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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I (claims 2-3 and 12-18) and
Species 1a (Fig. 6), as set forth in the reply filed on 02/13/2026, is acknowledged.
The traversal is based on the assertion that the species restriction is based solely on the figures and that Fig. 6 reads on all species or embodiments illustrated in Figs. 6-9. However, the purpose of the restriction requirement is to ensure that a single species is elected for prosecution of the application. In other words, the Examiner is permitted to focus examination on one species rather than multiple species during prosecution. In addition, the claims may be further amended to reflect the elected species during prosecution.
Moreover, Figs. 6-9 clearly illustrate distinct species. Although the searches for the individual species may overlap to some extent, they do not coincide. A search directed to elected Species Ia would not be sufficient to address the distinct features of non-elected Species Ib-Id. Furthermore, a text and subclass search necessary to locate the specific feature of one species would not necessarily disclose the distinct features of the remaining species. Each species, by virtue of its distinct feature(s), occupies a separate position in the prior art and requires a different field of search.
It should also be noted that Applicant has not elected one species from Group II (Species IIa-IId) corresponding to the elected species in Group I, as required in Item 6 of the Restriction Requirement. In response to this Office Action, Applicant must elect one of the species in Group II.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
2. Claims 7-11 and 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 two guide cylinder rod set forth in claim 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
Claims 1, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated
by Baur et al. (WO 2011045072 A1), hereinafter Baur (same as CN 102596466 A, cited in the IDS filled on 10/03/2023), as is evidenced in Fig. 5 of Ma et al. CN 107363317 A; and Soderberg (1,986,685)).
Regarding claim 1, Baur teaches an intelligent shearing mechanism, comprising an upper blade holder (defined by the holder of the upper blade 1 which is connected to the drive device 4; Fig. 2) and a lower blade holder (defined by the holder that is connected to the lower blade 2; best shown in Fig. 1c) that are provided on a frame (defined by the frame of the shearing machine that accommodates the upper and lower blades, as is evidenced in Fig. 5 of Ma et al. CN 107363317 A; and Soderberg (1,986,685)) and arranged correspondingly in a vertical direction, wherein a left connecting rod 4 and a right connecting rod 4 that are arranged side by side are provided between the upper blade holder and the frame, a left eccentric shaft (defined by the eccentric shaft used on one end of the rod 4; second paragraph on page 2 of the English translation) is provided at a joint of the left connecting rod and the frame, a right eccentric shaft (defined by the eccentric shaft used on one end of the rod 4; second paragraph on page 2 of the English translation) is provided at a joint of the right connecting rod and the frame, and at least one guide cylinder rod 3 (defined by the variable lateral guide which comprises a hydraulic or a pneumatic piston-cylinder; the large paragraph in the middle of page 4 of the attached English translation) is hinged (defined by the pivot point connection of the end of the guide cylinder rod to the upper blade holder and to the frame; claim 9 and Fig. 2) between the upper blade holder and the frame (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Baur teaches everything noted above including that
the upper blade holder is provided with one of a straight knife, an oblique knife, a concave knife, or a curved knife. See Fig. 2 in Baur.
Regarding claim 6, Baur teaches everything noted above including that a special-shaped structure of each of the upper blade holder and the lower blade holder on a horizontal projection thereof is in one of a triangular shape, an arc shape, a rectangular shape, or an oblique shape. See Fig. 2 in Baur.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 2, 4, 13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur in view of Ishii et al. (4,079,649), hereinafter Ishii. Regarding claim 2, Baur teaches that guide cylinder 3 and a hinge point between the guide cylinder rod and the upper blade holder is located at a middle of a side in a length direction, or a top-end surface of the upper blade holder, or is located between the middle of the side and the top-end surface. See Fig. 2 in Baur. Baur does not explicitly teach two guide cylinders. However, Ishii teaches an intelligent shearing mechanism including a guide cylinder 17 (similar to the guide cylinder 3 of Baur) connected to an upper blade holder 16 and another guide cylinder 24 also connected to the upper blade holder 16. See Figs. 4-5 in Ishii. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Baur’s intelligent shearing mechanism with another guide cylinder, as taught by Ishii, in order to adjust the gap between the upper and lower blades.
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Baur does not explicitly teach that the upper blade holder is provided with at least one sliding plate and roller configured to be in slide cooperation with the frame in the vertical direction. However, Ishii teaches an intelligent shearing mechanism including an upper blade holder 15 is provided with at least one sliding plate 19 and roller 20 configured to be in slide cooperation with a frame 2 in a vertical direction. See Fig. 4 in Ishii. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Baur’s intelligent shearing mechanism with the sliding plate and roller, as taught by Ishii, in order to facilitate vertical sliding of the upper blade holder.
Regarding claim 15, Baur teaches everything noted above including that
the upper blade holder is provided with one of a straight knife, an oblique knife, a concave knife, or a curved knife. See Fig. 2 in Baur.
Regarding claim 17, Baur teaches everything noted above including that a special-shaped structure of each of the upper blade holder and the lower blade holder on a horizontal projection thereof is in one of a triangular shape, an arc shape, a rectangular shape, or an oblique shape. See Fig. 2 in Baur.
8. Claims 3, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur in view Thomas (DE 102007019963A1) or Ma et al. (CN 107363317 A), hereinafter Ma. Regarding claim 3, Baur does not explicitly teach that the left connecting rod and the right connecting rod are each in a cylinder rod structure. However, Thomas also teaches a shearing apparatus including a left connecting rod 8 and a right connecting rod 8 are each in a cylinder rod structure 21 (Fig. 4). Thomas teaches a left eccentric shaft 10 I provided at a joint of the left connecting rod 8 and a frame (of the shearing apparatus, not shown), and a right eccentric shaft 11 is provided at a joint of the right connecting rod 9 and the frame.
Ma also teaches a shearing apparatus including a left connecting rod 1 and a right connecting rod 2 are each in a cylinder rod structure. See Fig. 1 in Ma. It would have been obvious in a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide Baur’s left and right connecting rods with a cylinder rod structure, as taught by Thomas or Ma, in order to adjust the vertical position of the upper blade and provide yet another addition movement for the upper blade and enhance versatility of the shearing apparatus.
Regarding claim 16, Baur teaches everything noted above including that
the upper blade holder is provided with one of a straight knife, an oblique knife, a concave knife, or a curved knife. See Fig. 2 in Baur.
Regarding claim 18, Baur teaches everything noted above including that a special-shaped structure of each of the upper blade holder and the lower blade holder on a horizontal projection thereof is in one of a triangular shape, an arc shape, a rectangular shape, or an oblique shape. See Fig. 2 in Baur.
9. Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur in view of Ishii and in further view of Thomas or Ma. Regarding claim 12, Baur does not explicitly teach that the left connecting rod and the right connecting rod are each in a cylinder rod structure. However, Thomas also teaches a shearing apparatus including a left connecting rod 8 and a right connecting rod 8 are each in a cylinder rod structure 21 (Fig. 4). Thomas teaches a left eccentric shaft 10 I provided at a joint of the left connecting rod 8 and a frame (of the shearing apparatus, not shown), and a right eccentric shaft 11 is provided at a joint of the right connecting rod 9 and the frame. Ma also teaches a shearing apparatus including a left connecting rod 1 and a right connecting rod 2 are each in a cylinder rod structure. See Fig. 1 in Ma. It would have been obvious in a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide left and right connecting rods of Baur’s intelligent shearing mechanism, as modified by Ishii, with a cylinder rod structure, as taught by Thomas or Ma, in order to adjust the vertical position of the upper blade and provide yet another addition movement for the upper blade and enhance versatility of the shearing apparatus.
10. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur in view Thomas or Ma and in further view of Ishii. Regarding claim 14, Baur does not explicitly teach that the upper blade holder is provided with at least one sliding plate and roller configured to be in slide cooperation with the frame in the vertical direction. However, Ishii teaches an intelligent shearing mechanism including an upper blade holder 15 is provided with at least one sliding plate 19 and roller 20 configured to be in slide cooperation with a frame 2 in a vertical direction. See Fig. 4 in Ishii. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Baur’s intelligent shearing mechanism, as modified by Thomas or Ma, with the sliding plate and roller, as taught by Ishii, in order to facilitate vertical sliding of the upper blade holder.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Brozym (4,228,706), Ikeda (4,507,997), Morgan (2,351,868), Soderberg (1,986,685), Hishiuma et al. (4,145,942), and Portman (4,156,387) teach an intelligent shearing mechanism.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached on (571) 272-4502. 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.
/GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
February 23, 2026