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 Claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 5/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 5/12/2026.
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 1-12 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 1-12 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Claim 1 recites “fixed screens and rotating screens are provided in the cylinder, for each fixed screen”. Applicant should clearly recite each element of the claim before referring to it. For example:
“wherein the cylinder comprises a plurality of fixed screens and a plurality of rotating screens, wherein each fixed screen corresponds to a rotating screen…”
This should be repeated throughout the claims as elements such as “mesh size, material receiving plates, feeding ports, discharge ports.
If there is more than one of an element, applicant should claim “at least one feeding port”, “a plurality of discharge ports.”
Claim 1 recites the limitation "material receiving plates" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While it is acknowledged the claim recites “a respective one of the material receiving plates…”, the manner in which this limitation is written implies it has already been claimed.
Claim 1 recites “one of the feeding ports is provided above the fixed screen.” However, it is not clear which one of the fixed screens is being referred to. The preamble refers to “multilayer modules”. As the modules are claimed, it would seem to be beneficial to claim “a sheller having a plurality of multilayer modules.” Then, state, “wherein each module comprises:” and clearly and distinctly list the parts of each module.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "a first fixed screen" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "a second fixed screen" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The first and second fixed and rotating screens need to be recited as if they were not already claimed. The same applies for first and second feeding port, first and second discharge port.
Regarding claim 3, most elements are being claimed after the function is discussed or after discussing which part its connected to. For example: “a driven part which is matched with an output end of a driver.” In order to clearly establish what is being included in the claim language, “a driver should be claimed before “a driven part which is matched with an output end”. The output end of the driver is being claimed before the driver. It is also not clear which elements are being positively recited.
Any claims not discussed are rejected due to dependency on a rejected claim.
As claims 13-20 are withdrawn, the same consideration should be taken for these claims in the event of rejoinder.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W JENNISON whose telephone number is (571)270-5930. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. 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.
/BRIAN W JENNISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 6/22/2026
Prosecution Insights