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
Claims 14-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 04/04/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of in the reply filed on 04/04/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claimed method cannot be practiced with a materially different apparatus, the claimed apparatus cannot be used to practice a materially different process, no serious search or examination burden exists, and the inventions are not patentably distinct.
This is not found persuasive because as expressly recited in MPEP 806.05(e) “process and apparatus for its practice can be shown to be distinct inventions, if either or both of the following can be shown: (A) that the process as claimed can be practiced by another materially different apparatus or by hand; or (B) that the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another materially different process”. For example, the method (process) does not the need the particulars of the apparatus, specifically “a motor equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed” and could be practice with another materially different apparatus such an apparatus with a fixed-speed motor (DC motor). Thus, the claimed method can be practiced with a materially different apparatus. Furthermore, the apparatus does not require the particular steps of the method, specifically “repurposing the thermal energy extracted from the thermally conductive fluid” and could be practice with another materially process that can exhaust/dissipate the thermal energy. Thus, the claimed apparatus can be practiced with a materially different method. Lastly, as expressly recited in MPEP 808.02 (C) "A different field of search" Where it is necessary to search for one of the inventions in a manner that is not likely to result in finding art pertinent to the other invention(s) (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries, a different field of search is shown, even though the two are classified together”. For example both inventions are classified in different classes and if applicant elected invention 2, which is drawn to a method, the examiner would be required to search terms such as “repurposing thermal energy” or “capturing the thermal energy” that indicate features of that invention. For the elected invention 1, that is drawn to an apparatus, the examiner would be required to search terms such as “motor” and “variable frequency drive (VFD)” that indicate features of the elected invention. Thus employing different search queries. Therefore, the inventions are patentably distinct.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Status of Claims
The action is in reply to the Application filed on 03/13/2024. Claims 1-17 are currently pending. Claims 14-17 are withdrawn. Claims 1-13 are being examined.
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:
“an attachment configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into an HVAC duct system” in claim 5, lines 1-2;
“an attachment configured to utilize the heat extracted by the condensing coil for any application where such heat is beneficial” in claim 6, lines 1-2;
“an attachment configured to utilize the heated thermally conductive fluid for any application where such fluid is beneficial” in claim 7, lines 1-3;
“an exhaust mechanism mounted on one of the doors” in claim 12, line 1;
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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
In claim 7, lines 1-2 “an attachment configured to utilize the heated thermally conductive fluid”;
Claim Objections
Claims 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 4, 5, and 13 “the fluid” should be “the thermally conductive fluid”
In claim 1, line 5 “fluid expel into the surrounding air” should be “fluid expel into [[the]] a surrounding air”
In claim 1, line 7 “the movement of the a sanding belt” should be “[[the]] a movement of the a sanding belt”
In claim 1, line 8 “each of which are bolted to a steel frame” should be “each of the lead drum pulley and the tail drum pulley are bolted to a steel frame”
In claim 2-13, line 1, “The invention of claim” should be “The sanding table apparatus of claim”
In claim 3, line 2 “facilitating the flow of the thermally conductive fluid” should be “facilitating [[the]] a flow of the thermally conductive fluid”
In claim 4, line 2 “into the surrounding area” should be “into [[the]] a surrounding area”
In claim 7, lines 2-3 “such fluid is beneficial” should be “such the thermally conductive fluid is beneficial”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“an exhaust mechanism” “designed for dust extraction” in claim 12, lines 1-2
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 6-7 and 12-13 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 6 recites the limitation "the first heat exchange system includes an attachment configured to utilize the heat extracted by the condensing coil for any application where such heat is beneficial" in lines 1-3. It is unclear what qualifies/constitutes as any application in order to be considered an application that benefits from the heat extracted by the condensing coil, thus the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite. For examining purposes, the examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be intended use met by any attachment of the first heat exchange system that is capable of utilizing the heat extracted by the condensing coil.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein the second heat exchange system includes an attachment configured to utilize the heated thermally conductive fluid for any application where such fluid is beneficial” in lines 1-3. It is unclear what qualifies/constitutes as any application in order to be considered an application that benefits from the heated thermally conductive fluid, thus the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite. For examining purposes, the examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be intended use met by any attachment of the second heat exchange system that is capable of using the thermally conductive fluid.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the water tank" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the tank" in line 2. It is unclear which tank applicant is referring to since a fluid tank is introduced in claim 1, line 2 and the water tank is introduced in claim 13, line 1, thus rendering the claim indefinite. For examining purposes, the Examiner to interpret the claim limitation to be referring the fluid tank.
Claim limitation “an exhaust mechanism” “designed for dust extraction”, in claim 12, lines 1-2 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is devoid of adequate structure to perform the claimed function. In particular, the specification has no written description of the exhaust mechanism. There is no disclosure of any particular structure, either explicitly or inherently, to perform dust extraction. The use of the term “exhaust mechanism” is not adequate structure for performing dust extraction function because it does not describe a particular structure for performing the function. As would be recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art, there are many different ways to actively suck liquid. The specification does not provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand which mechanical structures perform(s) the claimed function.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As described above, the disclosure does not provide adequate structure to perform the claimed function of the exhaust mechanism designed for dust extraction. The specification does not demonstrate that applicant has made an invention that achieves the claimed function because the invention is not described with sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
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, 7, 9, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 212145993) in view of Li (CN 202180566), Anderson (US Patent No. 4,750,297), and Tan (CN 104526510).
Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses: a sanding table apparatus (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0031) comprising:
a fluid tank (element 10) for storing a thermally conductive fluid (see paragraph 0032/0040 where the prior art disclose element 10 as “a cooling water tank” that receives “cooling water” (thermally conductive fluid));
a motor equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed, wherein the motor facilitates the movement of a sanding belt, which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley and a tail drum pulley, each of which are bolted to a steel frame;
a thermally conductive plate (element 1 and see also paragraph 0031) positioned beneath the sanding apparatus (see figure 1 and see also paragraph 0031 where the prior art discloses element 1 (thermally conductive plate) being disposed on the bottom surface of a belt sander platform), configured to support a workpiece, and forming part of a second heat exchange system that transfers heat generated from the workpiece during sanding, through the thermally conductive plate and into the thermally conductive fluid (see paragraph 0033 where the prior art discloses the thermally conductive plate (element 1) is fixed under the sander operating platform, which is well known in the art to be capable of supporting a workpiece and see paragraph 0040 where the prior art discloses utilizing element 1 (thermally conductive plate) with other components in order to have cooling water enter “spiral water tank” (element 2) of element 1 to “fully cool the sander operating platform, taking away the heat generated by sanding and grinding”, thus the thermally conductive plate would necessarily be placed the sander which supports the workpiece and would necessarily form a second heat exchange system that transfers heat generated from the workpiece during sanding, through the thermally conductive plate and into the thermally conductive fluid);
and a pump (element 8 and see also paragraph 0032) configured to circulate the fluid between the fluid tank and the thermally conductive plate (see figure 1 and see also paragraphs 0031-0032).
Furthermore, Sun utilizes a different means of a first heat exchange system in order to cool the fluid by utilizing a drum-type ventilation assembly (element 1001) and a drum type pre-cooling component (element 1002) installed inside the fluid tank (see paragraph 0034) which have air blown into the ventilation openings of the drums in order to cool (see paragraph 0040). However, Sun appears to be silent wherein a first heat exchange system, comprising an evaporator coil submerged in the thermally conductive fluid within the fluid tank, operationally linked to a compressor and an externally located condensing coil, designed to extract heat from the fluid and expel it into the surrounding air, thereby cooling the fluid, a motor equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed, wherein the motor facilitates the movement of a sanding belt, which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley and a tail drum pulley, each of which are bolted to a steel frame, and the thermally conductive plate is beneath the sanding belt.
Li is also concern in providing a cooling mechanism for an apparatus (Figure 1 and see also page 001, under “Technical Field”) comprising a fluid tank (element 6 and see also see also page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001) and a first heat exchange system (elements ), comprising an evaporator coil (element 4 and see also page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001 where the prior art discloses element 4 as “an evaporator”) submerged in the thermally conductive fluid within the fluid tank (see figure 1 and see also page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001), operationally linked to a compressor (element 1 and see also page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001 where the prior art discloses element 1 as “a compressor”) and an externally located condensing coil (see figure 1 showing an externally located condensing coil (element 2) and see also page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001 where the prior art discloses element 2 as “a condenser”) , designed to extract heat from the fluid and expel it into the surrounding air (see page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 002).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the first heat exchange system of Sun with the first heat exchange system Li to provide wherein first heat exchange system, comprising an evaporator coil submerged in the thermally conductive fluid within the fluid tank, operationally linked to a compressor and an externally located condensing coil, designed to extract heat from the fluid and expel it into the surrounding air, thereby cooling the fluid, since simple substitution of known elements for another to obtain a predictable results of providing a heat exchange system. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a known heat exchange system having an evaporator, compressor, and condensing coil would necessarily provide the predictable result of reducing water temperature in order to provide cool water into the system, thereby allowing the user to utilize cool water in order to control the temperature of the apparatus and prevent the temperature of the apparatus from rising during operations (See MPEP 2143.1(B)).
Furthermore, Sun modified discloses the that the thermally conductive plate (element 1 and see also paragraph 0031) is fitted and installed under a belt sander operating platform (see paragraph 0031/0033). However, Sun modified does not explicitly disclose the particular structure of the belt sander including a motor equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed, wherein the motor facilitates the movement of a sanding belt, which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley and a tail drum pulley, each of which are bolted to a steel frame, and the thermally conductive plate is beneath the sanding belt.
Anderson is also concern in providing a sanding table apparatus (Figures 1-4 and see also col. 3, ll. 63-65) comprising a belt sander operating platform (element 56) and a motor (element 28 and see also col. 4, ll. 4-9), wherein the motor facilitates the movement of a sanding belt (element 8 and see also col. 4, ll. 4-9), which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley (element 20) and a tail drum pulley (element 22), each of which are bolted to a steel frame (elements 14/16).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Anderson to provide the particular structure of the belt sander including, a motor wherein the motor facilitates the movement of a sanding belt, which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley and a tail drum pulley, each of which are bolted to a steel frame. The resultant combination would have the belt sander operating platform, motor, sanding belt, lead drum pully, and tail drum pulley of Anderson now above the thermally conductive plate of Sun modified which would necessarily have the thermally conductive plate operably beneath the sanding belt via the belt sander operating platform. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a known belt sander with the particular structure of claim 1 including the motor, sanding belt, lead drum pully, and tail drum pulley would necessarily provide a sanding apparatus which is known to quickly flatten, level, and smooth surfaces of a workpiece during operations, thus increasing efficiency and time savings.
However, Sun modified appears to be silent wherein the motor is equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed.
Tan is also concern in providing a sanding apparatus (Figures 1-2 and see also paragraph 0023) comprising a motor (element 12) operably connected to a lead drum pulley (element 13/132), a trail drum pulley (element 152), and a sanding belt (element 16) that is operably moved via the motor (see paragraph 0025). Tan further teaches wherein the motor is equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed (see paragraph 0025 where the prior art discloses the motor is “a variable frequency speed control motor” (i.e. variable frequency drive system) which allows the user to “adjust the sanding belt speed”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Tan to provide wherein the motor is equipped with a variable frequency drive system for adjusting sanding speed. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a variable frequency speed control motor would necessarily provide the predictable result allow the user to adjust the sanding belt speed according to the process requirements of different products to achieve the best sanding effect as disclosed by Tan (see paragraph 0025).
Regarding claim 2, Sun modified discloses: the invention of claim 1, wherein the motor is configured to connect to a standard 220V outlet (Giving that the prior art modified discloses the motor and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of being connected to a standard 220V outlet, as recited.) and includes a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) system (see paragraph 0025 of prior art Tan) capable of converting 220V 2-phase power to 3-phase power (Giving that the prior art modified discloses the variable frequency drive (VFD) system and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of converting 220V 2-phase power to 3-phase power, as recited.).
Regarding claim 3, Sun modified discloses: the invention of claim 1, wherein the thermally conductive plate includes multiple bore holes (elements 3/4) equipped with fittings (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) for facilitating the flow of the thermally conductive fluid (see paragraphs 0032/0040).
PNG
media_image1.png
648
890
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Sun modified discloses: the invention of claim 1, wherein the second heat exchange system includes an attachment (element 7) configured to utilize the heated thermally conductive fluid for any application where such fluid is beneficial (Giving that the prior art modified discloses the attachment and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable to utilize the heated thermally conductive fluid for any application where such fluid is beneficial, as recited.).
Regarding claim 9, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent further comprising a set of tail pulley adjustment mechanisms, each equipped with an adjustable bolt, allowing for fine-tuning of the sanding belt's tension and alignment by adjusting the position of the tail pulley relative to the lead pulley.
Anderson is also concern in providing a sanding table apparatus (Figures 1-4 and see also col. 3, ll. 63-65) comprising a motor (element 28 and see also col. 4, ll. 4-9), wherein the motor facilitates the movement of a sanding belt (element 8 and see also col. 4, ll. 4-9), which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley (element 20) and a tail drum pulley (element 22), each of which are bolted to a steel frame (elements 14/16). Anderson further teaches a set of tail pulley adjustment mechanisms (element 32 and see also col. 4, ll. 15-22 where the prior disclose the structure of element 32 and further discloses “an identical tension adjusting means is mounted to linear support frame 16, but does not show in FIG. 1”, thus having a set of tail pulley adjustment mechanisms ), each equipped with an adjustable bolt (element 38), allowing for fine-tuning of the sanding belt's tension and alignment by adjusting the position of the tail pulley relative to the lead pulley (see col. 4, ll. 15-22).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Anderson to provide a tail pulley adjustment mechanisms, equipped with an adjustable bolt, allowing for fine-tuning of the sanding belt's tension and alignment by adjusting the position of the tail pulley relative to the lead pulley. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a known tail pulley adjustment mechanisms would necessarily permit the tension in abrasive belt to be varied and to facilitate removal and replacement of the belt as disclosed by Anderson (see col. 4, ll. 13-22).
Regarding claim 13, Sun modified discloses: the invention of claim 1, wherein the water tank contains 25 gallons of water (Giving that the prior art modified discloses the tank and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of containing 25 gallons of water, as recited.) and includes a compact pump (see prior art of Li, element 5 and see also page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001 where the prior art discloses element 5 as “a pump”) to circulate the water within the tank (see page 002, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001-002), enhancing the heat exchange efficiency between the water and the evaporator coil (Giving that the prior art modified discloses the compact pump and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of enhancing the heat exchange efficiency between the water and the evaporator coil, as recited.).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 212145993) in view of Li (CN 202180566), Anderson (US Patent No. 4,750,297), and Tan (CN 104526510) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Allard (US Patent No. 4,376,510).
Regarding claim 4, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein the first heat exchange system includes a blower configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into the surrounding area.
Allard is also concern in providing an apparatus (Figure 1 and see also col. 3, ll. 23-34) comprising a first heat exchange system (elements 17/21/23/27/33) comprising an evaporator (element 21) operationally linked to a compressor (element 23), and condensing coil (element 27 and see also col. 3, ll. 36). Allard further teaches wherein the first heat exchange system includes a blower (element 31 and see also col. 3, ll. 35 where the prior art discloses element 31 as “a blower”) configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into the surrounding area (see col. 3, ll. 35-43).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Allard to provide wherein the first heat exchange system includes a blower configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into the surrounding area. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing a known blower into the heat exchange system of Sun would necessarily provide the added feature of directing heat produced from the condensing coil in order to heat a space as disclosed by Allard (see col. 3, ll. 41-42), thus enhancing the capabilities of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 5, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein the first heat exchange system includes an attachment configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into an HVAC duct system.
Allard is also concern in providing an apparatus (Figure 1 and see also col. 3, ll. 23-34) comprising a first heat exchange system (elements 17/21/23/27/33) comprising an evaporator (element 21) operationally linked to a compressor (element 23), condensing coils (element 27 and see also col. 3, ll. 36), and a blower (element 31 and see also col. 3, ll. 35 where the prior art discloses element 31 as “a blower”). Allard further teaches wherein the first heat exchange system includes an attachment (element 33) configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into an HVAC duct system (See col. 3, ll. 41-43 where the prior art discloses the heated air directed via element 31 (blower) to element 33 (attachment) into element 35, therefore giving that the prior art discloses the attachment directing heated air into another component and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable to direct air heated by the condensing coil into an HVAC duct system, as recited.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Allard to provide wherein the first heat exchange system includes an attachment configured to direct air heated by the condensing coil into an HVAC duct system. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing an attachment in combination with a known blower into the heat exchange system of Sun would necessarily provide the added feature of directing heat produced from the condensing coil in order to heat a space as disclosed by Allard (see col. 3, ll. 41-42), thus enhancing the capabilities of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 6, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein the first heat exchange system includes an attachment configured to utilize the heat extracted by the condensing coil for any application where such heat is beneficial.
Allard is also concern in providing an apparatus (Figure 1 and see also col. 3, ll. 23-34) comprising a first heat exchange system (elements 17/21/23/27/33) comprising an evaporator (element 21) operationally linked to a compressor (element 23), condensing coils (element 27 and see also col. 3, ll. 36), and a blower (element 31 and see also col. 3, ll. 35 where the prior art discloses element 31 as “a blower”). Allard further teaches wherein the first heat exchange system includes an attachment (element 33) configured to utilize the heat extracted by the condensing coil for any application where such heat is beneficial (see col. 3, ll. 41-43).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Allard to provide wherein the first heat exchange system includes an attachment configured to utilize the heat extracted by the condensing coil for any application where such heat is beneficial. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing an attachment in combination with a known blower into the heat exchange system of Sun would necessarily provide the added feature of directing heat produced from the condensing coil in order to heat a space as disclosed by Allard (see col. 3, ll. 41-42), thus enhancing the capabilities of the apparatus.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 212145993) in view of Li (CN 202180566), Anderson (US Patent No. 4,750,297), and Tan (CN 104526510) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Qui (CN115256147).
Regarding claim 8, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent further comprising a plurality of guide wheels positioned between the lead drum pulley and the tail drum pulley, designed to maintain the alignment and stability of the sanding belt.
Qui is also concern in providing a sanding table apparatus (Figures 1-7 and see also paragraph 0027) comprising a motor (element 3a4 and see also paragraph 0028), a sanding belt (element 3b2), which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley (see figure 4 annotated below Detail A) and a tail drum pulley (see figure 4 annotated below Detail A). Qui further teaches the sanding table apparatus comprises a plurality of guide wheels (element 3c4 and see also paragraph 0031 where the prior art discloses “two” elements 3c4) positioned between the lead drum pulley and the tail drum pulley (see figure 5 showing a close-up of box C having the guide wheels (element 3c4) and see figure 4 annotated below showing the box C, which comprises the guide wheels (element 3c4), being positioned between the lead drum pulley (Detail A) and the tail drum pulley (Detail B)), designed to maintain the alignment and stability of the sanding belt (Giving that the prior art discloses the plurality of guide wheels (element 3c4) in contact with the sanding belt (element 3b2) and further discloses “stabilizing the grinding belt 3b2 through” element 3c4 (see paragraph 0031) and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable having the plurality of guide wheels be designed to maintain the alignment and stability of the sanding belt, as recited.).
PNG
media_image2.png
638
731
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Qui to provide a plurality of guide wheels positioned between the lead drum pulley and the tail drum pulley, designed to maintain the alignment and stability of the sanding belt. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having guiding wheels stabilizing the sanding belt would necessarily prevent vibration during a grinding process, further ensuring the uniformity of the grinding as disclosed by Qui (see paragraph 0031).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 212145993) in view of Li (CN 202180566), Anderson (US Patent No. 4,750,297), and Tan (CN 104526510) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Heck (US Patent No. 4,924,633).
Regarding claim 10, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent further comprising a hinged workpiece fence positioned at the lead end of the thermally conductive plate.
Heck teaches it was known in the art to have a sanding table apparatus (Figures 1-12 and see also col. 3, ll. 32-40) comprising a motor (see col. 3, ll. 34-40) for facilitating the movement of a sanding belt (element 108). Heck further teaches the sanding table apparatus comprises a hinged workpiece fence (element 311 and see also col. 4, ll. 51-68).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Heck to provide a hinged workpiece fence. The resultant combination would have the hinged workpiece fence of Heck would now be positioned at a lead end of the thermally conductive plate of Sun modified. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having an adjustable fence would necessarily support workpieces being sanded by the sander during operations, thus maintaining the workpiece in position and preventing the workpiece from moving and not being evenly sanded.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 212145993) in view of Li (CN 202180566), Anderson (US Patent No. 4,750,297), and Tan (CN 104526510) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang (CN 219275559).
Regarding claim 11, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent further encased within an enclosure on all sides but one, wherein the one open side features two half-doors that partially enclose the open side, allowing access for workpiece manipulation and usage of the invention.
Wang teaches it was known in the art a sanding table apparatus (Figures 1-5 and see also paragraph 0031) comprising a motor (element 41) that facilitates movement of a sanding belt (element 48 and see also paragraph 0041), which is tensioned across a lead drum pulley (element 44/47) and a tail drum pulley (elements 45). Wang further teaches wherein the sanding table apparatus is further encased within an enclosure (element 11) on all sides but one (see figure 3 showing two doors (element 15) in one of the sides, thus when the doors are open a portion of that side is open and therefore would necessarily have the sanding table apparatus enclosed all sides but one), wherein the one open side features two half-doors (element 15) that partially enclose the open side (see figure 3 showing two doors (element 15), thus the prior art would be capable of having one of the two doors close while the other door is open, thus would necessarily be capable of partially enclosing the open side), allowing access for workpiece manipulation and usage of the invention (see paragraph 0046).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Wang to provide wherein the sanding table apparatus is encased within an enclosure on all sides but one, wherein the one open side features two half-doors that partially enclose the open side, allowing access for workpiece manipulation and usage of the invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing an enclosure that encases the sanding table apparatus would necessarily provide a closed processing space which prevent debris from escaping during sanding operations while also providing doors which would necessarily allow the user to open and access inner components of the apparatus, thus reducing pollution and improving safety during operations.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 212145993) in view of Li (CN 202180566), Anderson (US Patent No. 4,750,297), Tan (CN 104526510), and Wang (CN 219275559) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Armstrong (WO 2005011916).
Regarding claim 12, Sun modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 1 and 11, but appears to be silent wherein the sanding apparatus further comprising an exhaust mechanism mounted on one of the doors, designed for dust extraction to enhance the operational environment by removing dust generated during sanding operations.
Armstrong teaches it was known in the art a sanding table apparatus (Figure 1 and see also page 004, under “Detail Description” paragraph 001) comprising a lead drum pulley (element 150) that is coupled to a motor (see page 005 paragraph 002), a tail drum pulley (element 105/170), a sanding belt (element 110), and an enclosure (element 95) having a door (see page 004, under “Detail Description”, paragraph 002). Armstrong further teaches an exhaust mechanism (elements 120/125/130) mounted on one of the doors (see page 004, under “Detail Description”, paragraph 002 where the prior art discloses element 95 (enclosure) comprises at least one component (door) and see figure 1 showing a portion (element 130) of the exhaust mechanism being mounted on the element 95, thus the exhaust mechanism would necessarily be operably mounted to one of the door via element 95), designed for dust extraction to enhance the operational environment by removing dust generated during sanding operations (See page 008, paragraph 001 where the prior art discloses utilizing a component (element 120) of the exhaust mechanism to release debris within the enclosure, thus giving that the prior art discloses the exhaust mechanism and there is no additional structure provided or structural difference, therefore the prior art would be capable having the exhaust mechanism designed for dust extraction to enhance the operational environment by removing dust generated during sanding operations, as recited.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sun to incorporate the teachings of Armstrong to provide wherein the sanding table apparatus further comprising an exhaust mechanism mounted on one of the doors, designed for dust extraction to enhance the operational environment by removing dust generated during sanding operations. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having an exhaust mechanism would necessarily allow the user to vent debris from inside the enclosure, thus releasing debris and reducing the amount containment within the enclosure which would necessarily promote cleanliness during operations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERTO SAENZ whose telephone number is (313)446-6610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30PM 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights