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
Claim 2 and 3 are being interpreted as follows:
Claim 2 includes the term “longitudinal direction”. In light of the specification, “longitudinal direction” appears to be the same as the “axial direction” as used in claim 1. For the purpose of examination, “longitudinal direction” will be interpreted as though it read “axial direction”.
Claim 3 includes the term “entire circumference of the roll main body”. In light of the specification, “entire circumference of the roll main body” appears to be the same as “outer surface of the roll main body” as used in claim 1. For the purpose of examination, “entire circumference of the roll main body” will be interpreted as “outer surface of the roll main body”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-5, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iifushi (JPS61176417A).
Re Claim 1, Iifushi discloses a deflector roll that changes a travelling direction of a metal strip being threaded (intended use), the deflector roll comprising a roll main body (roller shaft 8) that is rotatably supported by a roll frame (“The transfer roller 4 is rotatably supported”, Pg. 1, Lines 4-5), and a sliding member (arc pieces 10) that is configured to be movable relative to an outer surface of the roll main body (“and the arc-shaped pieces 10 are held on the end plates 9, 11 independently of each other in the longitudinal direction so as to be freely expandable and contractible” Pg. 1, Lines 37-38), wherein the sliding member is configured to have the metal strip wrapped thereon and to be movable along an axial direction of the roll main body together with the metal strip while maintaining that wrapped state (“After being rolled and rolled, it is further carried on the transfer roller 4 and transported” Pg. 1, Line 4).
Re Claim 2, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the sliding member includes a plurality of plate-shaped bodies (arc pieces 10), and the plate- shaped bodies are arrayed over an entire circumference of the roll main body, with end surfaces in a longitudinal direction located on roll end surface sides of the roll main body and end surfaces in a width direction facing one another (Fig. 1).
Re Claim 3, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), wherein each of the plate-shaped bodies has an arc surface (outer surface of arc pieces 10, Fig. 2) that forms a part of a wrapping circumferential surface of a circular shape in a state where the plate-shaped bodies are arrayed over the entire circumference of the roll main body (Fig. 1).
Re Claim 4, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 2, wherein the plate-shaped bodies are each separately movable along the axial direction of the roll main body (“the arc-shaped pieces 10 are held on the end plates 9, 11 independently of each other in the longitudinal direction so as to be freely expandable and contractible” Pg. 1, Lines 37-38).
Re Claim 5, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 2, wherein each of the plate-shaped bodies has a cross-sectional profile in which a central part in the longitudinal direction protrudes outward relative to both end portions of the plate-shaped body (Fig. 2).
Re Claim 9, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 1, wherein the sliding member has an elastic member (spring 12) that elastically supports the sliding member (“A spring 12 is press-fitted in a longitudinal direction in a gap between the plate 11 and the arc piece 10” Pg. 1, Lines 40-41) so as to be movable along the axial direction of the roll main body, and that returns the sliding member to an original position by an urging force (“if the arc piece 10 expands due to thermal expansion, the spring 12 contracts, and if the arc piece 10 cools and contracts, the spring 12 expands.” Pg. 1, Lines 45-46).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iifushi (JPS61176417) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Clerx et. al. (WO2015130171), hereinafter referred to as “Clerx”
Re Claim 6, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), and further discloses that the roll frame has centering guides (end plates 9 and 11) that are provided facing the end surfaces of the plate-shaped bodies in the longitudinal direction and that are configured to be hit by the end surfaces in the longitudinal direction of the plate-shaped bodies in a moving state such that the plate-shaped bodies are returned to original positions and centered to a threading center of the metal strip (end plates 9 and 11, in combination with spring 12, constrain movement in an axial direction).
Iifushi fails to disclose that the centering guides are provided in a region of the roll main body except for a wrapping region of the metal strip.
Clerx teaches that that the roll frame has centering guides (reset element 2) that are provided facing the end surfaces of the plate-shaped bodies in the longitudinal direction, except for a wrapping region of the metal strip (Fig. 2), and that are hit by the end surfaces in the longitudinal direction of the plate-shaped bodies in a moving state such that the plate-shaped bodies are returned to original positions and centered to a threading center of the metal strip (“The segment 1 concerned will than be set back in its starting position by means of the reset elements 2.” Pg. 10, Lines 17-18).
Iifushi differs from the claimed invention by not having centering guides facing the end surfaces of the plate-shaped bodies in the longitudinal direction, in a region of the roll main body except for a wrapping region of the metal strip. Clerx teaches centering guides facing the end surfaces of the plate-shaped bodies in the longitudinal direction, in a region of the roll main body except for a wrapping region of the metal strip so that the plate-shaped bodies can be returned to their original position once they are no longer in contact with the belt (Clerx, Pg. 3, Lines 1-5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the centering guide of Iifushi for the centering guides of Clerx and the results of the substitution would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as the function of the centering guide of Clerx was known.
Re Claim 7, Iifushi, in view of Clerx, disclose the deflector roll according to claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above), and further discloses that the centering guides each include a base that is held on the roll frame and a guide plate that is supported at one end on the base; and the guide plate has a guide surface extending from a free end to a fixed end, wherein a distance between a roll end surface of the roll main body and the free end is greater than a distance between the roll end surface of the roll main body and the fixed end, and a distance from the roll end surface of the roll main body to the guide surface decreases gradually toward the fixed end (Clerx, Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iifushi (JPS61176417) in view of Clerx et. al. (WO2015130171), hereinafter referred to as “Clerx” and further in view of Tober (FR402482).
Re Claim 15, Iifushi, in view of Clerx, discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces the steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 6 is installed (see rejection of claim 6 above), the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll, along with the metal strip wrapped on the deflector roll, is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi, in view of Clerx, discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi, in view of Clerx, contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi, in view of Clerx. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi, in view of Clerx, with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 16, Iifushi, in view of Clerx discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 7 is installed (see rejection of claim 7 above), the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll, along with the metal strip wrapped on the deflector roll, is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi, in view of Clerx, discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi, in view of Clerx, contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi, in view of Clerx. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi, in view of Clerx, with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Claim(s) 8, 10-14 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iifushi (JPS61176417) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tober (FR402482).
Re Claim 8, Iifushi discloses the deflector roll according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), and Iiushi fails to disclose that the roll frame has guide rollers that are respectively located on both end sides of the metal strip in a width direction to prevent the metal strip from rolling out while being threaded.
Tober teaches that the roll frame has guide rollers (pair of rollers e and pair of rollers f) that are respectively located on both end sides of the metal strip in a width direction (see Fig. 20) to prevent the metal strip from rolling out while being threaded.
Tober and Iifushi include each element of claim 8 with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of references in a single prior art reference. It would be obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to have combined the elements as claimed by attaching the one set of the guide rollers of Tober to the roll frame downstream of the deflector roll of Iifushi and one set of the guide rollers of Tober to the roll frame upstream of the deflector roll of Iifushi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized this combination as predictable.
Re Claim 10, Iifushi discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 11, Iifushi discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 12, Iifushi discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 13, Iifushi discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 4 (see rejection of claim 4 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 14, Iifushi discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 17, Iifushi, in view of Tober, discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Re Claim 18, Iifushi discloses a method of producing a steel sheet using a deflector roll that produces a steel sheet by transferring a metal strip having undergone an upstream-side production process to a downstream-side production process so as to pass through a looper device in which at least one deflector roll according to claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above) is installed, the method comprising: while the metal strip is passing through the looper device, the sliding member of the deflector roll is moved along the axial direction of the roll main body using a frictional force attributable to meandering of the metal strip (when the metal strip meanders, the contact between the metal strip and the roll inherently causes a friction force which inherently causes axial movement).
Iifushi discloses that the metal strip is supported by the deflector roll (Fig. 5) and fails to disclose that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll.
Tober teaches that the metal strip is wrapped on the deflector roll which changes the direction of travel of the metal strip (Fig. 17)
Iifushi contained a method which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of wrapping the metal strip on the deflector roll as claimed for merely supporting the metal strip with the deflector roll as in Iifushi. However, wrapping the metal strip along a deflector roll to change the direction of travel of the strip was known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective foiling date of the claimed invention to have substituted supporting the metal strip with the roll as in Iifushi with wrapping the metal strip around the deflector roll as in Tober and the results of this substitution would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as wrapping the metal strip around a deflector roll was known to change the direction of travel of the metal strip.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 28th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued:
“Claim 1 recites: "wherein the sliding member is configured to have the metal strip wrapped thereon and to be movable along an axial direction of the roll main body together with the metal strip while maintaining that wrapped state." The applied references do not teach or suggest at least this claim feature.”
Iifushi discloses a transport roller 4 that is designed to be free from bending deformation or damage caused by thermal expansion and that does not generate noise. See Iifushi (translation provided by the Office Action), page 1, ,r [0001] (including the "Problems to be Solved by the Invention"). In particular, the arc pieces 10 (alleged sliding member) of the roller 4 of Iifushi would cause noise due to impact if they were allowed to move freely in the axial direction. Therefore, Iifushi teaches that the arc pieces 10 are constrained and held at both ends by the end plates 9, 11. See id. at p. 1, ,r [0001] (including "Means for solving the problems"), and p. 2, last sentence of the first paragraph. Iifushi discloses that the arc pieces 10 are held onto the end plates 9, 11 independently of each other with a spring 12 press-fitted in the longitudinal direction in aa gap between the plate 11 and the respective arc piece 10. See id. at p. 1, and Figs. 1-3 (reproduced below).”
and
“Therefore, because the arc piece 10 is always pressed against one direction in the longitudinal direction by the spring 12, the arc piece 10 does not freely move and collide. Indeed, the alleged sliding member (arc pieces 10) of lifushi is subjected to a spring-applied biasing force in the axial direction, which restricts free movement in that direction. Thus, the alleged sliding member 10 of lifushi is not configured to be movable along an axial direction of the roll main body, much less together with the metal strip, as recited by claim 1.”
Applicant argues that because the arc piece 10 of Iifushi is subject to a force which restricts free movement in the axial direction, the arc piece 10 of Iifushi is not configured to be movable in the axial direction as recited by claim 1. The examiner disagrees.
First, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the sliding member being able to freely move and collide) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). If one were to apply a force upon the arc piece 10 of Iifushi in the axial direction, the arc piece 10 of Iifushi would move in the axial direction, compressing the spring 12 of Iifushi. Therefore, the arc piece 10 of iifishi is configured “to be movable along an axial direction of the roll main body” as in the claim language.
Second, the broadest reasonable interpretation of applicant’s claim 1 includes sliding members that are restricted from free movement in the axial direction by a spring. Applicant’s claim 9, which depends from and is thereby narrower than claim 1, specifies that the sliding member has an elastic member “that returns the sliding member to its original position by an urging force”. The specification states “plate-shaped bodies 3a are returned to their original positions and centered by the urging force of the elastic member 14” (Pg. 14, line 24-26). Figs. 17-18 show this elastic member to be a spring. Therefore, the arc piece 10 meets the claimed limitation of “movable along an axial direction.”
“The Office Action asserts Iifushi teaches that the spring 12 allows the arc piece 10 to expand due to thermal expansion and to contract if cooled. According to the Office Action, this corresponds to movement along the axial direction. However, Iifushi teaches that the thermal expansion/contraction of the arc piece 10 in the longitudinal direction is limited. See id. at p. 2, first paragraph.”
As noted above, even though the movement of the sliding member of Iifushi is limited, it is still configured to move relative to the roll main body in the axial direction.
“Moreover, the alleged sliding member 10 of Iifushi is not configured to be movable along an axial direction of the roll main body together with the metal strip while maintaining that wrapped state, as recited by claim 1.”
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Therefore, the rejections are being maintained.
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 WILLIAM D DICKSTEIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at 5712701477. 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.
/W.D.D./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights