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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5 recites “material material” in Line 2 and it appears the latter repeated word needs to be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, including Claims 1-5 in the reply filed on 12/01/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “grasping element” in Claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Nowak et al. US 3747765 A.
PNG
media_image1.png
513
300
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Nowak et al. Fig. 9
Regarding Claim 1, Nowak et al. ‘765 discloses a filter assembly (meeting the limitation for in combination a filter and a tool for installing and removing the filter) from a filter chamber (meeting the limitation for a molten metal filtration box)(Abstract), said tool comprising a rod (62) (meeting the limitation for a shank), a flanged head end secured to a first end of the shank (63) (meeting the limitation for a head end secured to a first end of the shank), and a pin and arm (meeting the limitation for a grasping element) releasably secured to a second end of the shank (Column 5, Lines 58-65)(Figs. 8-9), said filter comprising a plate of porous ceramic material (56) defining a passage configured to receive the tool (Column 6, Lines 42-58), said passage including a compressible gasket (meeting the limitation for expandable gasket) (47) (Column5, Lines 38-48), meeting the limitation for the instant Claim.
Regarding Claim 2, Nowak et al. ‘765 discloses the head end is a flanged end of the rod (meeting the limitation for permanently secured to the shank) (Column 6 Lines 18-21).
Regarding Claim 3, Nowak et al. ‘765 discloses the grasping element comprises an aperture through which a pin passes through the shaft or rod (62) (Column 6, Lines 18-41), meeting the limitations of the instant Claim.
Regarding Claim 4, Nowak et al. ‘765 discloses the tool further comprises bifurcated arm (72) (meeting the limitation for a handle) shaped for insertion through the aperture (Column 6, Lines 18-41), meeting the limitations of the instant Claim.
Regarding Claim 5, Nowak et al. ‘765 discloses at least a portion of the tool includes Fiberfrax, a reinforced fibrous sheet material covering steel (Column 4 Lines 22-61, Column 6, Lines 18-41), meeting the limitations of the instant Claim.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukihisa et al. JPH 05195098 A in view of Yarwood et al. US 4081371 A.
PNG
media_image2.png
508
564
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2, Yukihisa et al. ‘098
PNG
media_image3.png
321
616
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2, Yarwood et al. ‘371
Regarding Claim 1, Yukihisa et al. ‘098 teaches a filtering device (meeting the limitation for in combination a filter and a tool for installing and removing the filter) from a filtering furnace (meeting the limitation for a molten metal filtration box)[0001-0002], said tool comprising a pull-up body (11) (meeting the limitation for a shank), an underside protrusion (12) (meeting the limitation for a head end secured to a first end of the shank), a hook (17) having an engagement hole (16) screwed into groove (15) of the lifting body (11) (meeting the limitation for a grasping element releasably secured to a second end of the shank) [0006] (Fig. 2), said filter comprising a plate of porous ceramic material (7) defining a passage configured to receive the tool [0003].
Yukihisa et al. ‘098 does not expressly teach said passage includes an expandable gasket.
However, Yarwood et al. ‘371 teaches a filter chamber plate inserted into a molten metal filtration furnace wherein a filter plate of porous ceramic material is inserted into a passageway comprising a resilient gasket (meeting the limitation for an expandable gasket) in order to prevent leaks.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to include resilient/expandable gaskets in the passageway of Yukihisa et al. ‘098 in order to prevent leaks and secure the filter in place based on the teachings of Yarwood et al. ‘371 at (Column 8, Lines 19-44), meeting the limitation for the instant Claim.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Yukihisa et al. ‘098 teaches the limitations set forth above. Yukihisa et al. ‘098 further teaches the head end is a protrusion (12) of the pull-up body (11), meeting the limitation of the instant claim for the head end permanently secured to the shank.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Yukihisa et al. ‘098 teaches the limitations set forth above. Yukihisa et al. ‘098 further teaches the grasping element comprises a hook (17) with engagement hole (16), meeting the limitation of the instant Claim for an aperture.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Yukihisa et al. ‘098 teaches the limitations set forth above. Yukihisa et al. ‘098 further teaches the tool further comprises a jig for the engagement of the hook [0010], meeting the limitation of the instant Claim for a handle shaped for insertion through said aperture.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukihisa et al. JPH 05195098 A in view of Yarwood et al. US 4081371 A as applied to Claims 1-4 above, further in view of Nowak et al. US 3747765.
Regarding Claim 5, Yukihisa et al. ‘098 modified by Yarwood et al. ‘371 teaches the limitations set forth above but does not expressly teach at least a portion of the tool includes reinforced fiber material covering steel.
However, Nowak et al. ‘765 teaches a molten metal filter assembly wherein at least a portion of the tool includes Fiberfrax, a reinforced fibrous material covering steel (Column 4 Lines 22-61, Column 6, Lines 18-41) used as a refractory sealant to protect the steel filter assembly as it withstands high temperatures.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to cover steel portions of the filtering device of modified Yukihisa et al. ‘098 in order to protect the device from high temperatures during the filtration of molten metal, meeting the limitations of the instant Claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 4426287 A teaches a plate-like filter with at least one filter-setting hole bored through.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MORIAH S. SMOOT whose telephone number is (571)272-2634. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am - 5pm EDT.
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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at (571) 272-1401. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/M.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1733