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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/10/2024, 01/17/2025, 06/12/2025, and 03/06/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8-10, 15, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski).
Regarding claim 1, Pietruszewski discloses a mixing impeller, comprising: an impeller body (figure 2, bell 11), wherein the impeller body defines, at a bottom end of the impeller body, a cavity (column 6, line 53, “open at its bottom end 17”) extending to a top end of the impeller body (column 7, line 16, “hollow rotatable bell 11”), and the impeller body defines an overflow hole (openings 13) in communication with the cavity at a side wall of the impeller body.
Regarding claim 2, Pietruszewski discloses the overflow hole is implemented as a plurality of overflow holes (figure 2, openings 13), the plurality of overflow holes are arranged around the side wall of the impeller body at intervals (see figure 2), and the plurality of overflow holes are disposed at part of the side wall close to the top end of the impeller body (see figure 2, the position of the openings 13 is deemed to meet the broad recitation of “close”).
Regarding claim 4, Pietruszewski discloses the impeller body is provided with a baffle (figure 2, blades 20) above the overflow hole, and the baffle is inclined from the top end of the impeller body to the bottom end of the impeller body (see figure 2). It is noted that claim 4 does not recite that the baffle extends from the top end to the bottom end, merely that is it inclined along that axis.
Regarding claim 6, Pietruszewski discloses the overflow hole (figure 2, openings 13) is arranged in a radial direction of the impeller body (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 8, Pietruszewski discloses the overflow hole (figure 2, openings 13) is a circular hole, an elliptic hole, a polygonal hole, or a flat hole (see figure 2, the openings are polygonal).
Regarding claim 9, Pietruszewski discloses the impeller body comprises a cylinder section (figure 2, lower part of bell 11) and a frustum section (upper part of bell 11) smoothly connected to the cylinder section, the frustum section has a large end connected to the cylinder section (see figure 2), and the cavity passes through the cylinder section and extends into the frustum section (column 7, line 16, “hollow rotatable bell 11”).
Regarding claim 10, Pietruszewski discloses the overflow hole is defined on a side wall of the frustum section (see position of openings 13 in figure 2).
Regarding claim 15, Pietruszewski discloses a pulping device (intended use, the disclosed device would be structurally capable of this function), comprising: a housing (figure 1, tank 1); and a mixing impeller disposed in the housing and comprising: an impeller body (figure 2, bell 11), wherein the impeller body defines, at a bottom end of the impeller body, a cavity (column 6, line 53, “open at its bottom end 17”) extending to a top end of the impeller body (column 7, line 16, “hollow rotatable bell 11”), and the impeller body defines an overflow hole (openings 13) in communication with the cavity at a side wall of the impeller body.
Regarding claim 16, Pietruszewski discloses the overflow hole is implemented as a plurality of overflow holes (figure 2, openings 13), the plurality of overflow holes are arranged around the side wall of the impeller body at intervals (see figure 2), and the plurality of overflow holes are disposed at part of the side wall close to the top end of the impeller body (see figure 2, the position of the openings 13 is deemed to meet the broad recitation of “close”).
Regarding claim 18, Pietruszewski discloses the impeller body is provided with a baffle (figure 2, blades 20) above the overflow hole, and the baffle is inclined from the top end of the impeller body to the bottom end of the impeller body (see figure 2). It is noted that claim 4 does not recite that the baffle extends from the top end to the bottom end, merely that is it inclined along that axis.
Regarding claim 20, Pietruszewski discloses the overflow hole (figure 2, openings 13) is arranged in a radial direction of the impeller body (see figure 2).
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.
Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski) in view of Sotoudeh (US PGPub 2022/0054993, hereinafter Sotoudeh).
Regarding claims 3 and 17, Pietruszewski is silent to the inclined overflow holes as recited. Sotoudeh teaches a mixing impeller having an impeller body with a cavity and overflow holes (figure 4) wherein the overflow hole is inclined from the top end of the impeller body to the bottom end of the impeller body in a direction from an inner wall of the impeller body to an outer wall of the impeller body (see figure 4). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the device of Pietruszewski with inclined overflow holes for the purpose of directing fluid as needed to achieve a desire mixing result.
Claims 5 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski) in view of Philosophow (DE 879081, hereinafter Philosophow).
Regarding claims 5 and 19, Pietruszewski is silent to the inclined overflow holes as recited. Philosophow teaches teaches a mixing impeller having an impeller body with a cavity and overflow holes (figure 1) wherein the overflow hole is inclined from the bottom end of the impeller body to the top end of the impeller body in a direction from an inner wall of the impeller body to an outer wall of the impeller body (see item 10). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the device of Pietruszewski with inclined overflow holes for the purpose of directing fluid as needed to achieve a desire mixing result.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski) in view of Hattori (US PGPub 2014/0177379, hereinafter Hattori).
Regarding claim 7, Pietruszewski is silent to the inclined overflow holes as recited. Hattori teaches a mixing impeller having an impeller body with a cavity and overflow holes (figure 2) wherein the overflow hole is inclined to the same side from inside to outside as a direction opposite to a rotation direction of the impeller body (see figure 3). It is noted that the direction of rotation of the impeller body is a method of operation of the device and the impeller bodies of Pietruszewski and Hattori would be fully capable of being rotated in either direction. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the device of Pietruszewski with inclined overflow holes for the purpose of directing fluid as needed to achieve a desire mixing result.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski) in view of Guifang (CN105457524, hereinafter Guifang, provided by Applicant).
Regarding claim 11, Pietruszewski is silent to a ring cavity. Guifang teaches a mixing impeller having a cavity therein (figures 1 and 2), wherein the cavity is a ring cavity (item 6 extending through the cavity form a ring cavity thereabout). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the device of Pietruszewski with a ring cavity for the purpose of allowing for shaft support both below and above the impeller, as depicted in Guifang.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski) in view of Shiyuuichi (JPS57203413, hereinafter Shiyuuichi, provided by Applciant).
Regarding claim 12, Pietruszewski is silent to sub-cavities. Shiyuuichi teaches a mixing impeller having a cavity therein (figure 3) wherein the cavity comprises a plurality of sub-cavities arranged at intervals, and the plurality of sub-cavities cooperatively form the cavity (sub-cavities separated by item 14 in figure 3). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Pietruszewski with the sub-cavities of Shiyuuichi for the purpose of increasing turbulence around the mixer by having additional structure to direct fluid flow.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietruszewski (US 4066722, hereinafter Pietruszewski) in view of Hoefken (US PGPUb 2009/0127213, hereinafter Hoefken).
Regarding claim 13, Pietruszewski is silent to the vanes as recited. Hoefken teaches a mixing impeller having an impeller body with a cavity and overflow holes (figure 2) wherein the impeller body is provided with a plurality of vanes (figure 4, ribs 7) arranged at intervals at an outer wall of impeller body, and at least one overflow hole is defined in an area between two adjacent vanes (see figure 4). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Pietruszewski with the vanes of Hoefken for the purpose of enhancing mixing of the material by creating more turbulence.
Regarding claim 14, Pietruszewski is silent to the vanes as recited. Hoefken teaches a mixing impeller having an impeller body with a cavity and overflow holes (figure 2) wherein the impeller body is provided with a plurality of vanes (figure 4, ribs 7) arranged at intervals at an outer wall of impeller body. In this modification of Pietruszewski, the vanes would line up with the baffles and abut against them as recited. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Pietruszewski with the vanes of Hoefken for the purpose of enhancing mixing of the material by creating more turbulence.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited prior art generally discloses impellers having internal cavities and overflow holes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC C HOWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-9834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/MARC C HOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights