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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 2/5/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The subject matter of this application admits of illustration by a drawing to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d).
No Drawings where submitted with the application. The PGpub (US 20250347176 A1) used drawings from the WIPO publication, which are not in English, and are not consistent with the Figures in the application CN202110086761.3, which is claimed for priority.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the PCT international search report by the CN national intellectual property Administration have been considered, but will not be listed on any patent resulting from this application because they were not provided on a separate list in compliance with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1). In order to have the references printed on such resulting patent, a separate listing, preferably on a PTO/SB/08 form, must be filed within the set period for reply to this Office action.
Claim Objections
Claims 1,3,5-7, 9-11,14, 15 and 17 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1,3,5-7, and 9-11 recite “top” with regard to the sealing sleeve, workpiece, sleeve tube, first arc-shaped groove, second arc-shaped groove, bearing block, pressing mechanism, internally threaded sleeve, and pressing boss. The terms “top” in claims 1,3,5-7, and 9-11 and “bottom” in claims 4,5,7 are relative terms.. Specifically, while “top” and “bottom” might be reasonably understood to be on opposite sides of an object, the top and bottoms of various elements are not understood to have any orientation and would only denote a side, edge or extremity.
Claims 14, 15 and 17 recite a broad limitation followed by “preferably…” with a narrowing the broad limitation. The preferably is interpreted as optional and only informative, and thus is given no patentable weight. If applicant wished to narrow the metes and bounds, narrowing in a dependent claim is recommended. Also note, that a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by GB 2626665 A to Ford.
Regarding claim 1: Ford discloses
1. A sealed cobalt removal tooling (Abstract), characterized by comprising:
a sealing sleeve 38 configured to be sleeved over an outer wall of a workpiece 1;
a clamping mechanism (Fig. 3, top of 32 adjacent 38 with threads 39) sleeved over an outer wall of the sealing sleeve and configured to provide a first pressure to the sealing sleeve; and
a pressing mechanism 34 (Figure 3) arranged on the top of the sealing sleeve and configured to provide a second pressure to the sealing sleeve, wherein an inner cavity 33 for containing a chemical reagent is formed inside the pressing mechanism, and the top of the workpiece is capable of extending into the inner cavity (Figure 3, POD material 12 of cutting element 1 extends into cavity 33).
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(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 2626665 A to Ford in view of CN 212713759 U to LI .
Regarding claim 8: Ford discloses the claimed invention except 8. The sealed cobalt removal tooling of claim 1, characterized by further comprising an enclosing mechanism, wherein the sealing sleeve, the clamping mechanism, and the pressing mechanism are all located in the enclosing mechanism.
Li teaches a similar device for a similar purpose where multiple fixtures in an enclosure with wheels 600.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date (AIA ) to have modified Ford and made an enclosure to house multiple fixtures of his apparatus 30 and to have wheels on the enclosure, in view of Li, as it adds convenience “to move the cobalt removing device, further improves the working efficiency.” (2nd to last paragraph of the English translation.)
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 2626665 A to Ford..
Regarding claim 11: Ford discloses11. The sealed cobalt removal tooling of claim 1, characterized in that a top face of the workpiece1 protrudes from a top face of the sealing sleeve (Figure 3). However Ford fails to disclose by a protrusion height of H, where H=600-800 μm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to the protrusion height of H, where H=600-800 μm , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7,9-10, and 12-17 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120227332 A1 discloses an apparatus for leaching cutters.
US 20100095602 A1 discloses an apparatus for removal of catalysts from diamond materials
US 20130213720 A1 discloses an apparatus for leaching cobalt from polycrystalline diamond ("PCD") cutting tables.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN MACDONALD whose telephone number is (571)272-8763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571) 272-4137. 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.
/STEVEN A MACDONALD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674