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 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7, the word “mam” is a misspelling, and should be changed to “main”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-3, 5, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bertrand (9,243,543).
With respect to claim 1, Bertrand teaches a pipeline (Figures 1-3, #12) comprising: a pipe (12) comprising a silencing section (see annoted view of Figure 2, #3, provided below), an air inlet section (1) extending away from the silencing section (3), and an air outlet section (2), opposite the air inlet section (1), extending away from the silencing section (3), wherein the pipe (12) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (dampening member #50, col 3 line 63 - col 4 line 3), wherein the silencing structure comprises: a main silencing pipe (54); a baffle (52), wherein the baffle (52) is disposed around the main silencing pipe (54) and connected on the main silencing pipe (54 - col 4 lines 3-5), and the baffle (52) comprises an opposite first side and second side (col 3 line 63 - col 4 line 3), wherein the main silencing pipe (54) extends on the first side and/or the second side of the baffle (col 5 lines 4-5), and wherein the main silencing pipe (54) of the silencing structure (50) is disposed in the silencing section (3) of the pipe (12) and is connected to the pipe via the baffle (52 - col 4 lines 32-34), and the baffle (52) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle from a space between the pipe and the main silencing pipe (a fluid-tight connection can be formed between the peripheral surface #60 of the partition plate #52 and the inner surface #62 of the main body section #12 to militate against the flow of fluid there between, col 4 lines 35-44).
PNG
media_image1.png
619
1138
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Bertrand teaches wherein the baffle is annular (54) and has an inner diameter and an outer diameter (col 4 lines 26-34), the inner diameter is matched with an outer diameter of the main silencing pipe (col 4 lines 26-34), and the outer diameter is greater than or equal to an inner diameter of the pipe (col 4 lines 26-34).
With respect to claim 3, Bertrand teaches wherein the main silencing pipe extends by a first length L1 on the first side of the baffle (a length L4 of the first end #64, col 5 lines 8-9), and extends by a second length L2 on the second side of the baffle (a length L5 of the second end #66, col 5 line 13), and the first length L1 is not equal to the second length L2 (a ratio of the length L4 of the first end #64 to the length L5 of the second end #66 is in a range of about 0.01 to about 1.0, and more specifically 0.475, col 5 lines 19-22).
With respect to claim 5, Bertrand teaches wherein an axis of the main silencing pipe (54) is parallel to that of the pipe (12), and the axis of the main silencing pipe is offset from that of the pipe (12 – see FIG 4-5; further, col 4 lines 20-32).
With respect to claim 10, Bertrand teaches wherein no expansion part is disposed in the pipe (12).
With respect to claim 11, Bertrand teaches wherein respective inner diameters of the air inlet section (1), the silencing section (3), and the air outlet section (2) are equal, and respective outer diameters of the air inlet section (1), the silencing section (3), and the air outlet (3) section are equal.
Claims 1-2, 8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Smith (2020/0166169).
With respect to claim 1, Bertrand teaches a pipeline (device of Figure 5) comprising: a pipe (112) comprising a silencing section (area of L2), an air inlet section (120) extending away from the silencing section (defined by section of pipe #12 having #130), and an air outlet section (140), opposite the air inlet section (120), extending away from the silencing section (130), wherein the pipe (112) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (114/116), wherein the silencing structure comprises: a main silencing pipe (114); a baffle (116), wherein the baffle (116) is disposed around the main silencing pipe (114) and connected on the main silencing pipe (114), and the baffle (116) comprises an opposite first side and second side, wherein the main silencing pipe (114) extends on the first side and/or the second side of the baffle (116), and wherein the main silencing pipe (114) of the silencing structure is disposed in the silencing section (130) of the pipe (112) and is connected to the pipe via the baffle (116), and the baffle (116) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle (116) from a space between the pipe and the main silencing pipe (114).
With respect to claim 2, Smith teaches wherein the baffle (116) is annular and has an inner diameter and an outer diameter, the inner diameter is matched with an outer diameter of the main silencing pipe (114), and the outer diameter is greater than or equal to an inner diameter of the main silencing pipe (114).
With respect to claim 8, Smith teaches wherein a ratio of the outer diameter of the main silencing pipe to the inner diameter of the pipe is 0.5-0.9 (Figure 5, D1, D2, D3 - [0034]-[0035]).
With respect to claim 10, Smith teaches wherein no expansion part is disposed in the pipe (112).
With respect to claim 11, Smith teaches wherein respective inner diameters of the air inlet section (120), the silencing section (130), and the air outlet section (140) are equal, and respective outer diameters of the air inlet section (120), the silencing section (130), and the air outlet (140) section are equal.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 10-15 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mackenzie (2,115,113).
