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 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 scraper unit and a driving unit in claims 1 and 9, a motor overload protection unit in claims 4 and 9.
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 1 recites “a scraper unit”. These limitations are interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as scraper connector, two pneumatic slide tables, and a blade and equivalents thereof, to accomplish the claimed function (see at least [0028] of the specification of the instant application).
Claim 9 recites “a scraper unit”. These limitations are interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as scraper connector, two pneumatic slide tables, and a blade and equivalents thereof, to accomplish the claimed function (see at least [0028] of the specification of the instant application).
Claims 4 and 9 recites “a motor overload protection unit”. These limitations are interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as a rotating plate, trigger plate, vertically-arranged rod, and micro switches and equivalents thereof, to accomplish the claimed function (see at least [0028] of the specification of the instant application).
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN112452997A) in view of Gorman (2008/0295265).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhou teaches A residue scraper (Fig. 1, [n0001]), comprising a machine frame (Ref. 32, Fig. 1), which is provided with a clamping unit (Ref. 39, fig. 1&2) for fastening a material holder (Ref. 39, Fig. 2);
a scraper unit (Ref. 46, 48-49, Fig. 1, [0034]) for cleaning residues on a to-be-cleaned surface of the material holder ([n0028]); and
a driving unit (Ref. 2, 410, 42, & 43, Fig. 1, [0034]) that drives the scraper unit to reciprocate along a long side direction (See annotated Fig. 1 below) of the material holder ([n0028]), the driving unit includes rotating shaft (Ref. 410, Fig. 5) and a motor (Ref. 2, Fig. 1), the rotating shaft mount on one end of long sides of the machine frame (Fig. 1 shows the rotating shaft mounted on a top end of the long side) and the motor (2) is suspended on one of the rotating shafts (Fig. 1).
Zhou as modified fails to explicitly teach two rotating shafts arranged parallel. Gorman teaches a residue scraper and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Gorman further teaches two rotating shafts (Fig. 1C,3&12) arranged in parallel (Fig. 3&12 shows there are drive systems in parallel to rotate two different shafts). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the rotating shaft, as taught by Zhou as modified, to have a second rotating shafts between the sprockets wherein two rotating shafts are arranged in parallel, as taught by Gorman, by duplication of parts and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of transferring movement of a motor to move a scraper along skid rails.
PNG
media_image1.png
548
752
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Gorman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Falk (2013/0081652).
Regarding Claim 2, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and Zhou further teaches wherein the machine frame is a rectangular frame (Fig. 1) a residue bucket (Ref. 5, Fig. 1, [0041]) is provided under the machine frame (Fig. 1), and the machine frame includes two long sides arranged in parallel and the two short sides arranged in parallel (See annotated Fig. 1 below).
Zhou fails to explicitly teach a cover to protect the scraper unit, the driving unit, and the clamping unit. Falk teaches a cleaning apparatus and can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of moving a cleaning device laterally by a motor. Falk further teaches a cover to protect the entirety of the cleaning apparatus including a driving unit (Ref. 7, fig. 3) and a scraping unit (Ref. 11, Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the machine frame, as taught by Zhou, with a cover, as taught by Falk, to protect the moving components and contain any debris and fluid ([0031]).
PNG
media_image2.png
548
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Gorman as modified as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Lou (CN114248121A).
Regarding Claim 3, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 2, as described above, and Zhou further teaches wherein the scraper unit includes two skid rails (Ref. 46, Fig. 5), slide tables (Ref. 48, Fig. 6) arranged on the skid rails (46, Fig. 6), and a scraper (Ref. 49, Fig. 5) and arranged between two slide tables (Fig. 5-6), and the scraper includes a scraper connector (Fig. 6 annotated below) connecting to the two slide tables (48, Fig. 5-6) and blades (49, [n0039]) arranged on the scraper connector (Fig. 6) and located in parallel with two later faces of the short sides (Fig. 5-6).
Zhou as modified fails to explicitly teach the skid rails arranged on the two long sides respectively and a scraper located in parallel with the short sides. Gorman teaches a residue scraper and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Gorman further teaches the scraper (Fig. 1C) having two skid rails (See annotated Fig. 1C below) arranged on the two long sides (Fig. 1c) respectively and a scraper (Ref. 29, Fig. 1C) located in parallel with the short sides (Fig. 1C), and the scraper include a scraper connector connecting to the two slide tables (Ref. 25, Fig. 1C) and blades (Ref. 9, Fig. 1C) arranged on the scraper connector and located in parallel with two later faces of the short sides (Fig. 1C). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the skid rails, as taught by Zhou as modified, to run along the two long sides with the scraper parallel to the short sides, as taught by Gorman, since such a modification would yield the predictable result of scraping off material from a substrate.
Zhou as modified further fails to explicitly teach pneumatic slide tables on the skid rails. Lou teaches a machine that is used to transfer linear movement of a head and can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to apply linear movement of a device. Lou teaches pneumatic slide tables (3072, Fig. 13) arranged on the skid rails (Fig. 14) to apply linear movement of a device (Fig. 13). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the slides, as taught by Zhou as modified, with the pneumatic slide tables, as taught by Lou, since such a modification would produce the predictable result of sliding on skid rails.
PNG
media_image3.png
526
441
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
732
736
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claims 4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gorman and Falk as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Sheng (CN105173539A).
Regarding claim 4, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 2, as described above, and given the teachings Gorman of the rearrangement of skid rails along the long sides and two parallel rotating shafts, Zhou as modified further teaches wherein the two rotating shaft (Ref. 410, Fig. 5), sprockets (Ref. 42, Fig. 5) arranged parallel with the short sides (Fig. 1&5), the sprockets mount on two ends of the long sides via bearing pedestals (Fig. 5), and the sprockets (42) are arranged at two ends of the rotating shaft (Fig. 5), and ring-shaped chains (Ref. 43, Fig. 5) are used to connect the sprockets ([n0031]), the scraper unit (4) is fastened to the ring-shaped chains (fig. 6).
Zhou as modified further fails to explicitly teach the frame is provided with a motor overload protection unit. Sheng can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to use a motor to drive a device. Sheng further teaches a motor overload protection unit (Ref. 17, Fig. 2, [0050]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the frame, as taught by Zhou, with a motor overload protection unit, as taught by Sheng, to prevent motor overloads and preventing component damage or accidents ([0004]).
Regarding claim 7, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 4, as described above, and Sheng further teaches wherein the motor overload protection unit (17)includes a rotating plate (Ref. 312, Fig. 3) fastened to the motor ([0049]) and a trigger plate (Ref. 316, Fig. 3) fastened to the machine frame (Fig. 3), the rotating plate is arranged perpendicular to the rotating shafts (318), the trigger plate is provided with a vertically-arranged rod (Ref. 312, Fig. 3, examiner notes the rod is has a dimension in a vertical direction and is vertically arranged), position limiting blocks (Ref. 310&306, Fig. 3) are arranged at both ends of the vertically-arranged rod ([0042], Fig. 3) a connecting block (Ref. 307, Fig. 3) is provided on the rotating plate (Fig. 3), the connecting block is located between two position limiting blocks (Fig. 3), the connecting block is provided with a through hole for the rod to pass through (fig. 3, [0050]), springs (Ref. 309, Fig. 3) sleeved on the rod (fig. 3) are arranged between the position limiting blocks (310) and the connecting block (307, Fig. 3), the trigger plate is provided with two micro switches (Ref. 315, Fig. 3), the rotating plate (312) is provided with a check disc (Ref. 312, Fig. 3 right end of the rotating plate) for triggering the micro switches ([0055]), and the micro switches are electrically connected to the motor ([0021&0055]).
Regarding claim 8, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 4, as described above, and Sheng further teaches proximity switch (ref. 315, Fig. 3, [0055]) located at margin positions (Fig. 3) and are electrically connected to the motor to prevent over expenditure of the motor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify each long side of the frame, as taught by Zhou as modified, with the proximity sensor, as taught by Sheng, located at two margin positions to prevent motor overloads and preventing component damage or accidents ([0004]).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gorman and Falk as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Jin (2014/0167342).
Regarding claim 5, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 2, as described above, and Zhou further teaches wherein the clamping unit includes clamps (Ref. 39, Fig. 2) arranged on the two long sides (Ref. 39, Fig. 2 both long sides) and one of the two short side of the machine frame (Fig. 1-2, Ref. 39, right side), and a position limiting plate (Ref. 39, Fig. 1-2, left side) arranged on another of the two short side (Fig. 2) and clamps face an inside of the machine frame (Fig. 2).
Zhou as modified fails to explicitly teach clamping cylinders and pistons of the clamping cylinders face the inside of the frame, and the pistons of the clamping cylinders are connected to L-shaped splints for snapping into the material holder. Jin can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to hold a substrate. Jin further teaches clamping cylinders (Ref. 371, Fig. 3) and pistons of the clamping cylinders (Ref. 371, Fig. 3) face the inside of the frame (Fig. 3), and the pistons of the clamping cylinders are connected to L-shaped splints (Ref. 373, Fig. 3) for snapping into the material holder (Ref. 311, Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to replace the clamps, as taught by Zhou as modified, with the clamping cylinders attached to L-shaped brackets, as taught by Jin, since such a modification would yield the predictable result of holding a substate ([0059&0067]).
Regarding claim 6, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 5, as described above, and given the teachings of Zhou as modified having the clamping cylinders in place of the clamps, Zhou as modified further teaches wherein the clamping cylinders (Ref. 317, Fig. 3, Jin) on the two long sides (Fig. 2, long sides, Zhou) are connected to the machine frame via L-shaped supports (Ref. 373, Fig. 3, Jin), and the L-shaped supports includes horizontal plates (Fig. 3 annotated below, Jin) on which the clamping cylinder are placed (Fig. 3), and vertical plates (Fig. 3 annotated below, Jin) connecting to the machine frame (Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image5.png
648
525
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN112452997A) in view of Gorman (2008/0295265) and Sheng (CN105173539A).
Regarding Claim 9, Zhou teaches A residue scraper (Fig. 1, [n0001]), comprising a machine frame (Ref. 32, Fig. 1), which is provided with a clamping unit (Ref. 39, fig. 1&2) for fastening a material holder (Ref. 39, Fig. 2);
a scraper unit (Ref. 46, 48-49, Fig. 1, [0034]) for cleaning residues on a to-be-cleaned surface of the material holder ([n0028]); and
a driving unit (Ref. 2, 410, 42, & 43, Fig. 1, [0034]) that drives the scraper unit to reciprocate along a long side direction of the material holder (See annotated Fig. 1 below), wherein the machine frame includes two long sides arranged in parallel and two short sides arranged in parallel (See annotated Fig. 1 below), the driving unit includes a rotating shaft (Ref. 410, Fig. 5), sprockets (Ref. 42, Fig. 5) arranged parallel with the two short sides (Fig. 1&5), the sprockets mount on two ends of the two long sides via bearing pedestals (Fig. 5), and the sprockets (42) are arranged at two ends of the rotating shaft (Fig. 5), and ring-shaped chains (Ref. 43, Fig. 5) are used to connect the sprockets ([n0031]), the scraper unit (4) is fastened to the ring-shaped chains (fig. 6), a motor (Ref. 2, Fig. 1) is suspended on one of the rotating shafts (Fig. 1).
Zhou as modified fails to explicitly teach two rotating shafts arranged parallel. Gorman teaches a residue scraper and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Gorman further teaches two rotating shafts (Fig. 1C&3) arranged in parallel (Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the sprockets, as taught by Zhou as modified, to have rotating shafts between the sprockets wherein two rotating shafts are arranged in parallel, as taught by Gorman, by duplication of parts and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of transferring movement of a motor to move a scraper along skid rails.
Zhou as modified further fails to explicitly teach the machine frame is provided with a motor overload protection unit. Sheng can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to use a motor to drive a device. Sheng further teaches a motor overload protection unit (Ref. 17, Fig. 2, [0050]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the machine frame, as taught by Zhou, with a motor overload protection unit, as taught by Sheng, to prevent motor overloads and preventing component damage or accidents ([0004]).
PNG
media_image2.png
548
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9, as described above, and Sheng further teaches wherein the motor overload protection unit includes a rotating plate (Ref. 312, Fig. 3)fastened to the motor ([0049]) and a trigger plate (Ref. 316, Fig. 3) fastened to the machine frame (Fig. 3), the rotating plate is arranged perpendicular to the rotating shafts (318), the trigger plate is provided with a vertically-arranged rod (Ref. 312, Fig. 3, examiner notes the rod is has a dimension in a vertical direction and is vertically arranged), position limiting blocks (Ref. 310&306, Fig. 3) are arranged at both ends of the vertically-arranged rod ([0042], Fig. 3), a connecting block (Ref. 307, Fig. 3) is provided on the rotating plate (Fig. 3), the connecting block is located between two position limiting blocks (Fig. 3), the connecting block is provided with a through hole for the rod to pass through (fig. 3, [0050]), and springs (Ref. 309, Fig. 3), sleeved on the rod (Fig. 3) are arranged between the position limiting blocks (310) and the connecting block (307).
Regarding claim 11, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and Sheng further teaches wherein the trigger plate is provided with two micro switches (Ref. 315, Fig. 3), the rotating plate is provided with a check disc (Ref. 312, Fig. 3 right end of the rotating plate) for triggering the micro switches ([0055]), and the micro switches are electrically connected to the motor ([0021&0055]).
Regarding claim 12, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9, as described above, and Sheng further teaches proximity switch (ref. 315, Fig. 3, [0055]) located at margin positions (Fig. 3) and are electrically connected to the motor to prevent over expenditure of the motor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify each long side of the frame, as taught by Zhou as modified, with the proximity sensor, as taught by Sheng, located at two margin positions to prevent motor overloads and preventing component damage or accidents ([0004]).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gorman and Shang as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Lou (CN114248121A).
Regarding claim 13, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9, as described above, and Zhou further teaches wherein the scraper unit includes two skid rails (Ref. 46, Fig. 5), slide tables (Ref. 48, Fig. 6) arranged on the skid rails (46, Fig. 6), and a scraper (Ref. 49, Fig. 5) and arranged between two slide tables (Fig. 5-6).
Zhou as modified fails to explicitly teach the skid rails arranged on the two long sides respectively and a scraper located in parallel with the short sides. Gorman teaches a residue scraper and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Gorman further teaches the scraper (Fig. 1C) having two skid rails (See annotated Fig. 1C below) arranged on the two long sides (Fig. 1c) respectively and a scraper (Ref. 29, Fig. 1C) located in parallel with the short sides (Fig. 1C), and the scraper include a scraper connector connecting to the two slide tables (Ref. 25, Fig. 1C) and blades (Ref. 9, Fig. 1C) arranged on the scraper connector and located in parallel with two later faces of the short sides (Fig. 1C). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the skid rails, as taught by Zhou as modified, to run along the two long sides with the scraper parallel to the short sides, as taught by Gorman, since such a modification would yield the predictable result of scraping off material from a substrate.
Zhou as modified further fails to explicitly teach pneumatic slide tables on the skid rails. Lou teaches a machine that is used to transfer linear movement of a head and can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to apply linear movement of a device. Lou teaches pneumatic slide tables (3072, Fig. 13) arranged on the skid rails (Fig. 14) to apply linear movement of a device (Fig. 13). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the slides, as taught by Zhou as modified, with the pneumatic slide tables, as taught by Lou, since such a modification would produce the predictable result of sliding on skid rails.
PNG
media_image3.png
526
441
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and given the teaching of the pneumatic slide tables of Lou, Zhou as modified teaches the scraper includes a scraper connector (Fig. 6 annotated below, Zhou) connecting to the two pneumatic slide tables (48, Fig. 5-6, Zhou) and blades (49, [n0039], Zhou) arranged on the scraper connector (Fig. 6, Zhou) and located in parallel with two later faces of the short sides (Fig. 5-6, Zhou).
