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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 4-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement:
While independent claim 1 now recites “a drive motor assembly within a drive motor housing” the specification as filed instead says at [0072] “drive motor assembly 240 includes a drive motor housing 242 and a drive motor 244”. In other words, the drive motor assembly is the combination of the motor (244) and the housing (242) rather than the assembly being within the housing. Furthermore, concerning the recitation “the drive motor provided in the drive motor assembly such that the drive motor moves with the drive motor assembly and within the drive motor housing between the first position and the second position”, according to the application as filed, the drive motor and drive motor assembly do not move within the drive motor housing”. Instead, the drive motor assembly, which includes the drive motor and the drive motor housing, move within the combination of the upper housing and middle housing. Quoting [0074]: “drive motor assembly 240 moves down into a cavity 122 in the middle housing 120 (see FIGS. 5B and 6B)”. Claims 4-8 and 10 fall with claim 1 concerning this issue.
Claim 4 contains further new matter in that the power shaft extends from the lower side of gearbox housing (222) itself rather than from a housing portion extending between the drive motor housing and gearbox housing as now claimed. Also, there is not mention of a housing portion extending between the gearbox housing and drive motor housing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham (US 2021/0274974) in view of Little et al. (US 2013/0265847) and Khalid (US 5,836,687). Regarding claim 1, Abraham discloses a method of positioning a power shaft (731) of a micro puree machine (100), the method comprising moving (see Figs. 2A-2E) a drive motor assembly (733) disposed within a drive motor housing (735) of the micro puree machine between a first position (for example Fig. 2B) and a second position (for example Fig. 2D), the drive motor assembly comprising: a drive motor (733) operable to rotate the power shaft relative to the drive motor housing, the drive motor provided in the drive motor assembly such that the drive motor moves with the drive motor assembly and within the drive motor housing between the first position and the second position; wherein the power shaft is configured to move together with the drive motor assembly between the first position and the second position (see Figs. 2A-2E). However, the drive motor assembly is inline with the power shaft. Little teaches a power shaft (18A) and a drive motor assembly (16) wherein the entirety of the drive motor assembly is offset from vertical alignment with the power shaft. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have offset the motor from the drive as taught by Little, to permit intervening elements which provide a different rotation speed than the output of the motor. While in Little a belt and pulley are utilized to deliver power form the motor to the shaft, Little recognizes the equivalence of belt and pulley arrangements to gears (see [0003]). Little teaches housing (21) for the belt and pulleys being apart from the motor. Khalid teaches providing a gear box assembly including a plurality of gears (13C) for delivering power from a drive motor to a power shaft. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have utilized gearing to control speed.
Regarding claim 4, Little further teaches that the power shaft and drive motor assembly are connected to the lower portion of a housing portion (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Khalid further teaches that the power shaft moves together with the plurality of gears and the drive motor assembly between the first position and the second position (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 6, Abraham further discloses a position motor (807 or 8071) coupled to the drive assembly such that the position motor is operable to move the drive assembly between the first position and the second position.
Regarding claim 7, the first housing portion includes an upper support member and a lower support member positioned within an upper housing, the position motor being mounted to the lower support member (see Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 8, Khalid further teaches two pillars (11) that extend between upper and lower supports (see Fig. 2) as well as moving a drive motor assembly (13) vertically along the pillars.
Regarding claim 10, Little further teaches a reversible motor (see [0019]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant has redirected all the claims to new matter as explained above.
Abraham discloses just motor (733) being in motor housing (735).
Little discloses belt and pulley housing (21) being apart from a motor assembly, gears being considered obvious over the belt and pulleys.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DAVID L SORKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1148. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-3:30pm.
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.
DAVID L. SORKIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/DAVID L SORKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights