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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the frame of Meckstroth is not configured to be movable relative to the container, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. However, the frame is separate structure from the container, and said container may be replaced or connecting in a looser manner for further movement between frame and container (Para. 143, releasably attached). Further Meckstroth describes in paragraph 145, that the vibrational movement starting from a center point (i.e. the frame) moving out therefrom, thus the frame would be subjected to a separate vibrational movement relative to the outer container. As further recited in Meckstroth that vertical displacement between the frame and the outer container can be slight by relative movement does exist due to the vibrational waveform moving from the center, as stated in paragraph 132. Further recitation as to the structures that provide for said relative movement to adequately define from the prior art of record.
Applicant argues that the non-contact force of Meckstroth is a contact force. However, only the force generated is non-contact, the claim is silent as to what features are not being contacted but are indeed feeling the claimed force. Here, Meckstroth in paragraph. 129-132, creates a force without contact as it is a non-contact electromagnetic force. This non-contact force is then subjected onto the frame for relative movement. The non-contact describes the type of force created, further by the Applicant’s own claim language this non-contact force eventually contacts the frame as the frame is “subjectable” to said force. If applicant wishes to recite further language to elucidate what is meant by “subjectable” the Office will continue to employ broadest reasonable interpretation during examination.
Applicant argues that Meckstroth does not describe a container in the specification. However, drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed. In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972). MPEP 2125. In this case, a container only requires a structure to contain. Here, Meckstroth clearly depicts container (21) configured to receive the product with an outlet below for discharge. Further delineation of the Applicant’s container is needed to adequately define over the prior art of record.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, and 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meckstroth et al. (US 2011/0204094 A1).
Re: Claim 1, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including a system for moving a product (23p), comprising:
a container (21) configured to receive the product, the container comprising a product outlet (20ch) arranged in a lower part of the container (Fig. 1);
an actuator system (25) configured to generate a non-contact force (Fig. 1, Para. 129-132, creates a non-contact electromagnetic force);
a frame (22) (Fig. 5C), wherein the frame is:
arranged within the container and configured to be in contact with the product when the product is arranged in the container (Depicted in Fig. 1),
configured to be moveable relative to the container (Fig. 1, para. 132, relative vertical displacement due to the vibrational waveform),
configured to be subjectable to the non-contact force generated by the actuator system (Para. 130, 132, the frame is subjected to the non-contact force);
a control unit (28) configured to control the actuator system, wherein the control unit is configured to generate changes in the non-contact force for moving the frame relative to the container (Fig. 1, Para. 129, control unit for the actuator system).
Re: Claim 2, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including the control unit is configured to control the actuator system to generate simultaneously: a first non-contact sub-force changing at a first frequency, and a second non-contact sub-force changing at a second frequency (Para. 130 & 132, teaches a non-harmonic displacement profile wherein, the first non-contact sub force is not balanced by a second non-contract sub-force, such that the frequencies are modified to fit the profile).
Re: Claim 3, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including the first frequency and the second frequency generate a beat pattern as interference pattern (Para. 130 & 132, teaches a non-harmonic displacement profile wherein, the first non-contact sub force is not balanced by a second non-contract sub-force creating an interference pattern, such that the frequencies are modified to fit the profile).
Re: Claim 5, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including the actuator system comprises at least a first non-contact actuator and a second non-contact actuator, wherein the control unit is configured to control the first non-contact actuator to generate the first non-contact sub-force, and control the second non-contact actuator to generate the second non-contact sub-force (Para. 130 & 132, teaches a non-harmonic displacement profile wherein, the first non-contact sub force is not balanced by a second non-contract sub-force creating an interference pattern, such that the frequencies are modified to fit the profile).
Re: Claim 6, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including an equilibrium system (29) configured to position the frame in an equilibrium position, wherein the equilibrium system is configured to provide a biasing force that causes the frame to levitate contactless within the container in said equilibrium position (Fig. 1, Para. 139, spring loaded tabs for keeping the frame in position).
Re: Claim 7, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including an equilibrium system configured to position the frame in an equilibrium position, wherein the equilibrium system comprises at least one resilient member configured to exert a biasing force onto the frame (Fig. 1, Para. 139, resilient spring-loaded tabs for keeping the frame in position).
Re: Claim 9, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention the actuator system is arranged outside of the container (Depicted in Fig. 1).
Re: Claim 10, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention the frame comprises at least a removable position and an operational position, wherein the frame is configured to be moved from the removable position to the operational position by rotating the frame around a longitudinal axis (Para. 139, frame includes a threaded portion that is rotated into the operational position).
Re: Claim 11, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention the container is a hopper (Fig. 1).
Re: Claim 12, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention the non-contact force is an electromagnetic force, magnetic force, or electric force (Para. 129, electromagnetic force).
Re: Claim 13, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including the product comprises a solid material, e.g. powder, granules, or pellets (Para. 100, 110, powder).
Re: Claim 14, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including a method for moving a product, comprising a step an operation of using a system according to claim 1 as evidenced by the rejection of claim 1 above.
Re: Claim 15, the device of Meckstroth is capable of performing the claimed method recited in this claim as evidenced by the rejection of claim 1 above teaching all the structures necessary to carry out the method steps.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meckstroth et al. (US 2011/0204094 A1).
Re: Claim 4, Meckstroth discloses the claimed invention including the second frequency (Para. 132, frequency or frequencies of the flow signal 28 s can be between about 100 Hz to about 5000 Hz, but other frequencies may be used) except for stating an ultrasonic frequency. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include an ultrasonic frequency, since Meckstroth states that other frequencies may be used based on the material acted upon in para 132, and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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 P. CHEYNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754