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 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 33, 34, 36, 37, and 41, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Yao (U.S. Publication 2012/0135846).
Regarding claim 33, Yao teaches a housing for a dual axis centrifugal mixing device (see figure 1) comprising: a first rotatable housing that rotates about said first rotational axis (rotating body 30, axis L1) having: a concave upper surface (item 30 has a concave shape complementary to item 40’s shape); an opening between the first rotational axis and the upper edge of said first rotatable housing (item 30 accommodates the side surface of item 40 which is considered reading on an opening); a second rotatable housing coupled with said first rotational housing, wherein said second rotatable housing rotates about a second rotational axis (item 40 which couples to item 30, see paragraph 39 and L2); and a receptacle positioned within said opening and secured by said second rotatable housing and rotated about said second rotational axis (paragraph 33 item 100, item 100 rotates about L2), wherein said opening is adapted to receive said receptacle in an approximately horizontal position (item 30 accommodates the side surface of item 40 which receives a horizontal side of item 40).
Regarding claim 34, Yao teaches wherein said first rotatable housing is coupled to a drive shaft, responsive to a rotary motor, that rotates about said first rotational axis (item 82 along with shaft 32 through which axis L1 extends).
Regarding claim 36, Yao teaches wherein said second rotatable housing is responsive to a power transmission system that rotates said second rotatable housing about a second rotational axis (item 40 responsive to item 76, the power transmitting mechanism is considered reading on a power transmission system and is used to rotate item 40 along L2).
Regarding claim 37, Yao teaches wherein said power transmission system comprises a belt routing system (see paragraph 55 teaches a pully and belt can be used as a power transmitting element, the pully and belt are considered reading on a belt routing system).
Regarding claim 41, Yao teaches wherein the direction of rotation of the first and second rotatable housings is asynchronous (paragraph 36 teaches item 30 is rotated in a clockwise direction, figure 8 rotational directions of L2 and L1 are opposite with L2 rotating in a counterclockwise direction which is considered asynchronous).
Regarding claim 45, Yao teaches relative angle between the first and second rotational axes is substantially constant during operation of the device (see angle formed by axis L2 and L1 that are both substantially constant during their operation).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 12, 16, 43, and 44, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao (U.S. Publication 2012/0135846).
Regarding claim 1, Yao teaches a dual axis centrifugal mixing device (See Figure 1) comprising: a rotary motor (item 82) coupled with a drive shaft adapted to rotate on a first rotational axis (item 32 shaft having an axis L1); a first rotatable housing coupled to said drive shaft that rotates about said first rotational axis (rotating body 30); a second rotatable housing coupled with said first rotational housing (item 40 which couples to item 30, see paragraph 39), wherein said second rotatable housing is responsive to a power transmission system that is coupled to said drive shaft and rotates said second rotatable housing about a second rotational axis (item 40 responsive to item 76, the power transmitting mechanism is considered reading on a power transmission system); and - a receptacle secured by said second rotatable housing and rotated about said second rotational axis (paragraph 33, container item 100 can be attached to and detached from container holder item 40) and wherein said first rotational axis is angled relative to said second rotational axis (L2 is considered the second rotational axis and L1 is angled relative to L2). Regarding claim 1, Yao is silent to the second rotational axis being substantially vertical relative to a vertical axis. Regarding claim 1, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to rearrange the container holder of Yao in order to obtain the desired degree of mixing since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 2, Yao teaches wherein said first rotatable housing comprises a concave upper surface (item 30 has a concave shape complementary to item 40’s shape).
Regarding claim 3, Yao teaches wherein said concave upper surface comprises an opening between the first rotational axis and the upper edge of said first rotatable housing (the concave portion of item 30 accommodating item 40’s shape is considered reading on an opening between both L1 and an upper edge of item 30 proximate item 40).
Regarding claim 4, Yao teaches wherein said opening is adapted to receive said receptacle in an approximately horizontal position (item 30 accommodates the side surface of item 40).
Regarding claim 5, Yao teaches further comprising a counterweight positioned within said first rotational housing (spindle 37 is considered reading on a counterweight since paragraph 37 teaches the weight of the spindle 37 and the position of the adjustment spindle are adjusted, thereby enabling the rotating body 30 to rotate stably).
Regarding claim 9, Yao teaches wherein said power transmission system comprises a belt routing system (see paragraph 55 teaches a pully and belt can be used as a power transmitting element, the pully and belt are considered reading on a belt routing system).
Regarding claim 12, Yao teaches wherein the direction of rotation of the first and second rotatable housings is asynchronous (paragraph 36 teaches item 30 is rotated in a clockwise direction, figure 8 rotational directions of L2 and L1 are opposite with L2 rotating in a counterclockwise direction which is considered asynchronous).
Regarding claim 16, Yao teaches relative angle between the first and second rotational axes is substantially constant during operation of the device (see angle formed by axis L2 and L1 that are both substantially constant during their operation).
Regarding claim 43, Yao is silent to the second rotational axis being substantially vertical relative to a vertical axis. Regarding claim 43, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to rearrange the container holder of Yao in order to obtain the desired degree of mixing since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 44, Yao teaches wherein said first rotational axis is angled relative to said second rotational axis (figure 1, see angle formed by axis L2 and L1).
Claims 13, and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao (U.S. Publication 2012/0135846) in view of Tamura (U.S. Publication 2002/0132353).
Regarding claim 13, Yao is silent to the direction of rotation of the first and second rotatable housings is synchronous. Regarding claim 13, Tamura teaches the direction of rotation of the first and second rotatable housings is synchronous (paragraph 78 teaches reversing the rotation of the turntable which is considered capable of rotating in the same direction as items 8a). Regarding claim 13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the rotation configuration of Yao with the reversible rotation configuration of Tamura in order to obtain a larger mixing effect (see Tamura paragraph 78).
Regarding claim 42, Yao is silent to the direction of rotation of the first and second rotatable housings is synchronous. Regarding claim 42, Tamura teaches the direction of rotation of the first and second rotatable housings is synchronous (paragraph 78 teaches reversing the rotation of the turntable which is considered capable of rotating in the same direction as items 8a). Regarding claim 42, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the rotation configuration of Yao with the reversible rotation configuration of Tamura in order to obtain a larger mixing effect (see Tamura paragraph 78).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 11, 38, and 29 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.
The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the dual axis centrifugal mixer with the combination of the orientation of the two axes, the power transmission comprising a belt routing system, gear wheel, belt and pullies configuration as claimed in dependent claim 10.
The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the dual axis centrifugal mixer with the combination of the orientation of the two axes, the power transmission comprising a belt routing system, gear wheel, belt and pullies configuration as claimed in dependent claim 38.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANSHU BHATIA whose telephone number is (571)270-7628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11 a.m. to 7:30 p.m..
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571)270-1051. 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.
/ANSHU BHATIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights