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 § 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 1-19 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 independent claims 1 and 12, there appear to be missing subject matter that is essential to the invention. As described in Fig. 1 and associated text, the original disclosure provides measuring device 25 which is essential for detecting the internal pressure and motor torque, both detected parameters being used to control and change the torque characteristic curve. Without such feature, it is unclear how to make and use the invention.
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, 12, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CH 650168 to Oberg et al. (“Oberg”; machine translation provided by Examiner).
Regarding claim 1, Oberg discloses a method for operating a device for the dewatering and volume reduction of material to be pressed, the method including the following steps:
- introducing the material to be pressed into a pressing arrangement that includes a screw shaft (see Description on p. 1 and p. 3, first para. of translation describing dewatering sludge, which manifestly includes introducing the sludge to be pressed and dewatered),
- driving a screw shaft (11) of the pressing arrangement at a rotational speed by means of a drive motor (17),
- expelling an existing liquid out of the material to be pressed by means of the screw shaft (note the screw centrifuge of Oberg is designed to dewater sludge, see Description and p. 3, first para.),
- detecting a torque applied by the drive motor (note pulse generator 22 and transducer 28 are provided to detect and transfer screw drive torque to computer 20),
- detecting an internal pressure prevailing within the pressing arrangement (note pressure measuring device 28 which directly correlates pressure of the pressing arrangement), and
- controlling the rotational speed of the screw shaft on the basis of the torque along a torque characteristic curve, wherein the torque characteristic curve is changed on the basis of the internal pressure (see translation at para. bridging pp. 3-4; see also last two para. of p. 4)
Regarding claim 12, Oberg further discloses a device for the dewatering and volume reduction of material to be pressed, comprising:
a pressing arrangement (see apparatus of Fig. 1) configured to perform a compacting operation that compacts the material to be pressed during operation of the device,
a screw shaft (see shaft part of auger 11) rotatably supported within the pressing arrangement;
wherein during the compacting operation, an internal pressure is generated within the pressing arrangement by means of rotation of the screw shaft and, in this way, liquid present in the material to be pressed is expelled out of the material to be pressed (intended use of the apparatus; note pressing operation to dewater sludge at p. 3, first para.),
a drive motor (17) configured and disposed to transmit a torque onto the screw shaft, and
a control unit (20), which has a torque controller configured for controlling the rotational speed of the screw shaft on the basis of the torque along a torque characteristic curve (see para. bridging pp. 3-4);
wherein the control unit is designed to change the torque characteristic curve on the basis of the internal pressure (see para. bridging pp. 3-4).
Regarding claims 14-15, Oberg further discloses at least one measuring device (see sensors 21 and 22 and operations thereof) configured for measuring the rotational speed, the torque and/or the internal pressure and wherein the control unit includes a pressure controller configured and disposed for controlling the rotational speed of the screw shaft on the basis of the internal pressure along a pressure characteristic curve, wherein the control unit is designed to change the pressure characteristic curve on the basis of the torque (see computer operations based on torque, pressure, and other variables at pp. 3-4).
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.
Claim(s) 2-11, 13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oberg.
Regarding claims 2-11, 13, Oberg discloses monitoring multiple variables (such as pressure and torque) along a torque characteristic curve to control the rotational speed of the screw shaft but does not expressly disclose the details of the torque characteristic curve, rotational speeds, or pressures as recited in claims 2-10. Absent a showing of unexpected/unpredictable results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to optimize the torque and pressure as desired in order to achieve the desired dewatering effect of the screw centrifuge, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.05(II) regarding Obviousness and Routine Optimization.
Regarding claim 16, Oberg discloses various characteristic curves including pressure and torque (p. 3, first para.), and changing torque based on various characteristic curves including pressure determined from device 28 (see para. bridging pp. 3-4).
Regarding claims 17-18, see Routine Optimization above.
Regarding claim 19, Oberg discloses wherein the rotational speed is increased when the internal pressure is increasing (see speed and pressure being proportion in 2nd to last para. on p. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH L PERRIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1305. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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, Michael E. Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
Joseph L. Perrin, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/Joseph L. Perrin/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights