DETAILED ACTION
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected dunder 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanify (U.S. Patent 5,227,136) in view of Heath (US Patent 6,371,137).
Regarding claim 1, Hanify teaches A mixing device (figures 6 and 9 are considered showing the mixing device) comprising: a source of pressurized gas (column 9 lines 60-66 teaches a source of pressurized gas); a mixing chamber (tank item 14); and at least one gas blade nozzle disposed within the mixing chamber (diffuser item 111 is considered comprising blades that are considered having nozzles since column 4 lines 32-38 teaches diffusers are rotated distributing fine bubbles which inherently requires nozzle openings) and connected to the source of pressurized gas (items 110 hoses attached to items 111, see column 8 lines 13-17 which teaches items 110 are connected to a source of pressurized air and column 8 lines 5-7 which teaches air being introduced into items 111). Regarding claim 1, Hanify is silent to the elongated opening for emitting a linear air stream configuration. Regarding claim 1, Heath teaches supplying pressurized fluid (column 4 line 16-23) that feeds fluid to an elongated opening for emitting a linear fluid stream (column 5 lines 4-12 teaches a linear flow passageway which is considered reading on an elongated opening, the opening is considered capable of delivering air, the material being worked upon is considered intended use). Regarding claim 1 it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the openings of Hanify with the linear air stream shape of Heath in order to obtain the desired degree of agitation.
Regarding claim 2, Hanify teaches further comprising a directional adjustment mechanism movably supporting the at least one gas blade nozzle (figure 6 item 22 which rotates items 111 via radial arm 90 which is considered reading on movably supporting item 111).
Regarding claim 3, Hanify teaches further comprising a directional adjustment mechanism rotatably supporting the at least one gas blade nozzle (figure 6 item 22 which rotates items 111 via radial arm 90 which is considered reading on rotatably supporting item 111).
Regarding claim 4, Hanify wherein the gas blade nozzle includes a plurality of gas blade nozzles (there are multiple items 11 in figure 6).
Regarding claim 5, Hanify teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of gas blade nozzles is directed at a sidewall of the mixing chamber (items 111 are proximate the sidewall of item 14 and therefore considered directed at the inner wall of item 14).
Regarding claim 6, Hanify teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of gas blade nozzles is directed at a bottom of the mixing chamber (items 111 are proximate the bottom of item 14 and therefore considered directed at the bottom of item 14).
Regarding claim 7, Hanify teaches further comprising a mixing blade within the mixing chamber and drivingly connected to a drive system (items 28 driven by item 22).
Regarding claim 8, Hanify teaches wherein the at least one gas blade nozzle is directed at the mixing blade to clean the mixing blade (the cleaning is considered intended use of the materials being worked upon and the flow rate of gas, however items 111 contribute to mixing and resuspension which is considered capable of providing a fluid flow to wipe material off of item 28).
Regarding claim 9, Hanify is silent to the gas blade nozzle and the mixing blade being integral. Regarding claim 9, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the blade and the diffuser integral to reduce the number of parts in the mixer since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Regarding claim 11, Hanify teaches further comprising a vacuum line in communication with the mixing chamber (figure 6, line from item 136 to item 50 is considered reading on a vacuum line since item 150 conveys gas from item 136 to 162).
Regarding claim 12, Hanify teaches wherein the vacuum line includes a liquid separator to collect solvent and drain it back into the mixing chamber (figure 6 column 9 29-32 item 142 scrubber removes volatile organics from the effluent, material then flows to item 162 and back into item 14).
Regarding claim 13, Hanify teaches wherein the source of pressurized gas includes one of dry air, argon, and nitrogen (see column 8 lines 13-17 which teaches items 110 are connected to a source of pressurized air).
Regarding claim 14, Hanify teaches wherein the source of pressurized gas has a temperature control system for heating the pressurized gas (column 9 lines 38-40 teaches a heat exchanger for the gas exiting compressor 150).
Regarding claim 15, Hanify teaches wherein the source of pressurized gas has a temperature control system for cooling the pressurized gas (column 9 lines 38-41 teaches an aftercooler 154).
Regarding claim 17, Hanify teaches wherein the at least one gas blade nozzle is mounted to a flexible tube (figure 9, flexible hose item 110).
Regarding claim 18, Hanify teaches a mixing device (figures 6 and 9) comprising: a source of pressurized gas, wherein the source of pressurized gas includes one of dry air, argon, and nitrogen (see column 8 lines 13-17 which teaches items 110 are connected to a source of pressurized air); a mixing chamber (tank item 14); and a plurality of gas blade nozzles disposed within the mixing chamber and connected to the source of pressurized gas (diffuser item 111 is considered comprising blades that are considered having nozzles since column 4 lines 32-38 teaches diffusers are rotated distributing fine bubbles which inherently requires nozzle openings, column 8 lines 5-7 which teaches air being introduced into items 111). Regarding claim 18, Hanify is silent to the openings specifically being linear air stream openings configuration. Regarding claim 18, Heath teaches supplying pressurized fluid (column 4 line 16-23) that feeds fluid to an elongated opening for emitting a linear fluid stream (column 5 lines 4-12 teaches a linear flow passageway which is considered reading on an elongated opening, the opening is considered capable of delivering air, the material being worked upon is considered intended use). Regarding claim 18, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the openings of Hanify with the linear air stream shape of Heath in order to obtain the desired degree of agitation.
Regarding claim 19, Hanify teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of gas blade nozzles is directed at a sidewall of the mixing chamber (items 111 are proximate the sidewall of item 14 and therefore considered directed at the inner wall of item 14).
Regarding claim 20, Hanify teaches further comprising a directional adjustment mechanism movably supporting the at least one gas blade nozzle (figure 6 item 22 which rotates items 111 via radial arm 90 which is considered reading on movably supporting item 111).
Claims 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 013 as being unpatentable over Hanify (U.S. Patent 5,227,136) in view of Heath (US Patent 6,371,137) in further view of Seaman (U.S. Patent 6,488,401).
Regarding claim 10, Hanify is silent to the plug. Regarding claim 10, Seaman teaches a plug (column 25 lines 1-6 crown plug item 391 which is used for opening-closing multiple openings) for apertures (column 25 lines 1-6 which teaches discharge ports) and a compressed gas (column 8 lines 48-55). Regarding claim 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffuser configuration of Hanify in view of Heath with the plug configuration of Seaman in order to better control the flow of material in the mixer (see Seaman column 25 lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 16, Hanify is silent to the nozzles having a variable area. Regarding claim 16, Seaman teaches a variable area nozzle (column 8 lines 57-59 teaches the port width and height can be adjusted using a ring with a slot in it). Regarding claim 16, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffuser configuration of Hanify in view of Heath with the variable opening of Seaman in order to better control the flow of material in the mixer (see Seaman column 23 lines 38-42).
Response to Arguments
The remarks regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) rejection of claims 1-8, 11-15, and 17-20 have been considered and are persuasive in light of the amendments to claims 1 and 18. A new ground of rejection is provided, necessitated by amendment.
The remarks regarding the remaining claims are based off the rejections of claims 1 and 18 and are rejected accordingly.
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 ANSHU BHATIA whose telephone number is (571)270-7628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11 a.m. to 7:30 p.m..
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 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.
/ANSHU BHATIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights