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 Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein plurality of openings” in Line 2 shall be “wherein the plurality of openings”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 4, 006,536 to Meiners in view of US Patent Publication 20160047600 to Pacheco.
In Reference to Claim 1
Meiners discloses a geometric multiformat grain dryer comprising: a first grain drying tower (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner), a second grain drying tower (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner), and a third grain drying tower (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner); the first grain drying tower, the second grain drying tower, and the third grain drying tower comprising: a plurality of airducts (Fig. 1, 82, 80); the plurality of airducts arranged in transverse fashion in relation to one another (As showed in Fig. 1)
PNG
media_image1.png
693
798
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Meiners does not teach the detail of the air duct.
Pacheco teaches the plurality of airducts having a plurality of openings , wherein the plurality of openings (Fig. 12, annotated by the examiner) are spaced along each of the plurality of airducts such that superficial segments (Fig. 12, annotated by the examiner) without the plurality of openings are positioned between areas with the plurality of openings.
PNG
media_image2.png
663
721
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teachings from Pacheco into the design of Meiners. Doing so, would result in the air duct with openings of Pacheco being used as air ducts in the design of Meiners. Both inventions of Pacheco and Meiners are in the same field of endeavor. Pacheco teaches an air duct design with opening on the side wall to increase the air flow volume. Therefore, the heat exchanging efficiency would be improved.
Meiners teaches the air duct having five side walls (82) or 4 side walls (80). The combination of Meiners and Pacheco as applied to Claim 1 does not teach the air duct having 6 side walls. The Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
In Reference to Claims 9-11
Meiners discloses a three tower structure.
Meiners does not teach the arrangement of multiple tower arranged in certain formation.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to arrange multiple towers in certain formation in order to improve the efficiency, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
In Reference to Claim 12
Meiners discloses an insulation (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) formed by a first layer of air between a first internal wall (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) and a second internal wall (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner), and a second layer (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) of air between the second internal wall and ends of the plurality of the airducts closest to the second layer of air.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is allowed.
Claims 2-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMING WAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1410. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur: 8 am to 6 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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 57122726460. 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.
DEMING . WAN
Examiner
Art Unit 3762
/DEMING WAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762 2/3/26