With respect to claim 1, Mackenzie teaches a pipeline (defined by device of Figure 1) comprising: a pipe (A) comprising a silencing section (defined by portion of muffler section between end heads B/C), an air inlet section (defined by portion of muffler having end head B, accommodating inlet pipe #15) extending away from the silencing section, and an air outlet section (defined by portion of muffler having end head C, accommodating outlet pipe #18), opposite the air inlet section, extending away from the silencing section, wherein the pipe (A) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (D/22), wherein the silencing structure comprises: a main silencing pipe (D); a baffle (22), wherein the baffle (22) is disposed around the main silencing pipe (D) and connected on the main silencing pipe (D), and the baffle (22) comprises an opposite first side (side facing end head B) and second side (side facing end head C), wherein the main silencing pipe (D) extends on the first side and/or the second side of the baffle (22), and wherein the main silencing pipe (D) of the silencing structure is disposed in the silencing section of the pipe (A) and is connected to the pipe via the baffle (22), and the baffle (22) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle (22) from a space between the pipe (A) and the main silencing pipe (D).
With respect to claim 2, Mackenzie teaches wherein the baffle (22) is annular and has an inner diameter and an outer diameter, the inner diameter is matched with an outer diameter of the main silencing pipe (D), and the outer diameter is greater than or equal to an inner diameter of the pipe (A).
With respect to claim 3, Mackenzie teaches wherein the main silencing pipe (D) extends by a first length L1 on the first side (side facing end head B) of the baffle (22), and extends by a second length L2 on the second side (side facing end head C) of the baffle (22), and the first length L1 is not equal to the second length L2 (clearly seen in Figure 1).
With respect to claim 6, Mackenzie teaches wherein the pipeline further comprises: an auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26), wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) extends on the first side of the baffle (22), and/or extends on the second side of the baffle (22), or both (note that structures 25/26 are located on both sides of baffle #22), and wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe does not penetrate through the baffle (22).
With respect to claim 7, Mackenzie teaches wherein: the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) is arranged outside the main silencing pipe (D) in a sleeving manner, and an inner wall (defined by portions of #25/25 that are spaced from pipe #D, as seen in Figures 1 and 3) of the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) is spaced apart from an outer wall of the main silencing pipe (D).
With respect to claim 10, Mackenzie teaches wherein no expansion part is disposed in the pipe (A).
With respect to claim 11, Mackenzie teaches wherein respective inner diameters of the air inlet section (defined by portion of muffler having end head B, accommodating inlet pipe #15), the silencing section (defined by portion of muffler section between end heads B/C), and the air outlet section (defined by portion of muffler having end head C, accommodating outlet pipe #18) are equal, and respective outer diameters of the air inlet section, the silencing section, and the air outlet section are equal.
With respect to claim 12, Mackenzie teaches a pipeline (defined by device of Figure 1) comprising: a pipe (A) comprising a silencing section (defined by portion of muffler section between end heads B/C), an inlet section (defined by portion of muffler having end head B, accommodating inlet pipe #15) extending away from the silencing section, and an outlet section (defined by portion of muffler having end head C, accommodating outlet pipe #18), opposite the inlet section, extending away from the silencing section, wherein the pipe (A) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (D/22), comprising: a main silencing pipe (D); a baffle (22) disposed around the main silencing pipe (D) and connected to the main silencing pipe (D), wherein the baffle (22) comprises an opposite first side and second side, wherein the main silencing pipe (D) extends on the first side of the baffle (22), extends pm the second side of the baffle (22), or both (clearly seen), and wherein the main silencing pipe (D) is disposed in the silencing section of the pipe (A) and is connected to the pipe via the baffle (22), and the baffle (22) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle (22) within a space between the pipe (A) and the main silencing pipe (D); and an auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26), wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) extends on the first side of the baffle (22), extends on the second side of the baffle (22), or both (note that structures 25/26 are located on both sides of baffle #22), and wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe does not penetrate through the baffle (22).
With respect to claim 13, Mackenzie teaches wherein the baffle is annular (22) and has an inner diameter and an outer diameter, the inner diameter is matched with an outer diameter of the main silencing pipe (D), and the outer diameter is greater than or equal to an inner diameter of the pipe (A).
With respect to claim 14, Mackenzie teaches wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) is disposed on one side of the main silencing pipe (D).
With respect to claim 15, Mackenzie teaches wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) is arranged radially outward from the main silencing pipe (D), and an inner wall (defined by portions of #25/25 that are spaced from pipe #D, as seen in Figures 1 and 3) of the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) is spaced apart from an outer wall of the main silencing pipe (D).
With respect to claim 18, Mackenzie teaches wherein the main silencing pipe (D) extends by a first length on the first side (side facing end head B) of the baffle (22), and extends by a second length on the second side (side facing end head C) of the baffle (22), and the first length is not equal to the second length (clearly seen in Figure 1).
With respect to claim 19, Mackenzie wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (25/26) extends by a third length on the first side (side facing end head B) of the baffle (22), and wherein the first length, the second length, the third length are not equal (clearly seen in Figure 1).
Claims 1-2, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sase (5,457,290).
With respect to claim 1, Sase teaches a pipeline (device of Figure 3) comprising: a pipe (1) comprising a silencing section (section downstream of inlet pipe #2 and upstream of outlet pipe #3, accommodating structures #4/7), an air inlet section (section having inlet pipe #2) extending away from the silencing section, and an air outlet section (section having outlet pipe #3), opposite the air inlet section, extending away from the silencing section, wherein the pipe (1) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (4/7), wherein the silencing structure comprises: a main silencing pipe (7); a baffle (4), wherein the baffle (4) is disposed around the main silencing pipe (7) and connected on the main silencing pipe (7), and the baffle (4) comprises an opposite first side and second side, wherein the main silencing pipe (7) extends on the first side and/or the second side of the baffle (4), and wherein the main silencing pipe (7) of the silencing structure (4/7) is disposed in the silencing section of the pipe (1) and is connected to the pipe (1) via the baffle (4), and the baffle (4) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle (4) from a space between the pipe (1) and the main silencing pipe (7).
With respect to claim 2, Sase teaches wherein the baffle (4) is annular and has an inner diameter and an outer diameter, the inner diameter is matched with an outer diameter of the main silencing pipe (7), and the outer diameter is greater than or equal to an inner diameter of the pipe (1).
With respect to claim 9, Sase teaches wherein the pipeline (device of Figure 3) comprises: a plurality of silencing structures (4/7) including the silencing structure (4/7), and the plurality of silencing structures (4/7) is disposed sequentially in the pipe (1).
With respect to claim 10, Sase teaches wherein no expansion part is disposed in the pipe (1).
With respect to claim 11, Sase teaches wherein respective inner diameters of the air inlet section (section having inlet pipe #2), the silencing section (section downstream of inlet pipe #2 and upstream of outlet pipe #3, accommodating structures #4/7), and the air outlet section (section having outlet pipe #3) are equal, and respective outer diameters of the air inlet section, the silencing section, and the air outlet section are equal.
Claims 1-3, 6, 10-12, 14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hunt (4,064,962).
With respect to claim 1, Hunt teaches a pipeline (Figure 1, #10) comprising: a pipe (12) comprising a silencing section (defined by section extending from baffle #20 to baffle #22), an air inlet section (defined by section extending from inlet header #14 to baffle #20) extending away from the silencing section, and an air outlet section (defined by section extending from baffle #22 to exit header #16), opposite the air inlet section, extending away from the silencing section, wherein the pipe (12) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (20/22/24/26/28), wherein the silencing structure comprises: a main silencing pipe (26); a baffle (22), wherein the baffle (22) is disposed around the main silencing pipe (26) and connected on the main silencing pipe 26), and the baffle (22) comprises an opposite first side (side facing inlet header #14) and second side (side facing exit header #16), wherein the main silencing pipe (26) extends on the first side and/or the second side of the baffle (22), and wherein the main silencing pipe (26) of the silencing structure is disposed in the silencing section of the pipe (1) and is connected to the pipe via the baffle (22), and the baffle (22) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle (22) from a space (defined by space excluding portion with pipe #28) between the pipe (12) and the main silencing pipe (26).
With respect to claim 2, Hunt teaches wherein the baffle (22) is annular and has an inner diameter and an outer diameter, the inner diameter is matched with an outer diameter of the main silencing pipe (26), and the outer diameter is greater than or equal to an inner diameter of the pipe (12).
With respect to claim 3, Hunt teaches wherein the main silencing pipe (26) extends by a first length L1 on the first side (side facing inlet header #14) of the baffle (22), and extends by a second length L2 on the second side (side facing exit header #16) of the baffle (22), and the first length L1 is not equal to the second length L2 (clearly seen in Figure 1).
With respect to claim 6, Hunt teaches wherein the pipeline further comprises: an auxiliary silencing pipe (24), wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) extends on the first side (side facing inlet header #14) of the baffle (22), and/or extends on the second side of the baffle, or both, and wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) does not penetrate through the baffle (22).
With respect to claim 10, Hunt teaches wherein no expansion part is disposed in the pipe (12).
With respect to claim 11, Hunt teaches wherein respective inner diameters of the air inlet section (defined by section extending from inlet header #14 to baffle #20), the silencing section (defined by section extending from baffle #20 to baffle #22), and the air outlet section (defined by section extending from baffle #22 to exit header #16) are equal, and respective outer diameters of the air inlet section, the silencing section, and the air outlet section are equal.
With respect to claim 12, Hunt teaches a pipeline (Figure 1, #10) comprising: a pipe (12) comprising a silencing section (defined by section extending from baffle #20 to baffle #22), an inlet section (defined by section extending from inlet header #14 to baffle #20) extending away from the silencing section, and an outlet section (defined by section extending from baffle #22 to exit header #16), opposite the inlet section, extending away from the silencing section, wherein the pipe (12) comprises a uniform diameter; and a silencing structure (20/22/24/26/28), comprising: a main silencing pipe (26); a baffle (22) disposed around the main silencing pipe (26) and connected to the main silencing pipe (26), wherein the baffle (22) comprises an opposite first side (side facing inlet header #14) and second side (side facing exit header #16), wherein the main silencing pipe (26) extends on the first side of the baffle (22), extends pm the second side of the baffle (22), or both (clearly seen), and wherein the main silencing pipe (26) is disposed in the silencing section of the pipe (12) and is connected to the pipe via the baffle (22), and the baffle (22) is configured to block a fluid from flowing through the baffle (22) within a space (defined by space excluding portion with pipe #28) between the pipe (12) and the main silencing pipe (26); and an auxiliary silencing pipe (24), wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) extends on the first side (side facing inlet header #14) of the baffle (22), extends on the second side of the baffle, or both, and wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) does not penetrate through the baffle (22).
With respect to claim 14, Hunt teaches wherein the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) is disposed on one side of the main silencing pipe (26).
With respect to claim 16, Hunt teaches wherein an axis of the main silencing pipe (26) is parallel to an axis of the pipe (12), and the axis of the main silencing pipe (26) is offset from the axis of the pipe (12).
With respect to claim 17, Hunt teaches wherein an axis of the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) is parallel to the axis of the main silencing pipe (26), and the axis of the auxiliary silencing pipe (24) is offset from the axis of the main silencing pipe (26).
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.
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bertrand (9,243,543).
With respect to claim 4, Bertrand teaches the pipeline according to Claim 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
40
292
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bertrand does not teach characterized in that wherein the first length L1 is determined according to a first wavelength l1 in a sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the first length L1 and the first wavelength l1 satisfies the following formula:
the second length L2 is determined according to a second wavelength l2 in the sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the second length L2 and the second wavelength l2 satisfies the following formula:
PNG
media_image3.png
44
298
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackenzie (2,115,113).
With respect to claim 4, Mackenzie teaches the pipeline according to Claim 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
40
292
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Mackenzie does not teach characterized in that wherein the first length L1 is determined according to a first wavelength l1 in a sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the first length L1 and the first wavelength l1 satisfies the following formula:
the second length L2 is determined according to a second wavelength l2 in the sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the second length L2 and the second wavelength l2 satisfies the following formula:
PNG
media_image3.png
44
298
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (2020/0166169).
With respect to claim 4, Smith teaches the pipeline according to Claim 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
40
292
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Smith does not teach characterized in that wherein the first length L1 is determined according to a first wavelength l1 in a sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the first length L1 and the first wavelength l1 satisfies the following formula:
the second length L2 is determined according to a second wavelength l2 in the sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the second length L2 and the second wavelength l2 satisfies the following formula:
PNG
media_image3.png
44
298
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sase (5,457,290).
With respect to claim 4, Sase teaches the pipeline according to Claim 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
40
292
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sase does not teach characterized in that wherein the first length L1 is determined according to a first wavelength l1 in a sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the first length L1 and the first wavelength l1 satisfies the following formula:
the second length L2 is determined according to a second wavelength l2 in the sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the second length L2 and the second wavelength l2 satisfies the following formula:
PNG
media_image3.png
44
298
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt (4,064,962).
With respect to claim 4, Hunt teaches the pipeline according to Claim 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
40
292
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Hunt does not teach characterized in that wherein the first length L1 is determined according to a first wavelength l1 in a sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the first length L1 and the first wavelength l1 satisfies the following formula:
the second length L2 is determined according to a second wavelength l2 in the sound to be eliminated, and a relationship between the second length L2 and the second wavelength l2 satisfies the following formula:
PNG
media_image3.png
44
298
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-19 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. It is noted that the Bertrand reference has been interpreted in a different manner from that of the previous rejection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JEREMY AUSTIN LUKS whose telephone number is (571)272-2707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:00-5:00).
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 270-7938. 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.
/JEREMY A LUKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights