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 .
Drawings
According to 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1), photographs, including photocopies or photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. The Office will accept photographs in utility and design patent applications, however, if photographs are the only practicable medium for illustrating the claimed invention.
Figures 1-4 are objected to because they are black and white photographs and/or utilize inappropriate shading. Further, Figure 2 appears to be a cross-sectional view which requires the use of material hatching. The prior art used in the 35 USC 103 rejections below demonstrate that black and white drawings can be used to depict the apparatus.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “curved or angled feature 108” on page 9, paragraph 26 of the written description. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 11, paragraph 29, "creates a linear electrical pathway between across the cross-section" should read "creates a linear electrical pathway across the cross-section".
On page 12, paragraph 33, "at the distal end of said device 114" should read "at the distal end of said device 113", there is no 114 in the drawings and the sentence is referring to the auger which is labeled 113 earlier in the sentence, the drawings, and the rest of the written description.
Appropriate correction is required.
The spacing of the lines of the specification is such as to make reading difficult. New application papers with lines 1 1/2 or double spaced (see 37 CFR 1.52(b)(2)) on good quality paper are required.
The pages of the specification, including claims and abstract, must be numbered consecutively, starting with 1, the numbers being centrally located above or, preferably, below, the text. The lines of the specification, and any amendment to the specification, must be 1.5 spacing or double spaced.
The statements made in the specification regarding each figure in the brief description of drawings fails to constitute what is required as set forth in 608.01(f) of the MPEP. The description fails to describe the figures themselves.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because the lines are crowded too closely together, making reading difficult. Substitute claims with lines one and one-half or double spaced on good quality paper are required. See 37 CFR 1.52(b).
See specification spacing objection above for more details.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“each set of perforations detachably connected” should read “each set of perforations are detachably connected”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“A device according to claim 6” should read “Said device according to claim 6”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 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 1 recites the limitation "said plate is either electro-conductive or non-electro-conductive" in line 11. A minimum of two plates are required in claim 1 because of the requirement of at least one set of perforations. Since there are at least two plates, “said plate” lacks antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For purposes of examination, examiner will read this limitation as “said plates are either electro-conductive or non-electro-conductive”
Claim 3 recites the limitation "said electro-conductive plate is removably attachable to an electrical source to create either a positive or negative charge" in line 18. A minimum of two plates are required because of the requirement of at least one set of perforations as set forth in claim 1. Since there are at least two plates, “said electro-conductive plate” lacks antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, claim 1 never sets forth that the plates are limited to being electro-conductive.
For purposes of examination, the claim will be read as “said plates are removably attachable to an electrical source to create either a positive or negative charge” as the claim never specifies that non-electro-conductive plates are not being used.
Regarding claim 2, it is unclear what is meant by “adjustable” or how this is accomplished or what structure is required to accomplish this. It is additionally unclear how this is accomplished if the plates are non-electro-conductive. Claim 2 never sets forth that the plates are limited to being electro-conductive.
Regarding claim 4, it is unclear whether the “one positively and one negatively charged electro-conductive plate” are new plates or if the applicant is claiming that the plates already found in claim 1 are positively and negatively charged. Additionally, claim 1 never sets forth that the plates are limited to being electro-conductive. Therefore, it is unclear how the plates would be positively or negatively charged if they were non-electro-conductive. For purposes of examination the examiner will read the claim as “the plates are electroconductive and include one positively charged plate and one negatively charged plate”.
Regarding claim 5, it is unclear what structure can adjust the level, rate, and frequency of electricity that passes through each said plate. It is also unclear how the claim limits the required structure beyond what is required in claim 3. Additionally, “said plate” in the claim lacks antecedent basis due to the requirement of at least one set of perforations which requires there to be two plates.
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, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulz et al (US Patent Document No. 20130107659), hereinafter Schulz, Kenneally et al (US Patent Document No. 20110001257), hereinafter Kenneally, Rice (US Patent Document No. 9387640), and Lindgren (US Patent Document No. 20150296824).
Regarding claim 1, Schulz teaches a device comprising a single linear casing (screw casing 1, Fig. 1) having an open proximal end (feed zone E) and an open distal end (discharge zone A), two linear augers (screws 2, 3, Fig. 2) positioned in parallel manner forming a dual auger unit (Fig. 1), said dual auger unit contained within said single linear casing (1).
Schulz teaches the dual auger unit having a gradual increase in diameter pitch along its lengths, however it still fails to teach each said auger of said dual auger unit having a narrower diameter at the proximal end of said single linear casing and a wider diameter at the distal end of said single linear casing, said linear casing having at least one set of perforations therethrough, each set of perforation comprising two perforations, each perforation of each set of perforations is disposed 180 degrees away from the other perforation of said set of perforations around the cross-sectional perimeter of said single linear casing, each perforation of each set of perforations is detachably connectable to a plate, said plate is either electro-conductive or non-electro-conductive.
Kenneally teaches a single screw extruder (Title) having a gradual increase in diameter pitch along its length (Pg. 3, par. 38), with a narrower diameter (Fig. 3) at a proximal end (feeding region 9) of a single linear casing (extruder 1) and a wider diameter (Fig. 3) at a distal end (heating/static mixing region 2) of said single linear casing (1) for the purpose of promoting even flow of the extruded composition exiting from the extruder (Pg. 4, par. 48).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Schulz to incorporate the teachings of Kenneally and have each auger of said dual auger unit gradually increase in diameter pitch along its length, each said auger of said dual auger unit having a narrower diameter at the proximal end of said single linear casing and a wider diameter at the distal end of said single linear casing for the purpose of promoting even flow of the extruded composition exiting from the extruder.
The combination of Schulz and Kenneally still fails to teach the linear casing having at least one set of perforations therethrough, each set of perforation comprising two perforations, each perforation of each set of perforations is disposed 180 degrees away from the other perforation of said set of perforations around the cross-sectional perimeter of said single linear casing, each perforation of each set of perforations is detachably connectable to a plate, said plate is either electro-conductive or non-electro-conductive.
Rice teaches a compounding system with a plurality of arm cavities (186, Fig. 12; considered to be perforations) along the length of a sleeve to fit arms (74; considered to be plates) into for the purpose of heating and/or otherwise processing the feed material to obtain, after a processing period, processed material (Col. 3, line 66-67 – Col. 4, line 1). The arms are positioned offset from one another, however, the positioning of one set overlaps the positioning of another set, therefore, making the cavities and arms less than, greater than, and equal to 180 degrees apart (74, Fig. 8).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the modified device of Schulz to incorporate the teachings of Rice and have at least one set of perforations therethrough, each set of perforation comprising two perforations, each perforation of each set of perforations disposed 180 degrees away from the other perforation of said set of perforations around the cross-sectional perimeter of said single linear casing, with each perforation of each set of perforations being detachably connected to a plate, said plate being either electro or non-electro-conductive for the purpose of heating and/or otherwise processing the feed material to obtain, after a processing period, processed material.
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Schulz teaches a plurality of sets of perforations located across a cross-sectional section of said single linear casing (see obvious statement for claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, the modified device of Schulz as applied to claim 1 teaches each said set of perforation of said plurality of sets of perforations is equal distant from another set of perforations around the cross-sectional perimeter section of said single linear casing (see obvious statement for claim 1 above).
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified device of Schulz as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pilavdzic et al (US Patent Document No. 20030121908), hereinafter Pilavdzic.
Regarding claim 2, the modified device of Schulz teaches a single linear casing having a plurality of sets of perforations located at three cross-sectional locations along its length (186, Fig. 12; Rice), the entire length of the extruder is heated with 3 separate heating zones (Pg. 5, par. 70; Kenneally), and the temperature may be adjusted by level of electric current output or by duration of exposure. It is noted that paragraph 31 of applicant’s specification states that each electro-conductive section is referenced interchangeably as a phase of heating along the length of the device. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the modified device of Schulz to incorporate the single linear casing having a plurality of sets of perforations located at three cross-sectional locations along its length, each cross-sectional location along the length of said single linear path comprising a zone of electro-conduction, said linear casing having a first electro-conductive zone, a second electro-conductive zone, and a third electro-conductive zone located along the length of said single linear casing, and the level and rate of electricity that passes through each said plate is adjustable within each electro-conductive zone and between each electro-conductive zone (see obvious statement for claim 1 above).
The modified device of Schulz still fails to teach the frequency of electricity that passes through each said plate is adjustable within each electro-conductive zone and between each electro-conductive zone.
Pilavdzic teaches an apparatus for inductive and resistive heating of an object (Title) wherein, it is preferable to adjust the frequency to the electric elements for the purpose of achieving desired heating (Pg. 7, par. 105). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the modified device of Schulz to incorporate the teachings of Pilavdzic and have the frequency of electricity that passes through each said plate be adjustable within each electro-conductive zone and between each electro-conductive zone for the purpose of achieving desired heating.
Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Schulz as applied to claim 3 teaches the level and rate of electricity that passes through each said plate is adjustable (see obvious statement for claim 1 above).
The modified device of Schulz still fails to teach the frequency of electricity that passes through each said plate is adjustable.
Pilavdzic teaches an apparatus for inductive and resistive heating of an object (Title) wherein, it is preferable to adjust the frequency to the electric elements for the purpose of achieving desired heating (Pg. 7, par 105). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the modified device of Schulz to incorporate the teachings of Pilavdzic and have the frequency of electricity that passes through each said plate be adjustable for the purpose of achieving desired heating.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified device of Schulz, as applied to claim 1, in view of Lindgren (US Patent Document No. 20150296824).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, the modified device of Schulz as applied to claim 1 teaches attachable heating elements (arms 74 and arm cavities 186, Fig. 8; Rice). However, Rice does not teach how the plates/arms perform the function of heating; specifically, the combination does not teach the plates producing a positive and negative charge of claim 3 and the perforations being connected to one positively and one negatively charged plate of claim 4.
However, Lindgren teaches it is known when heating cheese to make cheese curds via heating plates (104a, 104b, Fig. 1) to make the heating plates electro-conductive (Pg. 3, par. 29). Because the heating plates (104a, 104b) are electro-conductive each heating plate would inherently have positive and negative terminals thereby making each plate both positively and negatively charged.
Based on the teachings of Lindgren, it would have been obvious to try having the heating plates of the modified device of Schulz be electro-conductive via a power source for the purpose of heating, thereby inherently generating both positive and negative charges in each plate, to yield the predictable result of heating the cheese to promote even heating throughout the cheese curd.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANCIE I VELASQUEZ SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9477. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-4:30PM.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571)272-5567. 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.
/C.V.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761