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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-10) in the reply filed on January 14, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 14, 2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the drawing of “the side walls have a surface with openings and/or grooves in the direction of the press space (claim 4)”, and “the press plunger has a surface with openings and/or grooves in the direction of the press space claim 5)” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 abstract should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
See “The invention relates to (line 1)”, “conveying means (line 4)”, and “means of a vertical press 12 (line 10)”. These phrases should be avoided and the reference numbers should be deleted.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 1, “Device” should be changed to – A device --.
In claims 2-9, line 1, “Device” should be changed to – The device --.
In claim 10, line 1, “Method” should be changed to – A method --.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term "means" or "step" or a term used as a substitute for "means" that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word "for" (e.g., "means for") or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
If claim limitations in this application that use the word "means" (or "step"), they are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, if claim limitations in this application that do not use the word "means" (or "step"), they are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 1-10 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.
Regarding claim 1, there is no antecedent basis for the following limitations: “the direction (lines 5 and 9)”.
Regarding claim 4, there is no antecedent basis for the following limitation: “the direction (line 2).
Regarding claim 5, there is no antecedent basis for the following limitation: “the direction (line 2).
Regarding claim 10, there is no antecedent basis for the following limitation: “the press space (line 2)” and “the direction (last line)”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 6-7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN-113182321 A) in view of Goetz (US 5,386,768).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a device for dewatering a mass of material (fig. 2), comprising:
a vertical press (6) (figs. 1-2) with a press space (see a space formed between elements 61 and 65 in fig. 2) formed between a conveying means (5) and a press plunger (67),
conveying means (5) for conveying the mass of material from a feed side (see the left side of the conveying belt (5) in figs 1-2) into the press space and for conveying the pressed mass of material in the direction of a discharge side (see the right side of the conveying belt (5) in figs 1-2) out of the press space opposite the feed side (figs. 1-2),
wherein the press space is laterally confined by opposite side walls (see front and rear sidewalls of the frame (61) in figs. 1-2) extending between the feed side and the discharge side (fig. 1), and wherein the press space is not laterally confined in the direction of the feed side and the discharge side (fig. 1-2).
Wang does not disclose a tool provided with openings positioned withing the conveying means so that the press plunger movable relative to the tool.
Goetz discloses an apparatus for dewatering sludge comprising a vertical press (14) with a press space (see fig. 2) formed between a tool (30) provided with openings (32) and a press plunger (28) movable relative to the tool (fig. 2), conveying means (26) for conveying the mass of material from a feed side (i.e. left side of fig. 2) into the press space and for conveying the pressed mass of material in the direction of a discharge side (i.e. right side of fig. 2) out of the press space opposite the feed side (see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Wang with a tool having opening position within the conveying means, as taught by Goetz, in order to enhance liquid removal efficiency in processing of the mass of material.
Regarding claim 2, the device of claim 1, modified Wang discloses wherein the conveying means comprise a liquid-permeable (see page 5, paragraph 4 of the English translation) conveyor belt (5) which extends from the feed side to the discharge side (figs. 1-2) and rests on the tool in the press space (see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 3, the device of claim 2, wherein the conveyor belt (5) is closed by a return outside the press space (see figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 6, the device according to claim 1, modified Wang discloses wherein the tool (see element 30 of Goetz in figure 2) comprises a perforated plate (i.e. a top portion of element 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz) with the openings (element 32 of Goetz), a base plate (i.e. a bottom portion of element 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz) and a support frame (i.e. a vertical portion of element 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz) arranged therebetween, so that a flow space for discharging liquid through the openings and the interior of the support frame is formed (see 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz).
Regarding claim 7, the device according to claim 1, Wang discloses wherein collection means (11 in fig. 3 of Wang) and at least one conduit (12 in fig. 3 of Wang) are provided for collecting and directing liquid forced through the openings.
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses a method of dewatering a mass of material, in which the mass of material is conveyed from a feed side into a press space of a vertical press (see claim 1 above), and the mass of material in the press space is pressed by movement of a press plunger (see claim 1 above), the pressed mass of material is conveyed to a discharge side opposite the feed side out of the press space (see claim 1 above), wherein the press space is laterally confined by opposite side walls extending between the feed side and the discharge side (see claim 1 above), and wherein the press space is not laterally confined in the direction of the feed side and the discharge side (see claim 1 above).
Wang does not disclose a tool provided with openings.
Goetz discloses an apparatus for dewatering sludge comprising a vertical press (14) with a press space (see fig. 2) formed between a tool (30) provided with openings (32) and a press plunger (28) movable relative to the tool (fig. 2), conveying means (26) for conveying the mass of material from a feed side (i.e. left side of fig. 2) into the press space and for conveying the pressed mass of material in the direction of a discharge side (i.e. right side of fig. 2) out of the press space opposite the feed side (see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Wang with a tool having opening position within the conveying means, as taught by Goetz, in order to enhance liquid removal efficiency in processing of the mass of material.
Claims 1-7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stollenwerk et al. (hereinafter “Stollenwerk”) (US 4,033,253) in view of Goetz (US 5,386,768).
