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 § 103
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) 1-5 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP3614121 (Priesner et al), see translation. As to claim 1, Priesner et al disclose a sample probe 1 including a probe tail area (at opening 15) and a probe sampling area (hollow body 9/shell 11) connected to the probe tail area wherein the probe sampling area comprises a housing (body 9), a two piece mold housing (shell components 11) and a sample disposed inside the two piece mold housing and the two piece mold housing component is held by an adhesive strip as described as an alternative to the clamp 13 of fig. 3 and is capable of melting, see translation and description. Further, it is noted that Priesner et al fail to indicate a “top” of the tail area. However, it is noted that the “top” has not been specified as relative to any specific area such that any are of the tail near opening 15 can be designated as the “top”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have designated the probe area as connected to the “top” of the probe tail area since the tail is elongated and can be oriented such that the hollow body 9 is on top of the tail area as a matter of design choice obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. As to claim 2, note the separation device (removal device 19) with placement automatically by a robot and comprising a cutting device (press unit 23) for cutting the sample probe area and an inclined bottom plate (inclined vibration chute 53) inclined downward (see fig. 6) from a front end (right side) to a rear end(left side) with the front end close to the cutting device and the rear end farther away from the cutting device, wherein a first posture device (insertion funnel 21), a first separation device (stamp 35), a second posture device (outlet funnel 39) and a second separation device (separating unit 27) are sequentially arranged between the front “end” and rear “end” of the inclined plate. As to claim 3, note fig. 8 where the funnel 21 has 2 collision points (the two angled sides of the funnel) “or” the cutting device comprises a squeezing device (press unit 23). As to claim 4, it appears there sides of the funnel do turnover and constrain the sample. As to claim 5, it does not appear from fig. 8 that the distance between the collision points is larger than an end face of the sample. As to claim 16, note first inclined bottom plate (chute 53) and second inclined bottom plate (chute 56), see fig. 6. As to claim 17, the inclination of chute 53 appears to be 30 degrees.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nixon-US Patent # 1,579,952. As to claim 1, Nixon discloses a molten metal sampling probe including a probe tail area (silica tube 28) and a probe sampling area with housing (cardboard sheath 20, 2 piece mold (10) and a sample inside the mold) and the 2 piece mold component is held together and fixed with a combustible band 26, see fig. 1. It is noted that Nixon fails to designate that the combustible band is a tape or adhesive. However, usage of tape or adhesive to hold a mold together the mold components is considered an obvious matter of design choice since Nixon already recites usage of a band and adhesive or tape bands are old and well-known to secure the mold components.
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 1-20 are 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. As to claim 1, the designations of the probe including a probe tail “area” and a probe sampling “area” appear to indefinite and maybe should be perhaps “portion” on lines 1-2. Also, “the top” of the probe tail area is not clear and lacks antecedent basis since it is unclear what is being designated. In claim 3, on line 4, the designation of “and/or” is unclear as to whether the next limitation is included or not. All other claims are rejected based on the dependency on rejected claim 1, etc. In claim 6, on lines 6-8, it is unclear how the inclined bottom plate is “located within the first chute”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-15 and 18-20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the primary reason for allowance of the claims is that the prior art fails to teach or suggest an automatic separation device as found in claims 2-5 along with wherein the first separation device comprises a first side plate, a second side plate and a turnover plate, the first side plate and the second side plate are connected to the upper surface of the inclined bottom plate, thereby forming a first chute, the inclined bottom plate located within the first chute is provided with a drop opening, and the turnover plate is connected to the lower surface of the inclined bottom plate and covers the drop opening; the first chute is arranged as a structure that gradually becomes smaller in a direction from the front end to the rear end of the inclined bottom plate, and the minimum size of the outlet of the first chute is greater than the maximum size of the two-piece mold housing component and smaller than the cross-sectional diameter of the probe sampling area.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional prior art cited on PTO-892 include state of the art probe samplers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NASHMIYA FAYYAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571)272-2160. 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.
/ALEXANDER A MERCADO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
NF
Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/N.S.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2855