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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II, claims 17 and 21-23, in the reply filed on 09/16/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the inventions share a common inventive purpose and would not require a serious search burden. This is not found persuasive because the instant application is a national stage application submitted under 35 U.S.C. 371 and therefore Unity of Invention analysis was applied; therefore, Applicant’s arguments relating to 35 U.S.C. 121 practice are not germane to the Restriction Requirement. Applicant’s arguments have not pointed to any specific aspect shared by the independent claims of the invention group that make a contribution over the prior art. The Examiner maintains that the groups of invention do not share a special technical feature as set forth in the Restriction Requirement, and therefore restriction is proper under Unity of Invention practice.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-12, 16, and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09/16/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/27/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the numerals in Figs. 8 and 9 are not legible. Please ensure that all numerals are at least 1/8 inch in height and of sufficient quality for adequate reproduction (MPEP 608.02). 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 § 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 17 and 21-23 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the at least one injection stirring blade" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The prior lines of the claim do not provide antecedent basis for at least one injection stirring blade.
Regarding claim 17, the claim limitation “the at least one injection stirring blade provided at intervals along the stirring shaft” renders the claim indefinite because the feature “at least one injection stirring blade” encompasses wherein the apparatus comprises only one injection stirring blade. However, the feature “provided at intervals along the stirring shaft” would appear to require that there must be multiple injection stirring blades. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the second air supply pipe" in line 25. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The prior lines of the claim recite “a plurality of second air supply pipes” and it is unclear which one is being referred to in line 25.
Dependent claims are rejected for the same reason as the base claim(s) upon which they depend.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Jeon (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0100470) is directed to a high speed fermentation apparatus comprising a first air supply pipe branching into a plurality of second air supply pipes each extending within a stirring shaft.
Morris et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2011/0042305) is directed to an organic waste fermentation apparatus comprising a plurality of air pipes within a stirring shaft.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY KIPOUROS whose telephone number is (571)272-0658. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30-5PM.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at 5712721374. 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.
/HOLLY KIPOUROS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights