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/Amendments
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed 12/8/2025. Claims 1-7, 9-12, and 14-20 are pending. Claims 1-7, 9, 12, 14-16, and 18-20 have been amended.
The interpretation of “a clamping unit,” “a heating unit,” and “a cleaning unit” under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendments.
The rejection of claims 11-12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s arguments.
The rejection of claims 1, and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (KR 2001-0103124) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendments. Accordingly, the rejections of claims 2, 3, 9-12, 14-19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combinations of Kim, Jackson (US 2006/0278254), Lee et al. (KR 10-2022-0097730), Shin (KR 10-2019-0070507), and Lim et al. (US 2018/0114707) are also withdrawn
In response to Applicant’s amendments, and upon further consideration, new ground(s) of rejection are applied below.
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 1-7, 9-12, and 14-20 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 1 recites the limitation "the locked position,” and “the unlocked position" in lines 15 and 16, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the other side" in lines 8/9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-4, 7, 10, 12, 14, 18, 19, and 20 recite the limitation "the vessel." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims because there is a “vessel,” “a first vessel,” and “a second vessel.”
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the locked position." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because claim 5, from which claim 7 indirectly depends, there is an instance of “a locked position” that is not necessarily the same locked position as recited in claim 1.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the locked position” and “the unlocked position." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the other side" in lines 14/15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the locked position” and “the unlocked position." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the other side" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7, 9-12, 14-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose, or render obvious, the apparatus as defined by any of claims 1, 16, or 20. There is no apparent teaching, suggestion, or motivation to modify the closest prior art, Kim (KR 2021-0103124), to further have the claimed arrangements of the clamper, intake unit/member, and covers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID G CORMIER whose telephone number is (571)270-7386. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 - 6:00.
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 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.
DAVID G. CORMIER
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/DAVID G CORMIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights