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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 13 November 2025 has been considered. Revised rejections based on applicant’s amendments are recited below. Claims 14-28 are currently pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 14 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 11,779,932. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both require the same structure where the pending claim is merely broader than the patented claim.
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.
Claim(s) 14-X is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,844,851 to Solomon (Solomon).
Concerning claim 14, Solomon discloses a crusher for mineral materials or recycled materials, comprising:
a crusher unit including a first crusher body (7) and a second crusher body (9), wherein a crushing gap (6) is formed between the first crusher body and the second crusher body;
a hydraulic cylinder (21, 31, 33 or 35) including a cylinder (E1 in the figure reproduced below) and a piston (E2 in the figure reproduced below) guided in the cylinder, the hydraulic cylinder including a pressure chamber (31c) delimited by the piston;
an overload triggering device coupled to one of the first and second crusher bodies (9) to permit an evasive motion of the one of the first and second crusher bodies increasing a width of the crushing gap, the overload triggering device including a movable assembly (21, 31, 33 or 35) and a valve (55);
wherein the movable assembly includes two components that are movable relative to each other, one of the two components being a cylinder or a piston (E2 in the figure reproduced below) of a hydraulic cylinder (21, 31, 33 or 35), the hydraulic cylinder including a pressure chamber (31c) delimited by the piston (E2); and
wherein the valve (55) is formed between the two components (as the valve is located such that fluid enters the cylinder to move the piston) of the movable assembly that are movable relative to each other to define an open position establishing a fluid-conveying connection between the pressure chamber and a compensation area (31d or 151 or 58), and to define a closed position blocking the fluid-conveying connection, one of the two components forming the valve being the cylinder or the piston.
However, in the event that applicant argues that the valve (55) is not directly between the two components, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have the valve positioned as such. It is noted that the valve is connected to the hydraulic cylinder and the particular placement of the valve (being closer to or further away from the hydraulic cylinder along the hydraulic lines) is an obvious design choice and would not modify the operation of the device.
Concerning claim 15, Solomon discloses the movable assembly includes the piston (E2), a piston rod (E3 in the figure reproduced below) coupled to the piston (E2), and an inertia element (E4 in the figure reproduced below) coupled to the piston (E2) or the piston rod, wherein the two components of the movable assembly forming the valve (55) include the piston (E2) and the inertia element (E4).
Concerning claim 16, Solomon discloses a spring (column 8, lines 46-58) biasing the inertia element toward the closed position of the valve.
Concerning claim 17, Solomon discloses the movable assembly includes the cylinder (E1) and an inertia element (E4) coupled (as it is moveably coupled) to the cylinder (E1), wherein the two components of the movable assembly forming the valve include the cylinder and the inertia element.
Concerning claim 18, Solomon discloses the movable assembly includes an inertia element (E4) coupled to the piston (E2) or the cylinder (E1), wherein the inertia element (E4) is one of the two components forming the valve (55), and wherein the inertia element includes one or more guide sections (E5 in the figure reproduced below) configured to movably guide the inertia element (E4) within the cylinder (E1) between the open position and the closed position of the valve.
Concerning claim 19, Solomon discloses the fluid-conveying connection between the pressure chamber (31c) and the compensation area (31d) is routed inside the cylinder.
Concerning claim 20, Solomon discloses the movable assembly includes an inertia piston (E4) coupled to the piston (E2) or the cylinder of the hydraulic cylinder, wherein the inertia piston is one of the two components forming the valve, and wherein the inertia piston is movably guided inside a receiving space of the cylinder (E1).
Concerning claim 21, Solomon discloses the inertia piston (E4) includes a guide section (E6 in the figure reproduced below) mounted on a piston rod (E2) of the piston of the hydraulic cylinder so that the inertia piston is guided for movement in a longitudinal direction of the piston rod.
Concerning claim 22, Solomon discloses the hydraulic cylinder includes a piston rod (E3) extending from the piston through the compensation area; and wherein the fluid-conveying connection between the pressure chamber and the compensation area includes a discharge channel formed in the piston.
Concerning claim 23, Solomon discloses the movable assembly includes an inertia element (E4) coupled to the piston or the cylinder, wherein the inertia element is one of the two components forming the valve; and the fluid-conveying connection between the pressure chamber and the compensation area further includes a fluid guide formed by the inertia element.
Concerning claim 26, Solomon discloses the hydraulic cylinder further includes a piston rod (E3) extending from the piston (E2); the piston (E2) includes a piston crown adjoined by a securing piece (E6); the piston rod (E3) includes a mounting neck connected to the securing piece; and the fluid-conveying connection between the pressure chamber and the compensation area includes an overflow area (31d) formed between the piston rod and the securing piece.
Concerning claim 27, Solomon discloses a tank (51); a pressure valve (61, 62); a pressure line connecting the compensation area (31c) to the pressure valve (61, 62); a hydraulic line connecting the pressure valve (61, 62) to the tank (51); wherein the pressure valve (61, 62) is configured to open after the valve (55) of the overload triggering device has been triggered as a result of an overload situation at the crusher unit in order to discharge hydraulic fluid from the compensation area into the tank.
Concerning claim 28, Solomon discloses a pressure generator (53); and wherein the pressure chamber is connected to the pressure generator via a hydraulic port so that hydraulic fluid can be fed into the pressure chamber in order to increase a volume of the pressure chamber.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-25 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.
PNG
media_image1.png
608
900
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 13 November 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Solomon does not disclose a valve formed between the two components of the moveable assembly. However applicant has only claimed, in claim 14, one of the two components (either a cylinder or a piston of a hydraulic cylinder) the second component can be anything that is part of the moveable assembly. This would include any structure attached to the moveable assembly that is not structure of other claim limitations. As Solomon discloses a hydraulic cylinder having a piston within the cylinder and a valve that is connected between the piston and another component it reads on the claim as written. Applicant is correct that Solomon does not disclose the valve is formed by the left end of an inertial element sealing against the right end of the piston (as seen in applicant’s figure 4) but this has not actually been claimed. Further, as seen in claim 17, while applicant has claimed an inertial element that is part of the two components, applicant has still failed to claim that this element is the second of the two components. As seen in claim 18, applicant appears to claim that the inertial element is part of the first component as it is coupled to either the piston or the cylinder which is explicitly the first component.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Katcoff whose telephone number is (571)270-1415. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8-4, Fri: Flex.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/Matthew Katcoff/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725 01/09/2026