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
Claims 1, 16 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: The capitalized words at the beginning of each claim limitation should be made lower case. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: The “A” before “screw lifter” at the beginning of each claim should be replaced with a “The” since it is referencing the previously disclosed independent claim and each claim should end with a period not a semi-colon. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: The phrase “plurality of sections screw rod” would be clearer as “a plurality of screw rods”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: The phrase “two chute’s, two said chute’s” would be clearer as “two chutes, said chutes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 16-17 all three instances of “recycling pipe unit” would be clearer as “recycling pipe units”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 10-11 after “a screw guide set around said central shaft” delete “and the screw guide provided around said central shaft” since it is redundant. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-17 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. The appropriate determiner such as “a” or “an” is missing before the first instance of multiple structural features throughout the claims.
Claims 1, 16 and 17 all recite the limitation "the reciprocating cyclic movement" in the last line of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is further unclear how any reciprocating cyclic movement is achieved with only two independent movements disclosed or how a movement is both cyclic and reciprocating since the movements seem at odds with each other. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as “wherein when the screw mechanism is actuated by said drive assembly, said screw mechanism can lift a toy ball entering the lifting pipe from the lifting inlet to the lifting outlet, when the toy ball exits the lifting pipe through the lifting outlet the toy ball enters into the recycling pipe through the recycling inlet and travels to the recycling outlet by gravity, when the toy ball exits the recycling pipe through the recycling outlet the toy ball enters the lifting pipe through the lifting inlet to be lifted again by the screw mechanism”.
Claim 7 is unclearly and awkwardly worded making the scope of the claim unascertainable. For the purposes of examination claim 6 will be interpreted as “a connecting groove disposed at each end of said screw rod” and claim 7 will be interpreted as “wherein said screw mechanism further includes triangular pins, wherein adjacent pairs of screw rods are connected together by extending ends of each triangular pin into respective connecting grooves of each adjacent screw rod to form a solid structure”.
Claim 11 discloses limitations related to the lifting pipe in a manner where the relationship between parts to allow connection is not clearly established. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as “said lifting pipe units further including a first end and a second end, a joint is positioned at the first end and an inner wall of said joint is provided with a protruding block configured to receive the second end of another lifting pipe unit such that the lifting pipe units can be inserted into each other”.
Claim 14 discloses limitations related to the recycling pipe in a manner where the relationship between parts to allow connection is not clearly established. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as “said recycling pipe comprises a plurality of recycling pipe units, each recycling pipe unit having a first end and a second end, a joint is positioned at the first end and is configured to be received in the second end of another lifting pipe unit such that the recycling pipe units can be inserted into each other”.
Claim 16 discloses limitations related to a lifting pipe and recycling pipe that are awkwardly and unclearly worded and the relationship between parts is not clearly established. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as “said lifting pipe consists of a plurality of lifting pipe units coupled together, said lifting pipe units each consisting of a main body portion with a holding portion, a first end and a second end, a joint is positioned at the first end and an inner wall of said joint is provided with a protruding block configured to receive the second end of another lifting pipe unit such that the lifting pipe units can be plugged into each other” and “said recycling pipe comprises a plurality of recycling pipe units, each recycling pipe unit having a first end and a second end, a joint is positioned at the first end and is configured to be received in the second end of another lifting pipe unit such that the recycling pipe units can be inserted into each other”.
Claim 17 discloses claim limitations with regard to the screw mechanism in lines 11-15 that are unclearly and awkwardly worded making the scope of the claim unascertainable. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as “a connecting groove disposed at each end of said screw rod, said screw mechanism further including triangular pins, wherein adjacent pairs of screw rods are connected together by extending ends of each triangular pin into respective connecting grooves of each adjacent screw rod”.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Polleres (8991592). Polleres discloses a screw lifter for lifting a toy ball (Fig. 2) having a base (34), a lifting assembly (20) and a recycling assembly (3). The base includes a base housing with a drive assembly (column 4 lines 55-63). The lifting assembly includes a screw mechanism (21) coupled to the drive assembly, a lifting pipe (24) mounted within a first opening of the base housing and surrounding the screw mechanism, a lower lifting inlet is aligned with the first opening and an upper lifting outlet (23) is mounted on the lifting pipe (Fig. 2). The recycling assembly includes a recycling pipe (33) set in a second opening of the base housing and includes a recycling inlet at an upper end of the pipe and a recycling outlet at a lower end of the pipe adjacent the second opening (Fig. 2). A longitudinal height of the recycling inlet is not located higher than a longitudinal height of the lifting outlet and a longitudinal height of the recycling outlet is not located lower than a longitudinal height of the lifting inlet (Fig. 2). Wherein, when the screw mechanism is actuated by said drive assembly, said screw mechanism can lift a toy ball (2) entering the lifting pipe from the lifting inlet to the lifting outlet, when the toy ball exits the lifting pipe through the lifting outlet the toy ball enters into the recycling pipe through the recycling inlet and travels to the recycling outlet by gravity, when the toy ball exits the recycling pipe through the recycling outlet the toy ball enters the lifting pipe through the lifting inlet to be lifted again by the screw mechanism (Fig. 2, column 4 lines 27 – column 5 line 37). A chute (1) extends between the lifting outlet and recycling inlet (Fig. 2).
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polleres as applied above and further in view of Udagawa (5735724). Polleres discloses the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the drive assembly including a battery slot, battery cover and gear set. Udagawa discloses a device having a lifting assembly for a toy ball with a screw mechanism connected to a drive assembly in a base of the device (Figs. 1-2), wherein the drive assembly includes a battery slot (142) with a detachable battery cover (145), a motor (52) with a gear torsion member (Fig. 3) configured to engage a gear set (53) to transfer torque from the motor to the gear set (Figs. 1,3 & 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a drive assembly as taught by Udagawa to the device of Polleres for the predictable results of powering and driving the screw mechanism in a safe and efficient manner for lifting a toy ball.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polleres and Udagawa as applied above and further in view of Kelly (11054114). Polleres and Udagawa disclose the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the batter cover being attached using screws. Kelly discloses a device with a drive assembly having a battery slot with a battery cover attached with screws (Fig. 2, column 2 lines 4-8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Kelly to use screws to affix the battery cover of Polleres and Udagawa for the predictable result of retaining the cover on the base in a more secure manner.
Claim(s) 5, 10-12, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polleres as applied above for claim 1 and further in view of Wirth (3946516). Polleres discloses the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the lifting pipe and recycling pipe including a plurality of pipe units that use joints to connect together. Wirth discloses first and second pipes configured for allowing a toy ball to move therethrough, wherein each of the pipes is formed from a plurality of pipe units connected together (Fig. 7). Each pipe unit includes a main body portion with a holding portion at an end thereof to form a joint with an inner wall configured as a protruding block that receives an opposing end of another pipe unit (Figs. 1-3 & 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Wirth to configure the lifting and recycling pipes of Polleres to be formed from a plurality of pipe units connected using joints for the predictable result of providing enhanced functionality and versatility. It further would have been obvious to configure the base openings with vertical pipe elements that allow connection to the other pipe units for the predictable result of enabling the pipe units to be detached from the base. Configuring parts to be separable has been held to be an obvious modification. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961).
Claim(s) 6-7, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polleres as applied for claim 1 above and further in view of Rothbarth (6074269). Polleres discloses the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the screw mechanism having a plurality of screw rods connected together and the base including a chute between the recycling outlet and the lifting inlet. Rothbarth discloses a screw mechanism for lifting toy balls (abstract), wherein the screw mechanism is formed from a plurality of screw rods connected together that each include a central shaft, a screw guide disposed around the central shaft and a connecting groove at ends thereof configured to receive a pin (107) for connecting the screw rods together (Fig. 19, column 9 lines 24-53). Rothbarth also discloses a base that includes a chute (171) between a recycling outlet and a lifting inlet (Figs. 27-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Rothbarth to configure the screw mechanism of Polleres from a plurality of connectable screw rods for the predictable result of providing enhanced functionality and utility to the screw mechanism. Furthermore, configuring parts to be separable has been held to be an obvious modification. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). It further would have been obvious to include a chute in the base of Polleres as taught by Rothbarth for the predictable result of shaping the base to direct the ball to the lifting inlet in a known manner. In regard to the pin having a triangular shape, the examiner notes that changes in shape have been held to be obvious unless a new or unexpected result is produced. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polleres and Rothbarth as applied for claim 6 above and further in view of Udagawa. Polleres and Rothbarth disclose the basic inventive concept, with the exception of having a limiting block and an external portion above the limiting block. Udagawa discloses a device with a lifting assembly for a toy ball that includes a screw mechanism having a cylindrically shaped limiting block (43) at a top thereof so as to be positioned adjacent the highest point to which the ball can be lifted (Fig. 2) that further has an external portion (47) with a lower portion (41) extending into the limiting block for rotating therewith (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Udagawa to modify Polleres and Rothbarth to include a limiting block with external portion for the predictable result of providing enhanced functionality and visual appeal. In regard to the limiting block having an upper cylindrical portion and a lower inverted conical portion, the examiner notes that changes in shape have been held to be obvious unless a new or unexpected result is produced. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA HYLINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2684. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Eugene Kim can be reached at 571-272-4463. 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.
/A.M.H/Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/NICHOLAS J. WEISS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711