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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/266/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/266/2026 with respect Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant Argued that “Voges has no teaching or suggestion of removing a pressure block assembly or an apparatus for doing so”.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In this case, the office action does not rely on the primary art of Voges to teaches a removable fixture that comprises rollers which is rolled into position via a conveyor; this limitation is taught by the secondary prior art of Sato. The rejection based on the combination of the cited references; and
the secondary art of Sato teaches a removal fixture comprising rollers which is rolled into position via a convevor extending into a housing in order to allow prompt machine changing (Sato: paragraph 0024);
Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive.
The Applicant Argued that Voges does not teach hydraulic cylinders raising a pressure block using blocks on opposite sides of the housing.
In response to this argument, the prior art of Voges discloses said hydraulic cylinders (fig.1: (64) and (66)) raise said pressure block assembly via blocks (fig.3: (54)) located on opposite sides of the housing.
Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Voges (US4751838A) in view of Sato (US20200360975A1).
Claims 1-7, 9-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Voges (US4751838A) in view of Sato (US20200360975A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 9-10, Voges discloses a stretcher (abstract and cols.6-8) with a pressure block assembly (fig.1 (50); comprising:
a head housing (fig.1: the housing between elements (2) and (4));
a pressure block assembly (fig.1 (50)) which is located in said housing and positioned within said housing via hydraulic cylinders;
said hydraulic cylinders (fig.1: (64) and (66)) raise said pressure block assembly via blocks (fig.3: (54)) located on opposite sides of the housing; and said hydraulic cylinders lower said pressure block assembly to move said pressure block assembly out of said housing.
Regarding claims 1 and 9-10, Voges does not disclose a removal fixture comprising rollers which is rolled into position via a convevor extending into the housing under said pressure block assembly to receive the pressure block assembly which is lowered onto the removal fixture for removal of the pressure block assembly from the housing; wherein said hydraulic cylinders lower said pressure block assembly onto said removal fixture; and a mechanism to pull said pressure block assembly out of said head housing.
Sato teaches a removal fixture (figs.3-5: (30)) comprising rollers (see the rollers of the element (30)) which is rolled into position via a convevor (figs.3-5: (31)) extending into a housing (figs.3-5: the housing of the element (A)) for removal of a processing block assembly from the housing (paragraphs 0051-0052); and
a mechanism to pull said processing block assembly out of said head housing (paragraph 92).
Therefore, 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 apparatus of Voges by the configuration of a removal fixture comprising rollers which is rolled into position via a convevor extending into a housing as taught by Sato in order to allow prompt machine changing (Sato: paragraph 0024), thereby having a removal fixture comprising rollers which is rolled into position via a convevor extending into the housing under said pressure block assembly to receive the pressure block assembly which is lowered onto the removal fixture for removal of the pressure block assembly from the housing; and wherein said hydraulic cylinders lower said pressure block assembly onto said removal fixture; and a mechanism to pull said processing block assembly out of said head housing.
Regarding claim 2, Voges discloses a window formed in a wall of said housing (fig.1: the window of the housing between elements (2) and (4)) for accessing gripper plates (fig.6: (72) and (74)) within said housing for removal of said gripper plates (Voges does not explicitly disclose removal; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to Voges in view of Sato to make the gripper plates to be removable for the purpose of the maintenance and repairing, since it has been held that if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the breaker members of Blackwell’s. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961).
Regarding claim 3, Voges discloses wherein said gripper plates comprises upper gripper plates and lower gripper plates (figs.3 and 6: (72) and (74)).
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Voges discloses wherein said lower gripper plates (figs.3 and 6: (72)) remain fixed in said housing.
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Voges discloses wherein said upper gripper plates (figs.3 and 6: (74)) move up and down relative to said housing.
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Voges discloses wherein said pressure block assembly comprises at least one piston which applies gripping force through said upper gripping plate onto said lower gripping plates (fig.3: the piston rods of the hydraulic cylinders (64) and (66)).
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Voges discloses wherein said pressure block assembly further comprises hydraulic piping for providing hydraulic fluid to said at least one piston (col.9 lines 3-5).
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 7.
Regarding claims 11 and 18-19, Voges discloses a stretcher (abstract and cols.6-8) with a pressure block assembly (fig.1 (50); comprising:
a head housing (fig.1: the housing between elements (2) and (4)) having a window in a side wall (fig.1: the window of the housing between elements (2) and (4)) to access gripper plates (fig.6: (72) and (74));
a pressure block assembly (fig.1 (50)) which is located in said housing and positioned by hydraulic cylinders (fig.1: (64) and (66)) which raise the pressure block assembly via blocks (fig.3: (54)) located on opposite sides of the housing and lower said pressure block assembly for removing said pressure block assembly from said head housing (fig.1 (50)).
Regarding claims 11 and 18-19, Voges does not disclose a removable fixture having rollers which is rolled into position via a conveyor extending into the housing under said pressure block assembly to receive the pressure block assembly which is lowered onto the removal fixture for removal of the pressure block assembly from the housing; and herein said hydraulic cylinders are used to lower said pressure block assembly onto said removal fixture; and a mechanism to pull or push said pressure block assembly out of said head housing.
Sato teaches a removal fixture (figs.3-5: (30)) having rollers (see the rollers of the element (30)) which is rolled into position via a convevor (figs.3-5: (31)) extending into a housing (figs.3-5: the housing of the elemnet (A)) for removal of a processing block assembly from the housing (paragraphs 0051-0052); and a mechanism to pull said processing block assembly out of said head housing (paragraph 92).
Therefore, 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 apparatus of Voges by the configuration of a removal fixture having rollers which is rolled into position via a convevor extending into a housing as taught by Sato in order to allow prompt machine changing (Sato: paragraph 0024), thereby having a removable fixture having rollers which is rolled into position via a conveyor extending into the housing under said pressure block assembly to receive the pressure block assembly which is lowered onto the removal fixture for removal of the pressure block assembly from the housing; and herein said hydraulic cylinders are used to lower said pressure block assembly onto said removal fixture.
Regarding claim 12, Voges discloses wherein said gripper plates comprises upper gripper plates and lower gripper plates (figs.3 and 6: (72) and (74)).
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, Voges discloses wherein said lower gripper plates (figs.3 and 6: (72)) remain fixed relative to said head housing.
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, Voges discloses wherein said upper gripper plates (figs.3 and 6: (74)) move up and down relative to said head housing.
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, Voges discloses wherein said pressure block assembly comprises at least one piston which applies gripping force through said upper gripper plates onto said lower gripping plates (fig.3: the piston rods of the hydraulic cylinders (64) and (66)).
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, Voges discloses wherein said pressure block assembly further comprises hydraulic piping for providing hydraulic fluid to said at least one piston (col.9 lines 3-5).
Therefore, the modification of Voges in view of Sato the limitations of claim 16.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED S ALAWADI whose telephone number is (571)272-2224. The examiner can normally be reached 08:00 am- 05:00 pm.
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.
/MOHAMMED S. ALAWADI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights