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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/18/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 22, 23, 27-29, 31-33, 35, 36 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quaeck 5,165,525.
In Re Claim 22, Quaeck teaches a slat for a reciprocating slat conveyor, the slat comprising: an elongated slat body (4, Fig. 1, Fig. 2) that comprises a top wall (top wall of shown in Fig. 2), and a left and right side wall (16) arranged at a longitudinal side of the top wall and extending downwards therefrom, wherein each of the left and right side walls comprises a first wall part (vertical part, Fig. 2) connected to the top wall and extending substantially perpendicular thereto, and a second wall part (bottom horizontal portion of 16, Fig. 2) arranged at the end of the first wall part facing away from the top wall and extending towards the second wall part of the other one of the left and right side walls, wherein the elongated slat body has an upper surface (upper surface of 4, Fig. 2) on the top wall configured for supporting a load placed on the slat, a bottom surface (bottom surface of horizontal portion of 16, Fig. 2) on the second wall parts of the left and right side walls and opposite to the upper surface, a first side surface (side surface of 16, Fig. 2) and a second side surface (side surface of 16, Fig. 2), opposite to the first side surface, on the first wall parts of the left and right side walls, wherein an outside surface of at least at one of the bottom surface, the first side surface and the second side surface of the elongated slat body is at least partially provided with a wear member (8, Fig. 2).
In Re Claim 23, Quaeck teaches wherein at least a part of each of the first side surface and the second side surface is provided with the wear member. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 27, Quaeck teaches wherein the wear member is arranged at the first wall part of one of the left and right side walls, and a further wear member is arranged at the first wall part of the other of the left and right side walls. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 28, Quaeck teaches wherein the first wall part of the left and right side walls has a height, and the wear member and the further wear member extend over substantially the complete height of the respective first wall part. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 29, Quaeck teaches wherein the first wall part of the left and right side walls has a height, and the wear member extends over substantially the complete height of the respective first wall part and the further wear member extends over a part of the height of the respective first wall part. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 31, Quaeck teaches wherein the wear member comprises an inverted U-shaped wear body having a bottom portion and two legs standing upright from the bottom portion, wherein the bottom portion is arranged at the top wall and the two legs are arranged at least a part of the first wall parts of the left and right side walls. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 32, Quaeck teaches wherein the wear member is a wear strip or wear profile. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 33, Quaeck teaches wherein the wear member is a L-shaped wear strip or L-shaped wear profile. (vertical leg of 8 plus protrusion 26 creates an L-shaped wear profile, See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 35, Quaeck teaches wherein the wear member is arranged removably at least one of the upper surface, bottom surface, first side surface and second side surface. (See Fig. 2)
In Re Claim 36, Quaeck teaches wherein the wear member is manufactured from a material selected from the group comprising steel, wear aluminum, aluminum, plastics or the like. (Column 5, Lines 30-37)
In Re Claim 40, Quaeck teaches a support structure or subdeck (18, 14, Fig. 1, Fig. 2), multiple parallel elongate slats according to claim 22 as discussed above, that are supported by the support structure and that are slidable in the longitudinal direction with respect to the support structure, (Fig. 1, Fig. 2) slide bearings (10) between the support structure and the slats, and a drive mechanism (Column 3, Lines 2-7) for reciprocating sliding movement of the slats with respect to the support structure.
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 24 and 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quaeck and in view of Foster 5,355,994.
In Re Claim 24 and 37, Quaeck teaches the slat of Claim 22 as discussed above.
Quaeck does not teach wherein at least a part of the upper surface is provided with a wear member.
However, Foster teaches wherein at least a part of the upper surface is provided with a wear member (42); (Fig. 1) and wherein the wear member (10) is arranged at the elongated slat body by welding, gluing, riveting, screwing (48), clamping or the like.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use an upper surface provided with a wear member in the slat of Quaeck as taught by Foster with a reasonable expectation for success in order to make a more durable reciprocating conveyor.
Claim 30 and 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quaeck and in view of Wilkins et al. 7,152,729.
In Re Claim 30 and 34, Quaeck teaches the slat of Claim 22 as discussed above.
Quaeck does not teach wherein the wear member comprises a U-shaped wear body having a bottom portion and two legs standing upright from the bottom portion, wherein the bottom portion is arranged at the second wall parts of the left and right side walls and the two legs are arranged at least a part of the first wall parts of the left and right side walls.
However, Wilkins et al. teach wherein the wear member comprises a U-shaped wear body (62, Fig. 5, Fig. 6) having a bottom portion (66) and two legs (68, 70) standing upright from the bottom portion, wherein the bottom portion is arranged at the second wall parts (114, 116, Fig. 8) of the left and right side walls and the two legs are arranged at least a part of the first wall parts of the left and right side walls; (Fig. 8) and wherein the wear member (62) is substantially beam- shaped, such that the slat (60) is located within the wear member. (Fig. 8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use add a further wear member in the slat of Quaeck as taught by Wilkins et al. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to make a more durable reciprocating conveyor.
Claims 38 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quaeck and in view of Feigner et al. 2014/0183004.
In Re Claims 38 and 39, Quaeck teaches the slat of Claim 22 as discussed above.
Quaeck does not teach provided with an end cap mounted at one or both of the outer ends of the slat.
However, Feigner et al. teach the slat is provided with an end cap (vertical cap at end of 12, Fig. 1) mounted at one or both of the outer ends of the slat; and
wherein the end cap is connected to the wear member or to the elongated slat body solely. (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to ad and end cap in the slat of Quaeck as taught by Feigner et al. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to prevent debris from moving into the slat travel path.
Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quaeck and in view of Hallstrom, Jr. 4,856,645
In Re Claim 41, Quaeck teaches the slat of Claim 40 as discussed above.
Quaeck does not teach a trailer or truck comprising the reciprocating conveyor.
However, Hallstrom, Jr. teaches a trailer or truck comprising the reciprocating conveyor. (Column 2, Lines 39-43)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use a truck comprising the reciprocating conveyor in the slat of Quaeck as taught by Hallstrom, Jr. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to facilitate movement of material onto and off of a truck (Column 2, Lines 39-43).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 22-24 and 27-41 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLENN F MYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 PM.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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.
GLENN F. MYERS
Examiner
Art Unit 3652
/GLENN F MYERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights