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 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 10, please amend “flanged” to read “flange”.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McKulla (US 3,047,986).
Regarding claim 1, McKulla discloses a sandblasting apparatus (Col. 1, lines 9-33), comprising:
a booth having a bottom wall (see apparatus A, as well as cabinet C);
a sandblasting media reservoir position in the bottom wall of the booth (see supply hoppers S);
a first sidewall on a first side of the booth (see Figures 1 and 2);
an air pump providing an air flow to an inlet in the first sidewall of the booth (see main air supply header 19, as well as Col. 2, line 63-Col. 3, line 10; see also Col. 4, lines 59-74);
a first tube having a first end coupled to the inlet and second end extending into the booth (wherein conduit 20 has a first end coupled to the inlet of the sidewall of the cabinet C and a second end extending into the cabinet C);
a venturi nozzle positioned at the second end of the first tube (see venturi nozzle 21, Figure 4);
a mixing chamber positioned surrounding the venturi nozzle (see Figure 4, as well as the body of the blast gun surrounding the venturi nozzle 21, including an area 25 for mixing), the mixing chamber having an air pressure inlet (wherein air enters via the conduit 20 and therein), a sandblasting media inlet positioned adjacent to the venturi nozzle of the first tube (see abrasive entering via hoses 16 into the offset portion 24; see Figures 3 and 4), and an outlet (see the exiting portion adjacent nozzle 22; see Col. 2, line 56-Col. 3, line 10);
a second tube (16) having an inlet positioned in the sandblasting media reservoir in the bottom wall of the booth and an outlet coupled to the sandblasting media inlet of the mixing chamber (wherein hose 16 has an inlet connected to a supply hopper S and an outlet to feed into an offset portion 24 of a respective gun G having a mixing area 25; see Col. 2, lines 43-55 and 53-72); and
an outlet nozzle coupled to the outlet of the mixing chamber (see nozzle 22), the outlet nozzle having an inlet positioned to receive the air flow combined with the sandblasting media and outlet providing a sandblasting cleaning stream (see Figure 4; see also Col. 3, lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 2, McKulla discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further discloses wherein the mixing chamber includes a mixing zone fully surrounding the venturi nozzle (as can be seen in Figure 4, the nozzle 21 is fully surrounded by the mixing area 25; see also element 24 encapsulating the nozzle 21).
Regarding claim 5, McKulla discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further discloses a retaining fastener that couples the outlet nozzle (22) to the outlet of the mixing chamber (wherein as can be seen in Figure 4, there is a threaded connection which couples the nozzle 22 to the outlet of the mixing chamber area 25 and element 24).
Regarding claim 15, McKulla discloses a sandblasting apparatus (Col. 1, lines 9-33), comprising:
a booth having a bottom wall (see apparatus A, as well as cabinet C);
a sandblasting media reservoir position in the bottom wall of the booth (see supply hoppers S);
a first sidewall on a first side of the booth (see Figures 1 and 2);
an air pump providing an air flow to an inlet in the first sidewall of the booth (see main air supply header 19, as well as Col. 2, line 63-Col. 3, line 10; see also Col. 4, lines 59-74);
a first tube having a first end coupled to the inlet, a body extending into the booth and a second end within the booth (wherein conduit 20 has a first end coupled to the inlet of the sidewall of the cabinet C and a second end extending into the cabinet C);
a venturi nozzle positioned at a second end of the first tube (see venturi nozzle 21, Figure 4);
a second tube (16) having a first end as an inlet positioned in the sandblasting media reservoir in the bottom wall of the booth and a second end as an outlet positioned adjacent to the venturi nozzle of the first tube (wherein hose 16 has an inlet connected to a supply hopper S and an outlet to feed into an offset portion 24 of a respective gun G having a mixing area 25; see Col. 2, lines 43-55 and 53-72);
a mixing zone positioned adjacent to an outlet the venturi nozzle and the second tube outlet (see Figure 4, as well as the body of the blast gun surrounding the venturi nozzle 21, including an area 25 for mixing); and
an outlet nozzle positioned downstream of the mixing zone (see nozzle 22, as well as Figure 4 and Col. 3, lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 16, McKulla discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further discloses a mixing chamber positioned surrounding the venturi nozzle (see Figure 4, as well as the body of the blast gun surrounding the venturi nozzle 21, including an area 25 for mixing), the mixing chamber having an air pressure inlet coupled to the second end of the first tube (wherein air enters via the conduit 20 and therein), a sandblasting media inlet coupled to the second end of the second tube (see abrasive entering via the end of hose 16 into the offset portion 24; see Figures 3 and 4) and an outlet (see the exiting portion adjacent nozzle 22; see Col. 2, line 56-Col. 3, line 10), and the mixing zone being formed in the space between the mixing chamber inlet and the mixing chamber outlet (please see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 17, McKulla discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further discloses wherein the mixing chamber is rotatably coupled to the second end of the first tube (wherein as can be seen in Figures 3-5, there is a bolt portion coupling to the threaded portion of element 21, and there is also a fastener threaded into the body of element 24, i.e. there are multiple elements which rotatably coupled the mixing chamber element 24/25 to the second end of conduit 20).
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.
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(s) 1, 3, 4, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hellman (US 3,199,171) in view of Burgemeister (US 10,639,686).
Regarding claim 1, Hellman (US 3,199,171) discloses a sandblasting apparatus (Col. 1, lines 9-15), comprising:
a booth having a bottom wall (see cabinet 10 having a bottom wall, Figures 1 and 2);
a sandblasting media reservoir (see funnel shaped lower end 50 and hopper 56);
a first sidewall on a first side of the booth (see walls shown in Figures 4, 5, ands 7);
an air pump providing an air flow to an inlet in the first sidewall of the booth (see Figure 9, as well as air supply 92 and air regulator 100);
a first tube having a first end coupled to the inlet and second end extending into the booth (see pipe 106 in Figure 8, as well as Col. 2, line 24-Col. 3, line 9; see also the pipe 106 coupled to the gun, which is contained within the cabinet 10);
a venturi nozzle positioned at the second end of the first tube (see venturi 108, as well as Figures 5, 6, 8, and 9);
a mixing chamber positioned surrounding the venturi nozzle, the mixing chamber having an air pressure inlet, a sandblasting media inlet positioned adjacent to the venturi nozzle of the first tube, and an outlet (wherein as can be seen in Figure 8, the venturi nozzle 108 is interior within the gun, wherein there is an inlet for mating with the abrasive conduit 72, and inlet for air from pipe 106, and an outlet; );
a second tube having an inlet positioned in the sandblasting media reservoir and an outlet coupled to the sandblasting media inlet of the mixing chamber (wherein conduit 72 is positioned in the hopper 56, see Figures 8 and 9, and wherein the outlet of the conduit is coupled to the inlet of the blasting gun); and
an outlet nozzle coupled to the outlet of the mixing chamber, the outlet nozzle having an inlet positioned to receive the air flow combined with the sandblasting media and outlet providing a sandblasting cleaning stream (wherein after the air and abrasive are combined within the gun, there is an outlet nozzle downstream of the area where the abrasive and air are mixed, therein providing a blast stream; see at least Figure 8).
However, Hellman does not explicitly teach the hopper (56) is positioned in the bottom wall of the booth.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Burgemeister (US 10,639,686) teaches of a device comprising a cabinet, a cleaning tool comprising a nozzle (Col. 9, lines 18-22), and an extractor element (63), wherein the extractor element can be positioned in the bottom wall of the booth (Col. 9, lines 55-64).
The hopper element (56) of Hellman is provided in the form of an extractor comprising a motor, fan, an internal cone shaped element (64), and a fixture (70) for attaching to the return duct (72) such that particles can be recycled and reused. In a similar manner, the extractor element of Bergemeister also serves to filter, separate, collect, and reuse particles (Col. 4, lines 24-44), with the option of being located at a different position. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have relocated the hopper element of Hellman to be located in a bottom wall of the cabinet (10), aa taught by Bergemeister. One would be motivated to do so in order to provide a more compact apparatus which has a smaller footprint, thus reducing overall bulkiness while still maintaining the same capabilities of separating and reusing material. This modification would be recognized as using a known technique, i.e. relocating components into a compact configuration, to improve a similar device in the same manner, and would yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 3, Hellman in view of Bergemeister teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Hellman further teaches a sandblasting media inlet tube located in the sandblasting media reservoir, the sandblasting media inlet tube having a plurality of first apertures on a underside thereof located within the sandblasting media reservoir (see at least Figure 8 regarding fixture 70 having a plurality of apertures; see Col. 3, lines 11-30 and Col. 2, lines 44-55).
Regarding claim 4, Hellman in view of Bergemeister teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Hellman further teaches a second aperture in the sandblasting media inlet tube, the second aperture being positioned outside of the sandblasting media reservoir and exposed to ambient air outside of the booth to permit local ambient air to enter the sandblasting media inlet tube (see at least openings 78, as well as Col. 2, lines 44-55).
Regarding claim 11, Hellman in view of Bergemeister teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Hellman further teaches a second wall of the booth having protective gloves extending from the second wall into the booth, the protective gloves being positioned to receive the hands of a user that extend into the booth (Hellman: see at least Figures 4, 5, and 7, as well as gloves 32 and sleeve members 28; see also Col. 2, lines 6-10).
Regarding claim 12, Hellman in view of Bergemeister teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Hellman further teaches wherein the bottom wall of the booth is a downward extending funnel from the first and second sidewalls of the booth to the sandblasting reservoir and coupled at a bottom end thereof to the sandblasting reservoir (please refer to the combination statement as applied above, as well as Hellman disclosing the funnel portion 50, coupling conduit at 52, as well as the hopper 56).
Regarding claim 13, Hellman in view of Bergemeister teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified Hellman further teaches a support grid positioned above the bottom wall of the booth, the support grid having a plurality of apertures therein (Hellman: see at least screen 46 or 48, wherein screen 48 is a coarse screen and screen 46 is a finer screen; see also Col. 2, lines 16-23; wherein Col. 1, lines 21-24 teach that the size of glass beads may be as small as 0.0005 inches in diameter, or 0.0015 inch to 0.0331 inches in diameter; wherein Col.1 , lines 36-40 teach that the beads pass through the mesh floor).
However, modified Hellman is silent regarding the relationship between the coarse/fine screen mesh size and the diameter of the glass beads, i.e. modified Hellman does not explicitly teach each of the apertures has an area that is greater than 20 times larger than a diameter of the sandblasting media.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hellman to have an aperture size in either the coarse or fine mesh that is greater than 20 times larger than a diameter of the sandblasting media since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Hellman would not operate differently with the claimed aperture size range and since the screens are configured to allow beads to pass therethrough, the device would function appropriately having the claimed size. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the size is an example (Spec: page 6 line 29-page 7, line 5). The function of permitting media to pass therethrough is also accomplished by the apparatus of modified Hellman.
Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKulla (US 3,047,986) in view of Dresang (US 11,835,162).
Regarding claim 6, McKulla discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, McKulla does not explicitly teach wherein the mixing chamber is rotatably coupled to the first tube that permits the mixing chamber to rotate about its own longitudinal axis and also the longitudinal axis of the first tube while remaining coupled to the first tube with an air tight seal.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor of devices employing conduits, Dresang teaches of two tubular elements (10, 12) rotatably coupled to one another, which permits one element to rotate about its own longitudinal axis and also the longitudinal axis of the other element while remaining coupled with an air tight seal (wherein Col. 2, lines 7-8 and Col. 3 lines 44-46 teach that the centerline of element 10 can be the same, i.e. the 90 degree angle is not necessary; wherein Figure 5 shows the structure provided to permit swiveling of the swivel joint assembly; see also Col. 3, lines 35-55, Col. 4, lines 1-30).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of McKulla to include a swivel rotary connection, as taught by Dresang. One would be motivated to do so because as can be seen in Figure 1 of McKulla, the tube (20) is connected to manifold (19), and the system is provided with several internal tube components; incorporation of the ability to swivel would ensure that the tube line (20) does not twist or kink during use, which would hinder the ability of the tube line (20) to deliver air. The incorporation of the swivel between elements would also decrease the likelihood of clogging the abrasive gun of McKulla, which is a goal of McKulla, because the pressurized air required to perform blasting is maintained at a sufficient level by reducing the likelihood of kinking or tangling the tube (20). This modification would be recognized as using a known technique, i.e. a swivel connection, to improve a similar conduit device in the same manner, and would yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 7, McKulla in view of Dresang teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further teaches a sealing O ring coupled to the first tube and the mixing chamber and providing an air tight seal between the first tube and the mixing chamber (please refer to the combination statement as applied above, as well as Figure 5 of Dresang regarding o-ring 20; see also Col. 4, lines 1-16).
Regarding claim 8, McKulla in view of Dresang teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further teaches two retaining posts extending from the mixing chamber towards the first tube and positioned to retain the mixing chamber on the first tube (please refer to the combination statement as applied above; see Dresang: spring clip 50, which is annular but divided into two segments as can be seen in Figure 4, i.e. two retaining posts; wherein the spring clip ends extend from one tubular element towards another, and is positioned to retain the coupling therebetween; see Col. 2, lines 30-31, Col. 4, lines 21-23 and 45-60).
Regarding claim 9, McKulla in view of Dresang teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further teaches wherein the two retaining posts are positioned upstream of the O ring (please refer to the combination statement as applied above; see Dresang: spring clip 50 and o ring 20).
Regarding claim 10, McKulla in view of Dresang teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified McKulla further teaches a flange positioned on the second end of the first tube (please refer to the combination statement as applied above; please see Figures 4, 5, and7 of Dresang; see also flange element 42); and a groove (Dresang: 48) positioned upstream of the flanged and positioned to receive the retaining posts extending from the mixing chamber, the groove extending circumferentially around the second end of the first tube (Dresang; see at least Col. 4, lines 3-15).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKulla (US 3,047,986) in view of Perry (US 2,421,806).
Regarding claim 14, McKulla discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, McKulla does not explicitly teach a dust collection outlet positioned at an upper region of a sidewall of the booth, the dust collection outlet configured to receive a vacuum air stream that removes air from the booth.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor of devices which blast workpieces, Perry teaches a dust collection outlet positioned at an upper region of a sidewall of the booth, the dust collection outlet configured to receive a vacuum air stream that removes air from the booth (see Figure 2, suction conduit 12, as well as Col. 2, lines 28-38; Col. 3, line 26-Col. 4, line 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the suction element as taught by Perry into the invention of McKulla. One would be motivated to do so because while the base of McKulla provides suction/recycling, dust and powder is still formed during operation of the device, and the incorporation of the teachings of Perry provide a way to eliminate debris that is not recyclable or useful (Col. 3, line 26-Col. 4, line 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAKENA S MARKMAN whose telephone number is (469)295-9162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am-6:00pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/MAKENA S MARKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723