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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Heating mechanism (3) and deodorizing mechanism (4) are not identified in FIGS. 1 to 3 as indicated in the Detailed Description Para [048]; Fixed cutter set (21), second fixed cutter (212), first grinding groove (213), and first grinding protrusion (214) are not identified in FIG. 5 as indicated in the Detailed Description Para [050]; Second moving cutter (232), and first grinding protrusion (214) are not identified in FIGS. 5 and 6 as indicated in the Detailed Description Para [053]; Shaft (22) is not identified in FIGS. 7 & 8 as indicated in the Detailed Description Para [054]; and Box (1) is not identified in FIGS. 13 & 14 as indicated in the Detailed Description Para [060] and Para [062]. 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. 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) are: heating mechanism and deodorizing mechanism in claim 1.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Applicant is limited to a heating mechanism which includes a heating tube and a deodorizing mechanism which includes a suction ventilating fan and a filter layer.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 2-8 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.
Regarding claim 2, applicant claims a first grinding protrusion is formed on a lower end surface. It is unclear what component the lower end surface is in reference to. The claim includes a first fixed cutter and a second fixed cuter.
Regarding claim 3, applicant claims the first moving cutter and the second moving cutter are right-handed and inclined. It is unclear what structure is right-handed. Applicant does not provide a point of reference in which the claimed components are right-handed to, nor does the applicant provide a scope as to what aspect of the claimed components are inclined be it a surface of the component, or the component’s orientation.
Regarding claim 6, applicant claims the third grinding protrusion is in clearance fit with an outer side wall of the first moving cutter and an outer side wall of the second moving cutter in an axis direction of the rotating shaft. It is unclear what direction the clearance fit is located since an axis can extend in all directions through the center of the rotating shaft. Applicant does not provide a directional axis in which to reference.
Regarding claim 8, applicant claims an upper end surface of the fourth moving cutter is in clearance fit with the lower end surface of the first fixed cutter to grind the kitchen waste. According to FIG. 3, fourth moving cutter is positioned above the first fixed cutter. It is unclear how the fourth moving cutter is in a clearance fit with the lower end surface of the first fixed cutter to grind the kitchen waste when the fourth moving cutter is positioned above the first fixed cutter.
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)(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.
Claims 1 & 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 206082746U a cutter and a garbage disposal machine. Chinese patent CN 206082746U, to be referred as the Wu utility model patent, discloses elements of applicant’s device as claimed, thus anticipating the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer, comprising a box, (Wu Example 2, Para [8] - Outer Tub (1)); a crushing mechanism, wherein the crushing mechanism comprises a fixed cutter set (Wu FIG. 4 – 51, 52), a rotating shaft (Wu FIG. 4 - 7) and a moving cutter set (Wu FIG. 4 – a1, a2), the fixed cutter set is fixedly arranged on an inner wall of the box, the rotating shaft is arranged in a middle of a bottom of the box, the moving cutter set is rotatably mounted on the rotating shaft, the moving cutter set comprises a plurality of moving cutters, (Wu Example 2 Para [1] – a cutter comprising… a fixed blade, a movable blade, rotary shaft, and a fixed blade fixed to the inner side wall of the tub, the rotary shaft being located at the center of the bottom of the tub….Each of the movable blades comprises at least two movable blades arranged on the rotating shaft); and the moving cutter set and the fixed cutter set move relative to each other, (Wu Example 2 Para [7] - wherein the movable blade a1 and the movable blade a2 on the rotating shaft in the axial direction are located below the first fixed blade); a heating mechanism, wherein the heating mechanism is arranged in the box, (Wu Example 2 Para [8] – A garbage processor comprising…a heating block (3)) and is configured to heat the kitchen waste; and a deodorizing mechanism (Wu Example 2 Para [8] – a barrel is connected with guide tube, the guide tub is provided with a blower (10), a guide tube is provided with a filter core (11), upper end of the filter core (11) is provided with a vent port, a filter core is provided with a filter material (12)), wherein the deodorizing mechanism is arranged at the bottom of the box, (Wu FIG. 4. – 10, 11, 12 Note applicant’s deodorizing mechanism (4) is not entirely on the bottom (FIG. 14 - 42). Thus, that same interpretation is being used by the examiner.).
Referring to claim 2, applicant claims a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 1, wherein the fixed cutter set (51, 52) comprises a first fixed cutter and a second fixed cutter, (Wu Example 2 Para [5] – the fixed blade is two, which respectively are the first fixed blade (51) and a second fixed blade (52)…in the horizontal direction); the first fixed cutter (51) has a U-shaped groove (See the upper surface of 52 – Wu FIG. 4), the U-shaped groove forms a first grinding groove in an upper end surface of the first fixed cutter, and a first grinding protrusion is formed on a lower end surface, (Wu Example 2 Para [2] – the opposite surfaces of 51 and 52 are provided with tooth or bulge on the fixed blade, also Wu FIG. 4).
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.
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.
Claims 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 206082746U as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of KR 20110001116A.
Wu discloses a cutter and a garbage disposal machine. Korean published patent application KR 20110001116A, to be referred as the Kwang patent application, teaches a food processor for food waste. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have found that Wu and Kwang are analogous art to the claimed invention being that each discloses a device for processing food waste i.e. garbage.
Referring to claim 3, Wu discloses the device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 2, wherein the moving cutter set (a1, a2) comprises a first moving cutter (a1) and a second moving cutter (a2), the first moving cutter and the second moving cutter are symmetrically arranged on the moving cutter set, (Wu Example 2 Para [2] – optimization of movable blade is two groups which are respectively as a group and b group, each group is 2, a group comprises a1 and a2…a1 and a2 along the radial size of the same, and are symmetrically arranged on the side of the rotating shaft ….so as to ensure the center of the cutter at the rotating shaft); the first moving cutter and the second moving cutter are right-handed and inclined (a1 and a2 incline to the right when positioned at the 6 o’clock position of FIG. 2; and thus are right-handed and inclined), and a lower end surface of the first moving cutter and a lower end surface of the second moving cutter are close to a bottom wall of the box (Wu FIG. 4 – a1, a2). Wu does not disclose a side surface of the first moving cutter and a side surface of the second moving cutter are inclined planes. Nor does Wu disclose the lower surface of the first moving cutter and the lower surface of the second moving cutter each are provided with a second grinding groove.
Kwang teaches a side surface of the first moving cutter (124 & 130) and a side surface of the second moving cutter (126) are inclined planes (Kwang - FIG. 2; Para [12-13] - In one embodiment, the stirrer (130) is formed on the upper surface of the first wing (124) and is located between the central axis and the end of the first wing…In the embodiment of the present invention, the stirrer is formed only on the upper surface of one blade of the grinder, but may be formed on both the upper surfaces of both blades.), the lower end surface of the first moving cutter and the lower end surface of the second moving cutter each are provided with a second grinding groove (125, 127), (Kwang Description Of Embodiments Para [7] - a first groove (125) is formed below the first wing (124 & 130), and a second groove (127) is formed below the second wing (126)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the side surfaces of the first and second moving cutters inclined planes and include a grinding groove on a lower end surface of the moving cutters so as to effectively pulverize food waste of various sizes. Food waste is pulverized by sequentially crushing the food waste over a plurality of stages by a crusher comprising a wing having a groove of different sizes on the lower surface (Kwang Advantageous Effects).
Referring to claim 4, Wu in view of Kwang discloses the device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 3, wherein the bottom wall of the box is provided with a second grinding protrusion (140) (Kwang Description of Embodiments Para [22] - The bottom protrusion (140) is formed to protrude from the surface), and the second grinding protrusion fits with the second grinding groove (127), (Kwang Description of Embodiments Para [32] - The bottom protrusion (140) protruding from the bottom surface of the drum corresponds to the first groove (125) and the second groove (127) formed in the first wing portion (124 & 130) and the second wing portion (126).).
Referring to claim 5, Wu in view of Kwang discloses the device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 3, wherein an upper end surface of the first moving cutter and an upper end surface of the second moving cutter each are provided with a third grinding groove (Wu FIG. 4 - upper surfaces of a1 and a2), and the third grinding groove fits with the first grinding protrusion, (Wu Contents of the Utility Model Para [2] - the fixed blade and the movable blade opposite upper and lower surfaces are provided with tooth-shaped strips or bumps, also Wu FIG. 4).
Referring to claim 6, Wu in view of Kwang discloses a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 3, wherein the inner wall of the box is provided with a third grinding protrusion (Kwang FIG. 1 - 146), and the third grinding protrusion is in a clearance fit with an outer side wall of the first moving cutter and an outer side wall of the second moving cutter in a axis direction of the rotating shaft to grind the kitchen waste (Kwang Para [26] - The outer protrusions (146) are formed along the periphery of the bottom surface of the drum and the boundary of the side wall… When the grinder rotates, the food waste located between the first wing portion (124) and the second wing portion (126) and the outer protrusion 146 is pulverized).
Referring to claim 7, Wu in view of Kwang discloses a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 3, wherein the moving cutter set further comprises a third moving cutter (b1) and a fourth moving cutter (b2), the third moving cutter and the fourth moving cutter are symmetrically arranged on the moving cutter set, the third moving cutter and the fourth moving cutter are arranged above the first moving cutter and the second moving cutter, and the third moving cutter and the fourth moving cutter each have a length less than that of the first moving cutter and that of the second moving cutter, (Wu FIG. 3 which shows b1 and b2 being shorter than a1 and a2 (dotted lines); Wu Example 2 Para [3] - optimization of movable blade is two groups which are respectively as a group and b group, each group is 2, a group comprises a1 and a2, group b comprises b1 and b2…b1, and b2 along the radial size of the same, and are symmetrically arranged on the side of the rotating shaft, so as to ensure the center of the cutter at the rotating shaft the movable blade between a group and b group different size along the radial direction, also See Wu FIG. 4).
Referring to claim 8, Wu in view of Kwang discloses the device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 7, wherein an upper end surface of the third moving cutter (b1) is an inclined plane (As indicated in figure below – Wu FIG. 3),
PNG
media_image1.png
120
269
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a lower end surface is provided with a fourth grinding protrusion (Wu FIG. 4 – bottom surface of b2), and the fourth grinding protrusion fits with the first grinding groove (Wu Contents of the Utility Model Para [2] – the fixed blade and the movable blade opposite upper and lower surfaces are provided with tooth-shaped strips or bumps.)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 206082746U as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KR 200141339Y1 .
Wu discloses a cutter and a garbage disposal machine. Korean patent KR200141339Y1, to be referred as the Kim patent application, teaches a device for removing the odor generated during livestock manure treatment. Both inventions involve processing waste, be it kitchen waste of livestock manure. It is a reasonable for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to find that Wu and Kim are analogous art to the claimed invention being that each discloses a device for processing waste.
Regarding claim 9, Wu in view of Kim discloses a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 1, wherein the device includes a heating mechanism. Wu in view of Kim does not disclose the heating mechanism comprising a heating tube welded to the inner wall of the box. Kim teaches a heating mechanism comprising a heating tube (20), and the heating tube is attached to the inner wall of the box, (Kim Description of the Embodiments Para [6] - The gas heating tube (20) forms a support at the bottom of the combustion chamber so that the gas heating tube (20) is attached to the bottom of the combustion chamber so that the gas heating tube (20) is attached to the bottom of the combustion chamber…Therefore, when the gas heating tube (20) is installed at the bottom of the combustion chamber, the heating medium flows up and down the gas heating tube (20).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the heating tube to the inner wall of the box given that a heating tube allows for heated air to travel throughout the tube, wherein the heat supply is smooth, and will heat any surface the tube is in contact with.
Wu in view of Kim discloses attaching the heating tube to the inner wall of the box, but do not expressly disclose welding the heating tube. However, welding is a known method of attachment. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have chosen from a finite number of methods of attaching and welded the heating tube to the inner wall for the predictable result of attaching the heating tube to the inner wall securely to prevent detachment.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 206082746 U as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CN 215594264 U and US 7,845,586 B2.
Wu discloses a cutter and a garbage disposal machine. CN 215594264 U, to be referred to as the Chen patent, teaches a kitchen rubbish processor. US patent 7,845,586 B2, to be referred as the Lee patent application, teaches a food garbage disposer. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found that Wu, Lee, and Chen are analogous art to the claimed invention being that each discloses a device for processing food waste.
Regarding claim 10, Wu discloses a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste into an organic fertilizer according to claim 1, wherein the deodorizing mechanism (Wu FIG. 3 - 10, 11, 12) comprises a suction ventilating fan (10) and a filter layer (11, 12), the suction ventilating fan is connected to the filter layer, (Example 2 - a blower (10) is arranged in the middle of the draft tube, and the end of the draft tube is provides with a filter element (11). The upper end of the filter element (11) is provided with a vent, and the inside of the filter element is provided with a filter material (12)). Wu does not disclose the ventilation fan arranged at the bottom of the box, nor does it disclose the filter layer is an activated carbon adsorption member.
Chen teaches positioning a suction ventilation fan (40) at the bottom of the box (Chen Specific Implementation Examples Para [6] - a fan (40) from the bottom of the machine body). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wu in view of Chen and move the suction ventilating fan to the bottom of the box, as taught by Chen, since one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the elements and the results of the substitution would have been predictable since the fan would still provide suction ventilation.
Lee teaches the filter layer (520) is an activated carbon adsorption member (Col. 7, Lines 56-57] - filter layer (520) containing active carbon). It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wu with Lee to utilize an activated carbon adsorption member given that activated carbon filters excel at eliminating unpleasant smells from the air.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, CN 116441010 A, discloses a device for rapidly processing kitchen waste, wherein the device is comprised of a moving cutter set having multiple moving cutters, wherein a surface of a moving cutter is an inclined plane, and the moving cutter includes a grinding groove.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARLINGTON N IBEKWE whose telephone number is (571) 272-2474. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm.
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.
/D.N.I./
DARLINGTON NDUKA IBEKWE
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725