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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in People’s Republic of Chine on 1/28/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202310493642.9 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 communication of the first feeding unit and second feeding unit with the processing pipeline through a pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 3; the communication of the third feeding unit and fourth feeding unit with the processing pipeline through the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 4; the other side of the solid material pipeline connected with the first feeding port through the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 6; the second batching tank connected to the second feeding port through the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 7; the second metering pump is arranged on the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 7; the third batching tank connected to the third feeding port through the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 8; the third metering pump is arranged on the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 8; the fourth batching tank connected to the fourth feeding port through the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 9; the fourth metering pump is arranged on the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 9; thread pitch d1 as set forth in claim 15; thread pitch d2 as set forth in claim 15; the fifth batching tank connected to the fifth feeding port through the pipeline 400 as set forth in claim 16; must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The figures fail to show pipeline 400 in communication with any of the feeding units or connected to any of the batching tanks or feeding ports as recited in the claims. 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a mixing and shearing device” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 5-16 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 claim 5, it is unclear how there is a first, second, third and fourth feeding port at different locations of the processing pipeline, connecting respectively to each first, second, third and fourth feeding unit, when claims 3 and 4, upon which claim 4 depends, describes a single pipeline 400 that connects the first, second, third and fourth feeding units to the processing pipeline. If there is only one pipeline 400 recited that connects the feeding units to the processing pipeline, then it is unclear how the single pipeline can deliver multiple feeding units to multiple locations along the processing pipeline. As such the claim is indefinite for failing to distinctly claim the invention. Claims 6-16 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) by virtue of their dependency on claim 5.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Duffy (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2009/0198036).
Regarding claim 1, Duffy discloses a preparation system (abstract; figure 1), comprising
a mixing and shearing device (figure 1, section II, mixer 41; [0027]; [0059]; [0061]),
a controller ([0018]),
and a plurality of feeding stations (figure 1, section I; [0021]), wherein the plurality of feeding stations are configured to store materials with different material properties (figure 1, vessel 1, preblender 10 and 18, vessel 30), and all of the plurality of feeding stations are connected with the mixing and shearing device and transport the materials with different material properties to the mixing and shearing device (figure 1, see arrows into mixer 41),
the controller is electrically connected with the plurality of feeding stations and controls material transportation speeds of the plurality of feeding stations (figure 1, variable speed metering pump 8, 28, 31; [0018]), the controller is electrically connected with the mixing and shearing device and controls the operation of the mixing and shearing device (motor power draw monitor 49; [0018]; [0031]-[0032]),
and the mixing and shearing device is configured to simultaneously mix and shear the materials with different material properties to obtain the solution (mixer 41; [0027]; [0059]; [0061]).
Regarding the limitations directed to the intended use of the system, including the intended use of the mixing and shearing device (“configured to…”), the controller (“controls…”), and the plurality of feeding stations (“configured to…”), and the material or article worked upon (hydrosol solution), it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Duffy discloses all the structural limitations of the claims as explained above that are capable to perform as recited (figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Duffy discloses wherein the mixing and shearing device comprises a processing pipeline ([0027] twin-screw extruder 41 barrel), a first screw ([0027] twin screw extruder 41 screw), and a drive motor (figure 1, twin screw extruder 41, with motor not labeled on the left at numeral 49; [0027]; [0032]-[0033] motor), the feeding stations are in communication with the processing pipeline to transport materials with different material properties into the processing pipeline (figure 1, arrows from vessels/preblenders 1, 10, 21, 30 to barrel of twin screw extruder 41; [0021]-[0024]), the first screw is arranged inside the processing pipeline (figure 1, twin screw extruder 41; [0027]), the drive motor is electrically connected with the controller to drive the first screw to simultaneously mix and shear all the materials in the processing pipeline to obtain the solution (figure 1, motor power draw monitor 49; [0018]; [0031]-[0032]), and the first screw discharges the obtained solution from a discharge port of the processing pipeline (figure 1, right end of screw 41, not labeled; [0029] discharge of the mixer).
Regarding claim 3, Duffy discloses wherein the plurality of feeding stations comprises a first feeding unit for storing solid phase materials (figure 1, preblender 37; [0026]) and a second feeding unit for storing aqueous phase materials (figure 1, vessel 1; [0021]), and both the first feeding unit and the second feeding unit are in communication with the processing pipeline through a pipeline (figure 1, lines with arrow connecting vessel 1 to mixer 41; lines with arrow, feeders 39 and 40 connecting preblender 37 to mixer 41; [0021]; [0026]). Regarding the limitations directed to the material or article stored, it is noted that the material or article worked upon does not further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” The first and second feeding units are capable of storing the materials recited (figure 1, vessel 1 and preblender 37; [0021]; [0026])..
Regarding claim 4, Duffy discloses wherein the plurality of feeding stations further comprise a third feeding unit for storing aqueous phase functional materials (preblender 30; [0024]) and a fourth feeding unit for storing liquid phase functional materials (figure 1, holding tank 27), and both the third feeding unit and the fourth feeding unit are in communication with the processing pipeline through the pipeline (figure 1, lines with arrow connecting 30 with 41 and lines with arrow connecting 27 to 41; [0023]; [0024). Regarding the limitations directed to the material or article stored, it is noted that the material or article worked upon does not further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” The third and fourth feeding units are capable of storing the materials recited (figure 1, holding tank 21 and preblender 30; [0023]; [0024]).
Regarding claim 5, Duffy discloses wherein a first feeding port (figure 1, see where feeder 40 connects to mixer 41; [0026]) and a second feeding port (figure 1, see where arrow from vessel 1 connects to mixer; [0021]) are provided in one end of the processing pipeline close to the drive motor (figure 1, arow from vessel one at end of mixer 41 closes to motor at 49; [0028] (solid ingredients may be added at any point along the mixer length)), a third feeding port (figure 1, arrow from preblender 30; [0024])) and a fourth feeding port (figure 1, arrow from holding tank 27; [0023])) are provided in one end of the processing pipeline close to the discharge port (figure 1, arrow from 27 and 30 at right end near discharge), the first feeding unit is connected to the first feeding port (figure 1, #37, 38, 39, 40 and lines/arrow between; [0026]), the second feeding unit is connected to the second feeding port (figure 1, vessel 1 with lines and arrow connected; [0021]), the third feeding unit is connected to the third feeding port (figure 1, vessel 30 with lines and arrow connected; [0024]), and the fourth feeding unit is connected to the fourth feeding port (figure 1, tank 27 with lines and arrow connected; [0023]).
Regarding claim 6, Duffy discloses herein the first feeding unit comprises a hopper for storing the solid phase materials (figure 1, #39), a second propulsion screw (figure 1, crammer feeder 40 known to have a screw), a solid material pipeline (figure 1, #39 and 40 with lines and arrows have pipeline), and a servo motor (figure 1, crammer feeder 40 known to have a motor), one side of the solid material pipeline is connected with the hopper (figure 1, #39), the other side is connected with the first feeding port through the pipeline (figure 1, #40 and lines and arrow connection to 41; [0026]), the second propulsion screw is arranged in the solid material pipeline (figure 1, #40), and the servo motor is electrically connected with the controller to drive the second propulsion screw to push the solid materials and send them to the processing pipeline ([0018]; [0026])).
Regarding claim 7, Duffy discloses wherein the second feeding unit comprises at least one second batching tank for holding the aqueous phase materials (vessel 1) and a second metering pump (figure 1, pump 8), the second batching tank is connected to the second feeding port through the pipeline (figure 1, line and arrow between vessel 1 and mixer 41; [0021]), and the second metering pump is arranged on the pipeline to control a flow rate of the aqueous phase materials entering the processing pipeline (figure 1, variable speed metering pump; [0021]).
Regarding claim 8, Duffy discloses wherein the third feeding unit comprises at least one third batching tank for holding the aqueous phase functional materials (figure 1, liquid vessel 30) and a third metering pump (figure 1, metering pump 31), the third batching tank is connected to the third feeding port through the pipeline (figure 1, lines and arrow between vessel 30 and mixer 41; [0024]), and the third metering pump is arranged on the pipeline to control a flow rate of the aqueous phase functional materials entering the processing pipeline (figure 1, metering pump 31 on line between 30 and 41; [0024]).
Regarding claim 9, Duffy discloses wherein the fourth feeding unit comprises at least one fourth batching tank capable for holding the oil phase functional materials (figure 1, holding tank 47) and a fourth metering pump (figure 1, metering pump 28), the fourth batching tank is connected to the fourth feeding port through the pipeline (figure 1, lines and arrow between tank 47 and mixer 41; [0023]), and the fourth metering pump is arranged on the pipeline to control a flow rate of the oil phase functional materials entering the processing pipeline (figure 1, metering pump 28 on line between 27 and 41; [0023]).