Regarding claim 1, Stollenwerk discloses a device for dewatering a mass of material, comprising:
a vertical press (the left press 56, 58 in fig. 2) with a press space formed between a tool (72) (fig. 3) and a press plunger (56) movable relative to the tool (figs. 2-3),
conveying means (36, 38) for conveying the mass of material from a feed side (i.e. the right side of fig. 2) into the press space and for conveying the pressed mass of material in the direction of a discharge side (the left side of fig. 2) out of the press space opposite the feed side,
wherein the press space is laterally confined by opposite side walls (110) extending between the feed side and the discharge side (figs. 1-3), and wherein the press space is not laterally confined in the direction of the feed side and the discharge side (it is noted that when the movable gates 120a-c are opened, the press space is not laterally confined in the direction of the feed side and the discharge side).
Stollenwerk does not disclose the tool is provided with openings.
Goetz can be applied to teach an apparatus for dewatering sludge comprising a vertical press (14) with a press space (see fig. 2) formed between a tool (30) provided with openings (32) and a press plunger (28) movable relative to the tool (fig. 2), conveying means (26) for conveying the mass of material from a feed side (i.e. left side of fig. 2) into the press space and for conveying the pressed mass of material in the direction of a discharge side (i.e. right side of fig. 2) out of the press space opposite the feed side (see fig. 2). The tool further includes a drain (34) disposed below the tool for collecting liquid from the openings.
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 tool of Stollenwerk to include openings, and including a drain disposed below the tool for collecting liquid from the openings, as taught by Goetz, in order to enhance liquid removal efficiency in processing of the mass of material.
Regarding claim 2, the device of claim 1, Stollenwerk discloses wherein the conveying means comprise a liquid-permeable (see col. 5, lines 14-22) conveyor belt (36, 38) which extends from the feed side to the discharge side (fig. 2) and rests on the tool (72, 74) in the press space (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, the device of claim 2, Stollenwerk discloses wherein the conveyor belt (36, 38) is closed by a return outside the press space (see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, the device according to claim 1, Stollenwerk discloses wherein the side walls (110) have a surface with openings and/or grooves (see fig. 7) in the direction of the press space.
Regarding claim 5, the device according to claim 1, Stollenwerk discloses wherein the press plunger (56) has a surface with openings and/or grooves (see fig. 10) in the direction of the press space.
Regarding claim 6, the device according to claim 1, modified Stollenwerk discloses wherein the tool (see element 30 of Goetz in figure 2) comprises a perforated plate (i.e. a top portion of element 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz) with the openings (element 32 of Goetz), a base plate (i.e. a bottom portion of element 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz) and a support frame (i.e. a vertical portion of element 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz) arranged therebetween, so that a flow space for discharging liquid through the openings and the interior of the support frame is formed (see 30 in fig. 2 of Goetz).
Regarding claim 7, the device according to claim 1, Stollenwerk discloses wherein collection means and at least one conduit (see “suitable storage receptacle” and “piped” in col. 10, lines 33-34) are provided for collecting and directing liquid forced through the openings.
Regarding claim 9, the device according to claim 1, wherein Stollenwerk discloses an arrangement (52, 100 in fig. 2) for pre-compacting the mass of material is arranged on the feed side (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Stollenwerk discloses a method of dewatering a mass of material, in which the mass of material is conveyed from a feed side into a press space of a vertical press (see claim 1 above), and the mass of material in the press space is pressed by movement of a press plunger relative to a tool (see claim 1 above), the pressed mass of material is conveyed to a discharge side opposite the feed side out of the press space (see claim 1 above), wherein the press space is laterally confined by opposite side walls extending between the feed side and the discharge side (see claim 1 above), and wherein the press space is not laterally confined in the direction of the feed side and the discharge side (see claim 1 above).
Stollenwerk does not disclose the tool is provided with openings.
Goetz can be applied to teach an apparatus for dewatering sludge comprising a vertical press (14) with a press space (see fig. 2) formed between a tool (30) provided with openings (32) and a press plunger (28) movable relative to the tool (fig. 2), conveying means (26) for conveying the mass of material from a feed side (i.e. left side of fig. 2) into the press space and for conveying the pressed mass of material in the direction of a discharge side (i.e. right side of fig. 2) out of the press space opposite the feed side (see fig. 2). The tool further includes a drain (34) disposed below the tool for collecting liquid from the openings.
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 tool of Stollenwerk to include openings, and including a drain disposed below the tool for collecting liquid from the openings, as taught by Goetz, in order to enhance liquid removal efficiency in processing of the mass of material.
Claim 8, as applied to claim 1 above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stollenwerk and Goetz, in further view of Lautrette (US 4,153,550).
Modified Stollenwerk discloses the invention substantially as claimed as set forth above. Stollenwerk does not disclose a scraper is arranged on the feed side to limit a filling level in the press space.
Lautrette discloses a dewatering device having an equalizing device (15) to level/scrape off a level of sludge (2) before it enters a feed side of a press space (see fig. 1).
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 device of Stollenwerk to include an equalizing device, as taught by Lautrette, to level/scrape off a level of material before it enters a feed side of a press space, to ensure that the material is flat and even, which is more efficient for pressing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art listed on the attached PTO 892 are cited to show:
US 4,950,752 and JP 59163099 A disclose a dewatering device.
CN 111331903 A discloses a press space is laterally confined by opposite side walls extending between the feed side and the discharge side (fig. 1), and wherein the press space is not laterally confined in the direction of the feed side and the discharge side (fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4520. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-5pm.
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, CHRISTOPHER L TEMPLETON can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
JIMMY T. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3725
/JIMMY T NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725