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 § 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.
Claim(s) 11-13, 15, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (WO 2022253345 A1) in view of Zheng (WO 2020224542 A1).
Re Claim 11, Ma discloses a cloth replacement mechanism comprising: a frame body 200; a replacement module 300 disposed on the frame body and comprising: a base body 320 comprising an engaging assembly 321, wherein the engaging assembly is movable; a clamping-pulling module 310/311 movably disposed on the frame body; and a supply module 210/420 (Fig. 1-3; pg. 15-17). Ma does not disclose a cutting assembly movably disposed on the frame body. However, Zheng teaches a cutting assembly 280/281 movably disposed on the frame body (Fig. 1-2, 23; pg. 12). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a cutting assembly movably disposed on the frame body, as taught by Zheng, for the purpose of providing a safe mechanism for custom cuts as desired.
Re Claim 12, Zheng teaches the cutting assembly comprises a first rail, a round knife assembly 281, and a first power unit 283; the first power unit is disposed on the first rail; the round knife assembly is disposed on the first power unit (Fig. 1-2, 23; pg. 12).
Re Claim 13, Zheng teaches the round knife assembly comprises a housing and a round knife, and the round knife is disposed on the housing and protrudes out of a bottom surface of the housing (Fig. 23; pg. 12).
Re Claim 15, Ma discloses the engaging assembly comprises an engaging member, the engaging member has a clamping surface, and a flange is on the clamping surface (Fig. 1-3; pg. 15-17).
Re Claim 18, Ma does not discloses a recycling module, wherein the recycling module comprises a clamping-receiving assembly and a recycling cabin, and a distance is between the recycling cabin and the replacement module. However, Zheng teaches a recycling module 270, wherein the recycling module comprises a clamping-receiving assembly 277 and a recycling cabin 211, and a distance is between the recycling cabin and the replacement module (Fig. 24, 30-31; pg. 8). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a recycling module, wherein the recycling module comprises a clamping-receiving assembly and a recycling cabin, and a distance is between the recycling cabin and the replacement module, as taught by Zheng, for the purpose of recovering materials for enabling reuse and conservation of materials.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowed.
Claims 14, 16-17, 19-20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN J WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)270-5429. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm EST.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/Ryan J. Walters/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799