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
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.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 12-13, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hajek (DE 102008020248 B4 and translation) in view of Jwon (CN 102079097 A and Translation).
Regarding claim 1, Hajek shows a food cutting machine (Figure 1) comprising:
a product hold-down element (28, 39, Figures 2-3); and
a slicing blade (12) for cutting a food product (42), wherein the product hold-down element includes: frame
a drive unit (8, Figures 2-3), comprising: a drive shaft (11); a gearbox (13) having a gearbox housing (see the housing of the gearbox 13, Figure 1) with a first side and a second side (right and bottom sides of the gearbox housing);
a motor (page 4, the last two paragraph “a belt drive 8th…a motor”); and
a torque support (9);
a carrier frame (1, Figure 2); and
a transport (this is loosely claimed “transport” without providing any further structure, therefore, a plunger 2 pushes or pressed a pressure plate 9 that meets this limitation “transport”), wherein the transport is supported in the carrier frame (Figure 4), and wherein the carrier frame is supported on the drive unit by a strut (32),
the drive unit being provided for driving the transport (Figures 5-7) of the product hold-down element (as it is written, it is unclear how the drive unit drives the transport, therefore, as seen in figures 6-7, there are different shaped of products, the belt or the drive unit pivots the pressure plate that causes the plungers 2 adjusting their positions as seen in figure 7),
wherein the drive shaft is connected to the gearbox and is adapted to drive the transport (Figure 1 all parts are connected together as a unit and the gearbox 13. As it is written, it is unclear how the drive shaft is adapt to drive the transport, therefore, see the discussion above and Para. 40 “feed belts 45, 45’…deflection roller 30…are driven by the common drive shaft 11” that means the drive shaft is a part of driving the plunger 2 as discussed above while transporting different shapes of products),
wherein the drive shaft and the motor are connected to the gearbox at the first side of the gearbox housing (Figure 1), and wherein the gearbox housing is supported at the second side on the torque support (Figure 1).
However, Hajek fails to discuss that the motor is connected to the gearbox to transmit a rotation of the motor to the drive shaft by the gearbox.
Jwon show a conveyor (6, Figures 3a,b) that has a motor and a gear or a gearbox (as discussed in Para. 49 “the feed roller 20 the driving force from the motor …drive roller 11…gear …the gear sprocket…rotation of the motor causes the drive roller 11 and the feeding roller 20 rotate”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the conveying means of Hajeck to have a gear or a gearbox, as taught by Jwon, in order to allow the conveying belt to be driven by the motor as discussed in Para. 49 of Jwon.
Regarding claim 3, the modified machine of Hajek shows that the torque support (9 of Hajek) is flat and is Y- shaped (Figure 6 of Hajek).
Regarding claim 8, the modified machine of Hajek shows that the torque support is attached to a frame member (see the discussion above the plate 9 is attached an inherent frame or structure by a pivot 32 as seen in Figure 6).
Regarding claim 12-13, the modified machine of Hajek shows all of the limitations as stated in claims 1, 3 above.
Regarding claim 20, the modified machine of Hajek shows that the gearbox housing (13 of Hajek) comprises a plurality of fastening receptacles for coupling to the torque support (many coupling parts as seen in Figure 1 of Hajek, for an example Para. 36 “The longitudinal guide 5 is attached to the pressure beam housing 17, so that the entire pressure beam 1 can be roughly moved towards and away from the surface of the product” and pin 5 in Figure 5 ).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-7, 9-11, 14-19 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: independent Claims 2, 4-7, 9-11, 14-19 are free of the prior art because the prior art does not teach or suggest the feature of a unique structure of the product hold-down element, respectively (.e.g. “the torque support is formed of metal…0.8-2.0mm…elastic…an axial direction of the drive shaft than in a radial direction...”; “…fasteners…” of the gearbox…) as set forth in claims 2, 4-7, 9-11, 14-19 above.
The closest art above have different configurations. There appears to be no justification to modify the above mentioned art, in any combination to meet the requirements of the claimed invention. Thus, these claims could not be considered an obvious expedient of the combination, the claimed instant invention requires these limitations for reason purposes of the invention. Thus, 2, 4-7, 9-11, 14-19 have allowable subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the reasons below:
With regards to “the drive unit being provided for driving the transport of the product hold-down element”, see the further explanation in the claim 1 rejection above.
With regards to “the transport” and “the drive shaft is adapted to drive the transport”, see the further explanation in the claim 1 rejection above.
With regards to “gearbox” and “a gearbox housing” is supporting at the second side on the torque support”, see the further explanation in the claim 1 rejection above. Moreover, applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references (Hajek shows all of the structures except the gearbox that connects between the deflection roller 30 and the driving shaft 11; Jwon discusses gears or gearbox that connects between a motor shaft and a roller; therefore, the combination of the arts teaches gearbox connecting between the motor and the roller for driving the roller). See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
With regards to claim 3, see the further explanation in the claim 3 rejection above.
With regards to claim 4, this is mooted.
With regards to claim 20, see the further explanation in the claim 20 rejection above.
However, if Applicant still believes that the claimed invention’s apparatus/method different from the prior art’s apparatus/method or needs to discuss the rejections above or suggestion amendments that can be overcome the current rejections, Applicant should feel free to call the Examiner to schedule an interview.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NHAT CHIEU Q DO whose telephone number is (571)270-1522. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM 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 at (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.
/NHAT CHIEU Q DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 1/21/2026