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 . This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 5/07/2026
Election/Restrictions
Claims 2-6, 10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on05/07/2026
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 1, 7-9 in the reply filed on 05/07/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN on 04-18-2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 202310419025.4 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
The Applicant has submitted the certified priority document from WIPO 2023104190254, however, there is no claim to the PCT application on the Application Data Sheet submitted on 5/16/2023, under the Domestic Benefit/National Stage Information section.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the phrase “the present invention discloses” should be avoided. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the (clamping block, clamping slot, slider and slider slot) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 7-9 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.
Claims 1, 7-9 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.
Claim 1, line 6 recites “and a push plate”. However, a push plate was already set forth in line 2. It appears that Applicant intended – and the push plate-- and was not claiming a second push plate.
Claim 1 recites, “both ends of the push plate are provided with side plates respectively, one side of the side plate is provided with a blade, and one side of the blade is provided with a disassembly structure.” The limitations first identify “side plates” plural, but then state one side of “the side plate”. It is unclear if the Applicant intended to claim two side plates or one side plate. It is unclear if the “one side of the side plate” refers to one side of a singular side plate, or one side of both side plates.
It is also unclear how both ends of the push plate 5 have a side plate 11. It is unclear how either end of the push plate has a one or both side plates.
Claim 7 recites, “a second installation buckle, a second installation groove, a second buckle…”. However, a first installation buckle, a first installation groove, and a first buckle have not yet been set forth.
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.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhou (CN111251353). In regards to claim 1, Zhou discloses an automatic potato cutter machine, comprising a casing (1), a base (2), a push plate (6), wherein a top of the base (2) is provided with the casing (1); a movable structure (pressing control value 4) is arranged at a bottom of the casing (1), a motor (7) is arranged inside the casing (1) and a telescopic push rod is arranged on one side of the motor (7), a fixed rod is arranged on a top of one side of the casing and a push plate (6) is arranged on one side of the telescopic push rod; both ends of the push plate (6) are provided with side plate (3) respectively, one side of the side plate is provided with a blade (5) , and one side of the blade is provided with a disassembly structure (fixing bolt 804).
In regards to claim 7, Zhou discloses wherein a connection structure (tabs /screw for connecting panel 1 to funnel 10) is arranged on one side of the casing (1), the connection structure comprises a second installation buckle (head of the screw), a second installation groove (screw hole), a second buckle (threaded portion of the screw) a limited block (tab portion supporting the screw that extends from funnel 10), the limited block is arranged on one side of the casing (1; see Figure 2), one side of the limited block is provided with the second installation groove (screw hole), one side of the second installation groove (screw hole) is arranged on one side of the second installation buckle (head of the screw).
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 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN111251353) in view of Roesler (U.S. Publication 2006/0169695).
In regards to claim 8, Zhou discloses wherein one side of the limited block (tab portion supporting screw on 10) is provide with a clamping block, one side of the casing (1) is provided with a clamping slot (hole for screw in the tab in the plate 1). Zhou does not disclose that the limited block (tab on 10) and the casing (1) form a snap fit structure. Roesler sets forth a case with a slide closure. Although, Zhou is directed to a cutter assembly, and Roesler is directed to a case, as they are both directed to releasably securing two mating components of a housing enclosure, they both pertain to a similar problem and are therefore considered analogous art. Roesler discloses providing two mating tabs that are recessed relative to the outer casing wall and that provided within the wall is a slide closure 3 that allows the two halves of the case to be locked or unlocked relative to reach other without requiring the use of a secondary tool to perform the unlocking. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have replaced the tabs and screw connection of Zhou with a sliding locking mechanism of Roesler in order to permit repeated attachment and removal of the container without use of tools while maintaining a secure connection during operation.
In regards to claim 9, the modified device of Zhou discloses wherein one side of the second installation buckle (5 Roesler) is provided with a slider, one side of the second installation groove is provided with a slider slot (e.g. 12 Roesler), and the second installation buckle (5 Roesler) and the second installation groove (e.g. 6 Roesler; fig. 3) form a sliding structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA M LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8339. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a.m.- 5p.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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at 571-272-4502. 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.
/LAURA M LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights