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 § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-7, 10 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jacobellis 4,163,461.
In regard to claim 1, Jacobellis discloses (fig. 2) an inline accumulator (“for moderating pressure in a slurry flow conduit system” is considered an intended use limitation that carries little patentable weight in an apparatus claim. The accumulator of Jacobellis is capable of moderating pressure in a slurry flow conduit system as is therefore deemed to anticipate the intended use limitation of the claim), the accumulator comprising:
a body (10) defining an elongated chamber;
a resiliently deformable diaphragm (21) dividing the chamber into an upper sub-cavity (C-2) configured to be precharged with an inert gas and a lower sub-cavity (C-1) configured to convey slurry;
the lower sub-cavity (C-1) defining a geometric longitudinal cavity centerline and comprising a longitudinally elongated trough (12) formed at the bottom of the body configured to collect and move sediment entrained in the slurry through the lower sub-cavity as the slurry is flowing;
a slurry inlet (13) formed at a first end of the lower sub-cavity and a slurry outlet (14) formed at an opposite second end of the lower sub-chamber, the slurry inlet and slurry outlet being coaxially aligned with each other and defining a longitudinal flow (hole 19 allows for longitudinal flow) axis extending therebetween;
the longitudinal flow axis defined by the slurry inlet and slurry outlet being vertically offset from the longitudinal cavity centerline of lower sub-cavity (see fig. 2);
wherein the diaphragm (21) deforms due to increases or decreases in pressure of the slurry to maintain a constant pressure in the slurry flow conduit system.
In regard to claim 2, wherein the slurry is flowable through the lower sub-cavity from the slurry inlet to the slurry outlet in a linear flow path.
In regard to claim 5, wherein the trough (12) is co-axially aligned with the slurry inlet (13) and outlet (14).
In regard to claim 6, wherein the trough has a semi-circular transverse cross-sectional shape (see fig. 3 where wall 15 creates a semi-circular transverse cross-sectional shape).
In regard to claim 7, wherein the trough (12) has a different transverse cross-sectional shape than the lower sub-cavity (C-1).
In regard to claim 10, wherein the slurry inlet (13) and slurry outlet (14) are located at a the bottom of the lower sub-cavity (C-1).
In regard to claim 15, wherein the diaphragm (21) is sandwiched and trapped between first (27) and second (11) half-sections of the body which are detachably coupled together.
In regard to claim 16, wherein the accumulator includes a pressurized gas port (33) arranged to precharge the upper sub-cavity (C-2) with the inert gas.
In regard to claim 17, wherein the slurry is an agricultural slurry (claim is only drawn to the accumulator and not the accumulator in combination with the slurry).
In regard to claim 18, wherein the agricultural slurry is a soil slurry (claim is only drawn to the accumulator and not the accumulator in combination with the slurry).
In regard to claim 19, the trough (12) has a first width and the lower sub-cavity (C-1) has second width, the first width being less than the second width (C-1 is circular and the diameter of C-1 in fig. 2 is larger than the diameter of 15 in fig. 3).
In regard to claim 20, Jacobellis discloses an inline accumulator comprising
a body (10) defining a chamber (C-1, C-2);
a diaphragm (21) dividing the chamber into an upper sub-cavity (C-2) configured to be precharged with an inert gas and a lower sub-cavity (C-1) configured to convey slurry;
a trough (12) formed in the body and located below the lower sub-cavity, the trough configured
to collect and move sediment entrained in the slurry through the lower sub-cavity as the slurry is flowing; and
a slurry inlet (13) formed at a first end of the lower sub-cavity and a slurry outlet (14) formed at an opposite second end of the lower sub-cavity;
wherein the diaphragm (21) deforms due to increases or decreases in pressure of the slurry to maintain a constant pressure in the slurry flow conduit system.
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.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobellis 4,163,461.
In regard to claim 11, Jacobellis discloses a flow path with a transverse flow path
cross-sectional area, but it is unclear if the transverse flow path cross sectional area exceeds 30 times a transverse minimum cross sectional area of the slurry inlet or outlet. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the lower sub-cavity of Jacobellis with a transverse flow path cross-sectional area that does not exceed 30 times that of the slurry inlet or outlet because the optimization of proportions in a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Reese, 290 F.2d 839, 129 USPQ 402 (CCPA 1961), and
A change in the size of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
In regard to claim 12, wherein the slurry inlet and the slurry outlet each have the same cross-sectional area (see fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8-9 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-14 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Jacobellis fails to disclose a trough, but only a bore through which hydraulic fluid passes. The Examiner disagrees, as the both Jacobellis disclose a bore extending along the length of the bottom of the body with a pathway from the inlet to the outlet of the body. The bore or “trough” of Jacobellis is capable of conveying material from 13, through 19 and out at 14. Therefore the rejection has been maintained.
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 E. BOCHNA whose telephone number is (571)272-7078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:30.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. 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 BOCHNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights