structure to the tray.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heesch in view of Chen in view of Horton in view of Ney as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Porter (US Pat. 5,533,700) in view of Shiono (US Pat. 3,911,784).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Heesch device has the connecting block is provided with a hole (Horton; see Fig. 1 where each nut part B of the jaws D has a hole).
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of wherein the connecting block is provided with a stepped hole; the stepped hole comprises a primary inner hole and a secondary inner hole, and the primary inner hole has a smaller dimension than the secondary inner hole; a hole wall of the primary inner hole is the inner side wall of the tray recess; and a hole wall of the secondary inner hole, a top wall of the connecting block and an outer wall of the connecting block form the protrusion structure.
However, Porter teaches a support structure for holding a container, that has wherein the connecting block is provided with a hole (see Figs. 1-3 and Col. 3 lines 63 to Col. 4 lines 2 where the feet 6/7/8 can be connected to the base 2 by means of a screw, such that there is a screw holes through both feet 6/7/8 and base 2); the hole comprises a primary inner hole (see Figs. 1-3 the screw hole through base 2) and a secondary inner hole (see Figs. 1-3 the screw hole through feet 6/7/8); a hole wall of the primary inner hole is the inner side wall of the tray recess (see Figs. 1-3 where the screw hole of base 2 has a wall that forms against feet 6/7/8, such that it is an inner side wall of the recess of base 2); and a hole wall of the secondary inner hole (see Figs. 1-3 where the screw holes of feet 6/7/8 have a hole wall), a top wall of the connecting block and an outer wall of the connecting block form the protrusion structure (see Figs. 1-3 where the fingers 3/4/5 are connected to and formed from the top surface of feet 6/7/8, being on their outer wall to form the protrusion structure, where the fingers 3/4/5 are formed by the feet 6/7/8 that contain a hole wall, top wall, and outer wall).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connecting blocks of the modified Heesch device to have a hole with a primary and secondary inner hole as taught by Porter, as it would be a simple substitution of one hole connection structure for screwing two components together for another connection structure, to yield the predictable result of allowing the connecting block to connect via a hole to the tray through use of a screw.
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of a steeped hole, the stepped hole comprises a primary inner hole and a secondary inner hole, and the primary inner hole has a smaller dimension than the secondary inner hole.
However, Shiono teaches a connection between a block and a recess that the block fits into, having a stepped hole (see Figs. 4-5 where the hole is formed by bore 8a with its flared opening 8b, and the threaded hole 7a, which are stepped), the stepped hole comprises a primary inner hole (see Figs. 4-5 threaded hole 7a) and a secondary inner hole (see Figs. 4-5 bore 8a and flared opening 8b), and the primary inner hole has a smaller dimension than the secondary inner hole (see Figs. 4-5 where threaded hole 7a is smaller in diameter than flared opening 8b).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the screw connection between the block and the tray of the modified Heesch device to include a stepped screw connection as taught by Shiono, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of screw connection between two components for another, to yield the predictable result of screwing two components together.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heesch in view of Chen in view of Horton in view of Ney as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shiono.
Regarding claim 19, the modified Heesch device has wherein a sliding bolt mounted in a bore (Chen; see Figs. 7-8 where connecting portion 22 is a bolt that slides back and forth through a bore), and a stud of the sliding bolt is slidably disposed in the corresponding sliding slot (Chen; see Figs. 7-8 has the top of connecting portion 22 is a stud of a bolt that acts as a stop to its travel; such that the modified device has the bolt of Chen moving back and forth to adjust the up/down position of the protrusion structure taught by Horton, such that the bolt of Chen acts through the slot E in Fig. 1 of Horton in order to move the protrusion structure).
The modified Heesch device lacks a detailed description of wherein a counter bore is formed in the primary face; and a sliding bolt mounted in the counter bore is further comprised.
However, Shiono teaches a connection between a block and a recess that the block fits into, having a counter bore in a primary face (see Figs. 4-5 where the hole is formed by bore 8a with its flared opening 8b, forming a counter bore for screw 9).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection of the protrusion structure to the tray of the modified Heesch device to include a counter bore connection as taught by Shiono, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of screw connection between two components for another, to yield the predictable result of screwing two components together.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Horton in view of Ney.
Regarding claim 21, Chen discloses a waste gas absorption tank supporting device (see body 1 in Figs. 2-4), comprising: a tray (see Fig. 3 seat 11) provided with a tray recess (see Fig. 3 the recess of seat 11, in which adapter 131 resides); and a protrusion structure provided on the tray (see Fig. 3 positioning portions 23), the protrusion structure being capable of forming a circumferential protective structure located on an outer side of the tray recess and configured to protect a waste gas absorption tank (see Figs. 3-5 where the positioning portions 23 are circumferentially located on seat 11 on the outer parts of the recess of the seat 11, and position themselves over the outside of the CO2 absorbent canister 4 so as to protect it by some amount), and an inner side surface and an outer side surface of the protrusion structure being both protective surfaces capable of protecting the waste gas absorption tank (see Figs. 3-5 where positioning portions 23 have an inner surface touching the canister 4, and an outer surface facing way from the canister 4, the outer surface protecting some amount of canister 4 from outside influence, and the inner surface holding fast to the canister 4 to protect it by keeping it secure and in place).
Chen lacks a detailed description of wherein: the protrusion structure is movably arranged on the tray; and wherein: a plurality of sliding slots are provided in the tray, and extension directions of the sliding slots are oriented in a radial direction of the tray; a plurality of protrusion structures are provided and arranged in a circumferential direction and shaped as segments of an annular flange, and the protrusion structures are in one-to-one sliding fit with the sliding slots; a connecting block is provided on the tray; the connecting block comprises a primary face and a secondary face that are arranged in a direction away from the center of the tray, the primary face and the secondary face being located on a side of the connecting block facing away from the tray; the connecting block further comprises a primary facade connected to an end of the primary face away from the secondary face, and a secondary facade connecting the primary face to the secondary face, wherein the primary facade and the secondary facade face the center of the tray and are orthogonal to the primary face and the secondary face; the primary facade is the inner side wall of the tray recess; and the secondary facade, the secondary face and an outer wall of the connecting block form the protrusion structure.
However, Horton teaches a system for selectively holding onto a cylindrical object, having a protrusion structure that is movably arranged on the tray (see Fig. 1 where jaws D contain a protrusion structure jutting out the top, such that it moves within slot E), where a plurality of sliding slots are provided in the tray (see Fig. 1 where slots E are shown on the tray, the tray being the base of the shown device), and extension directions of the sliding slots are oriented in a radial direction of the tray (see Fig. 1 where the direction of slots E is radial, centered around projecting hub L); a plurality of protrusion structures are provided and arranged in a circumferential direction and shaped as segments of a flange (see Fig. 1 where each jaw D of the sets of jaws has an upper circumferentially arranged protrusion, arranged about the center of projecting hub L, and together the upper protrusion of jaws D form segments of a flange; see also annotated Fig. 5 below), and the protrusion structures are in one-to-one sliding fit with the sliding slots (see Fig. 1 where each jaw D is fit within and has a one-to-one sliding connection with its corresponding slot E, such that the protrusions carried on each jaw D also have a one-to-one sliding connection with slots E); a connecting block is provided on the tray (the body of the jaw D in Fig. 1; see annotated Fig. 5 below); the connecting block comprises a primary face and a secondary face that are arranged in a direction away from the center of the tray (see annotated Fig. 5 below, the primary and secondary face arranged spatially above the center and bottom of the tray body as seen in Fig. 1), the primary face and the secondary face being located on a side of the connecting block facing away from the tray (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the primary and secondary face are facing up and away from the tray body as seen in Fig. 1); the connecting block further comprises a primary facade connected to an end of the primary face away from the secondary face (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the primary façade connects to one end of the primary face, and spatially away from the secondary face), and a secondary facade connecting the primary face to the secondary face (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the secondary façade connects the primary and secondary face to one another), wherein the primary facade and the secondary facade face the center of the tray and are orthogonal to the primary face and the secondary face (see annotated Fig. 5 below where the primary and secondary façade face the center of the tray, and are orthogonal to the primary and secondary faces); the primary facade is the inner side wall of the tray recess (see annotated Fig. 5 below and Fig. 1, where the primary façade forms an inner wall of the device, defining a recess between each jaw D); and the secondary facade, the secondary face and an outer wall of the connecting block form the protrusion structure (see annotated Fig. 5 below, where the secondary façade, secondary face, and an outer wall (back surface of the protrusion structure facing radially away from the center) together form and define the protrusion structure).
PNG
media_image1.png
431
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protrusion structure connection system between the tray and tank of Chen to be a set of slidable jaws as taught by Horton, as it would be a simple substitution of one means for firmly and removably holding a cylindrical object for another for another means, to yield the predictable result of allowing for selectively attachment and detachment of a cylindrical object (e.g. tank) from the tray. It is further noted that the structure described in Horton is over 150 years old, to the point where it is a well-established and known system for removably clamping down on a cylindrical body to hold it firmly in place.
The modified Chen device lacks a detailed description of wherein the protrusion structure is shaped as segments of an annular flange.
However, Ney teaches a system for holding a container, where the supporting device has a protrusion structure that is an annular flange (see Fig. 2 where upper edge 34 is a protrusion structure extending out of apparatus 10, to be secured against a container).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the protrusion structures of the modified Chen device to be an annular flange as taught by Ney, as it would be a simple substitution of one shape of circumferentially located protrusion structure for another shape of circumferentially located protrusion structure, with the benefit of conforming to the shape of both the held cylindrical object and the cylindrical tray.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1, 3-11, 13, 15-16, 19 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record. Specifically, the newly applied Horton reference is used in lieu of the previously applied Bever reference.
Thus, the rejections hold.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D ZIEGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-3349. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. 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.
/MATTHEW D ZIEGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785