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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/28/2026 have been entered. Claims 1-8 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/28/2028 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims - have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In response to applicant’s argument that Schaller’s flange 32 is a pivot mechanism, not an angled resting section, flange 32 appears to provide an integrated molded angled resting section is fabricated directly as part of said openable cover panel, (Fig. 12, C7/L50-51), and figure 12 appears to illustrate each of flange 32 and flange 34 with flat surfaces. Examiner notes the language of said integrated molded angled resting section is fabricated directly as part of said openable cover panel such that said mounting section retains the flat shape, is unclear, this language appears to require that the mounting section be part the cover, it is unclear how the fabrication of the angled resting section is related to the mounting section retaining the flat shape.
With respect to applicant’s argument that the rejections including reference to MPEP 2144.04 and reversal of parts are misplaced the rejections not that Schaller teaches the recited integral construction of an angled resting section with a cover (flange 32 has flat sections and angles) and mounting section with a flat shape and (flange 34), regarding the assertion of easy of cleaning and easier construction, Knowles teaches access for cleaning (0007); Schaller teaches the use of integrally molded covers enables reductions in manufacturing time and installation (C4/L59-67), and the cover and pivot means allows for cleaning (C9/L3-5).
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 1-8 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 said integrated molded angled resting section is fabricated directly as part of said openable cover panel such that said mounting section retains the flat shape, this language appears to require that the mounting section be part of the mounting section is part of the cover, it is unclear how the fabrication of the angled resting section is related to the mounting section retaining the flat shape.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knowles (US PG Pub 2021/0245076), in view of Schaller (US 5,670,045).
With respect to claim 1, Knowles teaches a system for covering a launder channel of a clarifier tank, the launder channel having a tank wall and a launder channel wall (system for covering a launder channel of a clarifier tank, the launder channel having a tank wall and launder channel wall) comprising a mounting section connected to the launder channel wall, a hinge, and an openable cover panel a mounting section, the mounting section includes an angled resting structure for supporting the cover panel in an open position (abstract, a mounting section connected to either one of said tank wall or said launder channel wall, a hinge; and an openable cover panel such that when said openable cover panel is in the open position, said angled resting section rests against said mounting section), in one embodiment, the integrated latch system/hold open arrangement is located on an angled resting structure, on the mounting section of the cover panel coupled to said mounting section by said hinge (0007-0008, 0021-0026, Fig. 3-5, 9).
While Knowles teaches a molded resting structure on the mounting section, not an integrated molded section as part of the cover panel, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. A and MPEP 2144.04 V. B., reversal of parts and integral construction are obvious engineering choices to one of ordinary skill in the art, and known in the art as shown by Schaller.
As Knowles teaches the resting structure stops the cover panel from over-rotating, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the resting structure as part of the cover panel, for in a case of retrofit to an existing channel to prevent over-rotation without the need for a new overflow cover, and integral construction as “the use of a one piece construction would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice”, and to provide a one-piece part.
Additionally, Schaller teaches a similar launder cover (abstract, C4, figures, in particular Fig. 12), comprising cover 14 and in an embodiment resting flanges 34 and pivoting flange 32, resting flange 34 with a mounting surface 42 on which integrally molded flange 32 rests, and pivot flange 32 which may be integrally formed with cover 12 (C4/L59-67, C7/L24-37), flange 32 appears to provide an integrated molded angled resting section is fabricated directly as part of said openable cover panel, (Fig. 12, C7/L50-51). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Knowles taught launder cover with Schaller use of a cover with an integrally molded resting part, as launder covers with pivoting/hinged connection and integrally molded angled resting parts are known in the art as shown by Schaller, and according to Schaller the use of integrally molded covers enables reductions in manufacturing time and installation (C4/L59-67).
Applicant amended to require: the mounting section with a flat shape and wherein said integrated molded angled resting section is fabricated directly as part of said openable cover panel such that said mounting section retains the flat shape.
Knowles teaches mounting section 10 (a flat surface, Fig. 3, 4), Schaller teaches resting flanges 34 and pivoting flange 32, resting flange 34 with a mounting surface 42 on which integrally molded flange 32 rests, flange 32 appears to provide an integrated molded angled resting section is fabricated directly as part of said openable cover panel, (Fig. 12, C7/L50-51), flange 32 and flange 34 each comprising flat surfaces (Fig. 12).
With respect to claim 2, the system as claimed in claim 1, is taught above. The combination of Knowles and Schaller teaches a cover panel with an integrated resting section as discussed above. Knowles teaches a mounting section and an associated locking post/locking pin to hold the panel cover in an open position allowing access and cleaning of the launder channel (0007-0009, 0026-0030, Figs. 3-18), a mounting section includes a locking post configured to be passed through a receiving hole in said integrated molded angled resting section of said cover panel to support said cover panel in said open position.
With respect to claim 3, the system as claimed in claim 2, is taught above. Knowles teaches a transvers locking pin (0027) locking post has a transverse locking pin.
With respect to claim 4, the system as claimed in claim 3, is taught above. Knowles teaches said locking post is spring loaded (0028-0026, Figs. 8, 9).
With respect to claim 5, the system as claimed in claim 4, is taught above. Knowles teaches (0028-0026, Figs. 8, 9), the locking post, has a rotatable handle connected by a pin to a shaft and, in turn to a spring, said shaft passing through a barrel, such that said handle can be either in a linear arrangement with said barrel in an open position, and where said handle can be rotated perpendicular to said barrel in a locked position.
With respect to claim 6, the system as claimed in claim 1, is taught above. Knowles and Schaller teach an integrated molded angled resting section, as discussed above. Knowles teaches a curved cover (0024, Figures); Schaller teaches flange 32 is disposed at an angle away from a curved surface of said cover panel (Fig. 12).
With respect to claim 7, the system as claimed in claim 6, is taught above. Knowles teaches curved cover panel 14, and an resting structure angled at 30 degrees (0024, curved surface of said cover panel integrated molded angled resting section is angled at approximately 30 degrees from said curved surface of said cover panel), alternatively, Knowles teaches different cover panels for different types of launder channels can have different curvatures and thus the ideal angle of resting structure from mounting section can set accordingly, such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the angle depending on the specific lauder channel dimensions.
With respect to claim 8, the system as claimed in claim 6, is taught above. Knowles teaches (0024), said integrated molded angled resting section is angled to support said cover panel such that it supports said cover panel, at a point when said cover panel is unfolded around said hinge to rest on said mounting section, to approximately 900.
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 JEANNIE MCDERMOTT whose telephone number is (571)272-4479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EST.
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, Vickie Kim can be reached at 571-272-0579. 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.
/JEANNIE MCDERMOTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/BRADLEY R SPIES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777