Regarding claim 10, Duffy discloses wherein the first screw comprises a plurality of sets of propulsion sections ([0027] “conveying elements”) and shearing sections ([0027] “combinations of dispersive and distributive mixing elements”), and the propulsion sections and the shearing sections are arranged at intervals from each other ([0027]; [0059]; [0061]).
Regarding claim 11, Duffy discloses wherein the first feeding port (111), the second feeding port (112), the third feeding port (113), and the fourth feeding port (114) all correspond to positions of the propulsion sections (121) in the processing pipeline ([0027] (the screw configuration is made up of conveying elements in the feed sections); [0028]; [0061]).
Regarding claim 12, Duffy discloses wherein the first feeding port and the second feeding port correspond to the same propulsion section in the processing pipeline ([0028] (solids ingredients (first feeding port) may be added at any point along the mixer length (ie same propulsion section as second feeding port)), and the third feeding port and the fourth feeding port correspond to the same propulsion section in the processing pipeline (see table 2, additive feed location and catalyst preblend 2 feed location overlap at 25-30 D length).
Regarding claim 13, Duffy discloses wherein a portion of the first screw located between the second feeding port and the third feeding port is provided with at least one set of shearing sections (figure 1, see divided sections of mixer 41 between arrow from 1 and arrow from 30; [0027]; [0028]; [0059]; [0061]).
Regarding claim 14, Duffy discloses wherein a portion of the first screw located between the third feeding port and the discharge port is provided with at least one set of shearing sections (figure 1, see divided section after arrow from #30; [0059]; [0061]).
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.
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) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duffy in view of Handa et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,158,725).
Regarding claim 15, Duffy discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Duffy further discloses wherein the propulsion section is composed of a plurality of sets of propulsion thread modules ([0027]; [0059]; [0061]), the shearing section is composed of a plurality of sets of shearing thread modules ([0027]; [0028]; [0059]; [0061]); however does not explicitly disclose the exact pitch dimensions. Handa et al. teaches the pitch of the screw threads may be selected based on the control of the pressure, flow restriction of material based on a preference of a feeding area versus a back mixing area and selecting the screw profile, including pitch, based on the yield of the desired level of dispersion without seriously degrading the material and further teaches using a shorter pitch for restricted, higher shear mixing elements than for feeder elements (Handa et al. columns 3-4, lines 62-48). Therefore the feeding and shearing efficiency is a variable that can be modified, among others, by varying the thread pitch for those sections. For that reason, thread pitch of the propulsion thread module of the propulsion section and the thread pitch of the shearing thread module of the shearing section, would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing. As such, without showing unexpected results, the pitch dimensions cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the pitch of the propulsion threads and the pitch of the shearing threads in the screw mixer of Duffy to obtain the desired feeding and shearing of materials (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duffy in view of Meyer et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,215,878).
Regarding claim 16, Duffy discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Duffy further discloses wherein the plurality of feeding sections further comprise a fifth feeding unit for storing other ingredients (figure 1, preblender 10 and its connecting parts), the fifth feeding unit comprises at least one fifth batching tank for holding other ingredients (figure 1, preblender 10) and a fifth metering pump (figure 1, pump 16), the fifth batching tank is connected to a fifth feeding port (figure 1, lines and arrow from preblender 10 to mixer 41; [0022]), and the fifth metering pump is arranged on the pipeline to control a flow rate of the other ingredients entering the processing pipeline (figure 1, metering pump 16 connects lines from preblender 10 to mixer 41; [0022]). However, does not explicitly disclose the fifth feeding port and the third feeding port correspond to the same propulsion section in the processing pipeline.
Meyer et al. teaches another multiple material supply unit to a mixing screw (abstract; figure 1). Meyer et al. teaches the fifth feeding port and the third feeding port correspond to the same propulsion section in the processing pipeline (figure 1, L1, L2, L4; column 8, lines 17-29).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to place said fifth feeding port at the same propulsion section as the third feeding port for the late addition of the multiple materials for minimal mixing and less stress on the materials while still permitting different metering states of the individual materials to the mixer (Meyer column 2, lines 26-60), since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art while the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 and since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art, In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Deal et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,626,420) discloses the system comprising a mixing and shearing device (figure 1, #2 and 11), controller (column 10, lines 35-48) and plurality of feeding stations (figure 1, #5, 57, 61, 62; figure 2 and 3, #71, 72; figure 3, #710, 720, 730, 740, 750).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights