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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/17/2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “cross-member” in claim 1 (there are many cross members in Figure 9, but it is unclear which one is in the claim; Applicant needs to label and discuss in Applicant’s specification) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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 1-10 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.
Claim 3, the “receptacle” for the one and only one pendulum joint is unclear whether the receptacle refers to an outer shell element 18’ or the shell element of claim 1 (the inner shell element 19) or the cross-member of claim 1.
Claim 4, the receptacle is “a transverse support” which is unclear whether the transverse support refers to an outer shell element 18’ or the shell element of claim 1 (the inner shell element 19) or the cross-member of claim 1. Looking at Figure 3 and reading at Applicant’s specification, the transverse support 16 is formed from three shell elements 18, 18' and 19. Thus, it is unclear since claim 1 inherently recites the “transverse support”.
Claim 5, the “transverse support is formed from at least three shell elements…two outer shell elements and a central shell element” is unclear since claim 1 recites the shell element (inner) and the cross-member. It is unclear whether the two outer shell elements and the central shell element are additional shell elements or refer to the shell element (inner) and the cross-member of claim 1. Claims 6-9 have the same issues of “at least three shell elements”.
How many shell elements are in the transverse support? And what are they?
All claims dependent from claim 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being dependent from the rejected parent claim.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyatsu et al (US 6109154) hereinafter Miyatsu.
Regarding claim 1, Miyatsu shows a device (Figures 1-6) for separating at least one conveyed surface element (1) into individual components (as it is written, it is not required individual separated components, therefore, the cutting portions 15a, Figure 6 meet the limitations), the device comprising:
a framework (a chassis 1a, Figure 1);
a punching tool (13), which has at least one punching beam (131) that is configured to operate against an anvil (142) and is held in place by the framework (as seen in Figures 1-2, 7); and
one and only one pendulum joint (see figure 2, only one pendulum joint or axle 132c) connecting the punching beam and the framework (see Figure 1; all parts connect as a unit),
wherein the pendulum axis of the one and only one pendulum joint or extends transversely to a longitudinal axis of the at least one punching beam (see the leg 132c, Figure 1, is extending transversely to a longitudinal axis of the knife beam 131),
wherein the at least one punching beam is connected to the one and only one pendulum joint via a shell element (a vertical arm 131d) and the one and only one pendulum is supported on the framework (1a, Figure 1) via a cross-member (132).
Regarding claim 2, Miyatsu shows that the punching beam is suspended from the one and only one pendulum joint (Figures 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, Miyatsu shows that the framework (the chassis 1a, Figure 1) has a receptacle (see the inner surface of the chassis 1a having a pivot 1a’) for the one and only one pendulum joint.
Regarding claim 4,as best understood, Miyatsu shows that the receptacle is a transverse support (see the inner surface of the chassis 1a and the link 132, Figure 1), which is arranged transversely to a conveying direction of the surface element above the surface element.
Examiner’s notice
With regards to claims 5-10, there are many issues (see the discussions above) that the specification does not sufficiently identify what structures of the device recite in claim 1 and what structures of the device recite in claims 5-10 that cause confusing the scope of claims 5-10. Therefore, Examiner does not know how the issue will be overcome. Therefore, there is no art rejection for claims 5-10 at this time because it is not clear how the issues will be overcome and these claims cannot be considered to be “allowable” at this time due to the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 2nd paragraph set forth in this Office action. Therefore, upon the claims being rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action, further consideration of these claims with respect to the prior art will be necessary.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. See the new art above.
However, if Applicant still believes that the claimed invention’s apparatus/method different from the prior art’s apparatus/method or needs to discuss the rejections above or suggestion amendments as “an inner shell element is supported between two outer shell elements by the one and only one pendulum joint” that can be overcome the current rejections, Applicant should feel free to call the Examiner to schedule an interview.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NHAT CHIEU Q DO whose telephone number is (571)270-1522. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/NHAT CHIEU Q DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 10/13/2026