PNG
media_image4.png
732
736
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gorman and Shang as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Jin (2014/0167342).
Regarding claim 15, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9, as described above, and Zhou further teaches wherein the clamping unit includes clamps (Ref. 39, Fig. 2) arranged on two long sides (Ref. 39, Fig. 2 both long sides) and one of the short side of the machine frame (Fig. 1-2, Ref. 39, right side), and a position limiting plate (Ref. 39, Fig. 1-2, left side) arranged on the another of the two short sides (Fig. 2) and clamps face the inside of the frame (Fig. 2).
Zhou as modified fails to explicitly teach clamping cylinders and pistons of the clamping cylinders face the inside of the frame, and the pistons of the clamping cylinders are connected to L-shaped splints for snapping into the material holder. Jin can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to hold a substrate. Jin further teaches clamping cylinders (Ref. 371, Fig. 3) and pistons of the clamping cylinders (Ref. 371, Fig. 3) face the inside of the frame (Fig. 3) and the pistons of the clamping cylinders are connected to L-shaped splints (Ref. 373, Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to replace the clamps, as taught by Zhou as modified, with the clamping cylinders attached to L-shaped brackets, as taught by Jin, since such a modification would yield the predictable result of holding a substate ([0059&0067]).
Regarding claim 16, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 15, as described above, and given the teachings of Zhou as modified having the clamping cylinders in place of the clamps, Jin further teaches wherein pistons of the clamping cylinders face (Ref. 317, Fig. 3) an inside of the machine frame (Fig. 3), and the pistons of the clamping cylinders are connected to L-shaped splints (Ref. 373, Fig. 3) for snapping into the material holder (Ref. 311, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 17, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 16, as described above, and Jin further teaches given the teachings of Zhou as modified having the clamping cylinders in place of the clamps, Zhou as modified further teaches wherein the clamping cylinders (Ref. 317, Fig. 3, Jin) on the two long sides (Fig. 2, long sides, Zhou) are connected to the machine frame via L-shaped supports (Ref. 373, Fig. 3, Jin).
Regarding claim 18, Zhou as modified teaches the limitations of claim 16, as described above, and given the teachings of Zhou as modified having the clamping cylinders in place of the clamps, Jin further teaches the L-shaped supports include horizontal plates (Fig. 3 annotated below, Jin) on which the clamping cylinder are placed (Fig. 3), and vertical plates (Fig. 3 annotated below, Jin) connecting to the machine frame (Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image5.png
648
525
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claim are acknowledged and examiner has withdrawn the 35 USC 112(b) rejections and claim objections.
Applicant’s arguments in regards to the 35 USC 112(f) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. While the terms do not use the term "means" they use generic placeholder terms such as unit with a function but do not have any structure to accomplish this function (MPEP 2181). The limitation meets the 3-prong analysis of the term “unit” is a nonce term that has no specific structural meaning for performing the claimed function, the “unit” is modified by functional language using language such as “for”, and the “unit” is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Applicant's arguments filed 11 May, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Claim 1, Applicant has amended the claims thereby changing the scope of the claim necessitating a new grounds of rejection and reinterpretation of the prior art. Applicant’s arguments in regards to Gorman have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Examiner have applied Zhou in view of Gorman in 35 USC 103 rejection above. Gorman is being used to merely teach the concept of two parallel rotating drive shafts. Given the suggestion of two drive shafts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the rotating shaft, as taught by Zhou as modified, to have a second rotating shafts between the sprockets wherein two rotating shafts are arranged in parallel, as taught by Gorman, by duplication of parts and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of transferring movement of a motor to move a scraper along skid rails.
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 DANA L POON whose telephone number is (571)272-6164. The examiner can normally be reached on General: 6:30AM-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, David Posigian can be reached on (313) 446-6546. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANA LEE POON/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights