FINAL OFFICE ACTION
This application has been assigned or remains assigned to Technology Center 1700, Art Unit 1774 and the following will apply for this application:
Please direct all written correspondence with the correct application serial number for this application to Art Unit 1774.
Telephone inquiries regarding this application should be directed to the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/index.html or 1-866-217-9197 or to the Examiner at (571) 272-1139. All official facsimiles should be transmitted to the centralized fax receiving number (571)-273-8300.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d). All of the CERTIFIED copies of the priority documents have been received in this national stage application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
Information Disclosure Statement
Note the attached PTO-1449 forms submitted with the Information Disclosure Statements.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The amended Abstract of the Disclosure is approved.
The title is acceptable.
Election/Restriction
Newly submitted claim 10 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: New claim 10 is a pulping method whereas the invention originally claimed and given an action on the merits is a dispersing device.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 10 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other 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 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 terms used in this respect are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in their ordinary usage in context as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, in light of the written description in the specification, including the drawings, without reading into the claim any disclosed limitation or particular embodiment. See, e.g., In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004); In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2000); In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
The Examiner interprets claims as broadly as reasonable in view of the specification, but does not read limitations from the specification into a claim. Elekta Instr. S.A.v.O.U.R. Sci. Int'l, Inc., 214 F.3d 1302, 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2000). "A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference." Verdegaal Bros. Inc. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983). See MPEP 2112.
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 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KEEN (US 2673723) that discloses in figures 1, 2 and at column 5, line 66 - column 6, line 60: a dispersing device comprising a first shear device (32, 28) and at least two second shear devices (31+14, 29+14), wherein one of the first shear device and the second shear devices is a shear stator and another one of the first shear device and the second shear devices is a shear rotor, and the first shear device (32, 28) is rotatable relative to the second shear devices (31+14,29+14); wherein the first shear device (32, 28) comprises a shear inner ring (28), a shear outer ring (28) and an annular isolation board (32); the shear inner ring is provided with a plurality of first radial through holes 33 provided at intervals from each other; the shear outer ring is provided to surround outside the shear inner ring, and is provided coaxially with the shear inner ring and connected in linkage with each other; the shear outer ring is provided with a plurality of third radial through holes 33 provided at intervals from each other; the annular isolation board (proximate 32) is located between the shear inner ring and the shear outer ring, an inner side of the annular isolation board is connected with the shear inner ring, and an outer side of the annular isolation board is connected with the shear outer ring, so that both opposite ends of the annular isolation board form shear receiving grooves (cf. figure 2), respectively; and wherein each of the at least two second shear devices ((31+14, 29+14) has a shear embedded ring (29, 31), the shear embedded rings of each of the second shear devices are respectively embedded in one of the shear receiving grooves (cf. figure 2), and the shear embedded rings are provided with a plurality of second radial through holes provided at intervals from each other (cf. figure 2); and seal ring at 32. The additional features of claims 2-9, in combination with the features of independent claim 1, are disclosed (Figures 1, 2; column 5, line 66 - column 6, line 60); and shear chamber 27 defining multiple chambers there.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
552
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Annular isolation board between the two arrow heads and connected with the radially outermost shear ring (proximate 27) and the innermost shear ring at 33 extending upwardly and downwardly from the isolation board)][AltContent: textbox (Annular seal ring between the two arrow heads; inner hole of this seal ring locked to hollow drive shaft 34 per col. 6, lines 24-33)]
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by HASSELQUIST (US 2685436) that discloses a dispersing device including the recited shear devices having coaxial and intermeshing stator rings 49 and a rotor including rotor rings 47 mounted on a rotor plate 43 (Figures 2 and 4); the rotor rings 47 being rotatable relative to the stator rings 49; an annular isolation board 43; radial through holes 51 provided at intervals from each other in the stator rings and the rotor rings; both opposite ends of the annular isolation board form shear receiving grooves; wherein the first shear device/rotor is an integrally formed structure (Figure 2); the stator rings 49 and the rotor rings 47 are provided at intervals to form gaps; wherein the through holes 51 and the gaps are communicated in sequence; wherein an inner side of an inner ring 47 is connected with a seal ring 56, and an inner hole of the seal ring is configured to sealingly and interlockingly connect a rotation shaft 42; annular carrier plates 31, 34 fixedly connected with the stator rings 49; the annular carrier plate 31 is configured to connect a machine (Figure 1); wherein the plurality of the first radial through holes 51 are evenly distributed on a side wall of the rings (Figure 3); the radial through holes 51 are of circular hole structure (Figure 3); a frame (Figure 1), a rotation shaft 42; the frame has a shear chamber 31-34 defining multiple chambers there (Figures 1-2).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
725
945
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Annular seal ring (56 and the portion of 43 joined to the isolation board) or located between the two arrow heads; inner hole of this seal ring locked to drive shaft 42 to rotate the shear rotor 43)][AltContent: textbox (Annular isolation board between the two arrow heads and connected with the radially outermost shear ring (proximate 32) and the innermost shear ring (proximate 78))]
Allowable Subject Matter
No claims stand allowed. Claim 10 is withdrawn from consideration.
Specification
The substitute specification filed 21 MAY 2026 has not been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) because it lacks the required “no new matter” statement:
(b) Subject to § 1.312, a substitute specification, excluding the claims, may be filed at any point up to payment of the issue fee if it is accompanied by a statement that the substitute specification includes no new matter.
The response filed 21 MAY 2026 mentions “no new matter” in conjunction with the “Claim Status” but not the substitute specification.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 21 MAY 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As seen in the annotated Figure above, KEEN shows an inner side of the shear inner ring being connected with the denoted seal ring, and an inner hole of the seal ring is configured to sealingly and interlockingly connect a rotation drive shaft 34. Comparing instant Figure 1 with annotated KEEN above, the examiner sees no structural difference as the instant seal ring 15 leads into the annular isolation board 13 (note the common and uninterrupted cross hatching between 15 and 13 in instant Figure 1) and the inner shear ring 11 extends axially upwardly and downwardly from the annular isolation board 13, as in annotated KEEN above. Applicant argues that the seal ring 15 “is an independent component, which can be easily replaced after damage”, yet the examiner finds no support in the written description or drawings for this subject matter, especially in view of the cross-hatching design seen in Figure 1. Such arguments are of no patentable consequence because it is well settled that features not claimed may not be relied upon in support of patentability. In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 213 USPQ 1 (CCPA 1982). Although a claim should be interpreted in light of the specification disclosure, it is generally considered improper to read limitations contained in the specification into the claims. See In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 162 USPQ 541 (CCPA 1969) and In re Winkhaus, 527 F.2d 637, 188 USPQ 129 (CCPA 1975), which discuss the premise that one cannot rely on the specification to impart limitations to the claim that are not recited in the claim.
Applicant may be his or her own lexicographer as long as the meaning assigned to the term is not repugnant to the term’s well-known usage. In re Hill, 161 F.2d 367, 73 USPQ 482 (CCPA 1947). Any special meaning assigned to a term “must be sufficiently clear in the specification that any departure from common usage would be so understood by a person of experience in the field of the invention.” Multiform Desiccants Inc. v. Medzam Ltd., 133 F.3d 1473, 1477, 45 USPQ2d 1429, 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1998). The examiner notes, for the record, that the claim term “seal ring [15]” is indeed a peculiar manner of describing the ring that joins the annular isolation board 13 to the drive shaft 6 since this so-called seal ring is merely a radially inward extension of the isolation board to permit the drive shaft to drive the seal ring and isolation board and shear rings into rotation (such as assembly commonly and typically referred to as the rotor in such a rotor/stator arrangement as evidenced by the B01F CPC classification schedule, in part, reproduced below), yet Applicant breaks this rotor assembly into three discrete parts (which can be derived from the prior art rotor/stator devices) for some reason. Nevertheless, these elements can be derived from the prior art as above.
CPC: B01F27/27+
PNG
media_image3.png
724
652
media_image3.png
Greyscale
This “seal ring” provides no sealing function as commonly understood by the term “seal ring”, such as sealing the interface between a drive shaft and stationary housing. Ironically, Figure 1 fails to show the drive shaft 6 connection to the seal ring 15 at all since the drive shaft is lacking from Figure 1 and only seen in Figure 4 abutting the non-cross-hatched drive shaft 6 with no apparent seal or joint connection therebetween depicted whatsoever (such as a key, spline, weld, or the like) that would allow for rotational torque movement of the drive shaft 6 to be positively transmitted to the seal ring 15 and thus to the isolation board 13.
Likewise, with regard to HASSELQUIST, this patent shows the seal ring as identified above joining the annular isolation board to the drive shaft and permits disassembly for replacement or overhaul per col. 3, lines 6-15.
GB 2016939 can be annotated as above to depict the recited subject matter, however, this rejection is withdrawn at this time in favor of KEEN and HASSELQUIST which better show the claimed subject matter.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
Per Rule 1.116(b)(3): “An amendment touching the merits of the application or patent under reexamination may be admitted upon a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the amendment is necessary and was not earlier presented.” Thus, an amendment after final lacking such showing will be denied entry.
A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE TO THIS FINAL ACTION IS SET TO EXPIRE THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ACTION. IN THE EVENT A FIRST RESPONSE 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 EXTENSION FEE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) WILL BE CALCULATED FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THE ADVISORY ACTION. IN NO EVENT WILL THE STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE EXPIRE LATER THAN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS FINAL ACTION. ANY RESPONSE FILED AFTER THE MAILING DATE OF THIS FINAL REJECTION WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MPEP 714.12 AND 714.13.
NOTE: The examiner of record follows the interview after-final policy set forth in MPEP 713.09:
Normally, one interview after final rejection is permitted. However, prior to the interview, the intended purpose and content of the interview [agenda] should be presented briefly, preferably in writing. Such an interview may be granted if the examiner is convinced that disposal or clarification for appeal may be accomplished with only nominal further consideration. Interviews merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations which would require more than nominal reconsideration or new search should be denied. (emphasis added)
The agenda will be made of record per PTO policy.
New USPTO policy limits time for interviews to one per new application or RCE (utility), when during prosecution, the examiner conducts an interview. More than one interview and additional time will only be granted if it is ensured “that the interviews are being used to advance prosecution”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES COOLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1139. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:00 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. New USPTO policy limits time for interviews to one per new application or RCE (utility), when during prosecution, the examiner conducts an interview. More than one interview and additional time will only be granted if it is ensured “that the interviews are being used to advance prosecution”.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CLAIRE X. WANG can be reached at 571-272-1700. 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.
/CHARLES COOLEY/
Examiner, Art Unit 1774
DATED: 17 JULY 2026
Prosecution Insights