DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 7/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that US 20110229635 A1 (the ‘635 Publication) (hereinafter Tsuji) fails to disclose specific technical features recited in claim 1. Applicant argues that the prior art discloses a powder feeding device that supplies powder to an ejector. However, this powder feeding device lacks the specific structural and functional features of the dosing unit claimed in the present application.
This is not found persuasive for several reasons. First, the Tsuji teaches the claimed elements of claim 1 of the current application. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed elements linking Groups I and II is taught in the Tsuji reference. (See the detailed analysis below in the rejection of claim 1 or in the restriction requirement mailed on 5-19-26 .)
Secondly, Applicant does not specifically identify what those features are. In order for the traversal to be persuasive, Applicant should provides evidence from the claims and the restriction to support their position.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
“gas buffer tank” in claim 5.
It is unclear what the curved dark line in Fig. 2 refers to. Clarification is requested.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “4” has been used to designate both the control unit in Fig. 4 and automatic transfer unit in Fig. 5.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “2” has been used to designate both “gas buffer tank” in Fig. 2 and “conveying unit” in Fig. 2 based on paragraph 40.
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. 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 title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The reference character “2” has been used to designate both “gas buffer tank” in Fig. 2 and “conveying unit” in Fig. 2 based on paragraph 40.
The term “gas buffer tank” is used in paragraphs 11 and 40. It is unclear if this term should be “gas buffer box”.
Information Disclosure Statement
Two information disclosure statements (IDS) have been received in this application. One IDS from 2-16-24 with 3 US references and 3 foreign references and a second IDS from 10-24-25 with 2 US references and 1 foreign patent document. Applicant is reminded of the requirements under 37 CFR 1.56(a) for each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application having a duty of candor and good faith in dealing with the Office, which includes a duty to disclose to the Office all information known to that individual to be material to patentability as defined in 37 CFR 1.56(a) section
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.
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: “dosing unit”, “conveying unit”, “receiving unit”, and “control unit” in claim 1; “automatic material dosing device”, “dispensing mechanism”, and “weighing device” in claim 2, “holding mechanism” in claim 6, and “automatic transfer mechanism” in claim 12 .
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 Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected for the phrase “substrate to be coated”. A suggested revision is “substrate”.
Claim 5 recites “the gas buffer tank”. A suggested revision is “the gas buffer box”.
Claim 5 recites “the external environment”. A suggested revision is “an external environment”.
Claim 6 recites the phrase “by means of “. A suggested revision is “by”.
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.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being anticipated by Tsuji et al. (US 2011/0229635) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20220362698 A1 to Chen et al (hereinafter Chen).
Regarding claim 1, Tsuji et al. discloses a coating system for coating a substrate (honeycomb filter) (see Fig. 1/Fig. 2, abstract, Tsuji 0018-0019), comprising: a dosing unit for a solid material conveyed (powder feeding device 24 of Fig.2 with a gravimeter (mass meter) see Tsuji 0078); a conveying unit (20) for conveying the solid material to the substrate to be coated by a conveying gas flow (see Tsuji 0075 – ejector); a receiving unit (10, 12) for receiving the substrate and located downstream of the conveying unit (see 12 of Fig. 2) along a flowing direction of the conveying gas flow. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 35, 75, 78, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Tsuji teaches controlling the flow rate of the gas for the powder deposition. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 35, 75, 78, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Tsuji does not explicitly teach a control unit for controlling the operation of the dosing unit, the conveying unit and the receiving unit.
Chen is directed to the coating of a substrate.
Chen teaches a control unit for controlling the operation of the dosing unit, the conveying unit and the receiving unit. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 63, 83, 114-116, 150-151, and 158, and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a control unit for controlling the operation of the dosing unit, the conveying unit and the receiving unit, because Chen teaches this would have provide improved distribution of the coating on the filter. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 63, 83, 114-116, 150-151, and 158, and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 12, Tsuji teaches comprising: an automatic transfer mechanism (6) for transferring the substrate (10) to be coated to the receiving unit and removing the coated substrate from the receiving unit. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 75, 78, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuji et al. (US 2011/0229635) in view of Chen et al ( 20220362698 Chen) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Bellham et al. (US 2021/004647 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Tsuji et al. does not explicitly teaches the dosing unit comprises: an automatic material dosing device comprising a material container with a dispensing port and a dispensing mechanism arranged in the material container; a material transfer container; and a weighing device;
wherein the dispensing mechanism is used for dispensing the solid material into the material transfer container- through the dispensing port, and the weighing device is used for weighing the solid material in the material transfer container.
(See Tsuji, Figs. 1 and 5, paragraphs 87-95.)
Belham teaches it is known to use a weight in loss dosing device for the manufacture and coating of particulate filters.
Belham teaches the dosing unit (3, 15) comprises:
an automatic material dosing device (15) comprising a material container (container of 15 ) with a dispensing port (14) and a dispensing mechanism (inlet of 15 connecting to 14 ) arranged in the material container; a material transfer container (13); and a weighing device (device which provides output to controller from loss in weight feeder in paragraph 154) ;
wherein the dispensing mechanism (inlet of 15 connecting to 14 ) is used for dispensing the solid material into the material transfer container (13) through the dispensing port (14), and the weighing device (device which provides output to controller from loss in weight feeder in paragraph 154) is used for weighing the solid material in the material transfer container. (See Belham, Abstract, Fig. 1 and 5, paragraphs 63, 66, 95-97, 119, 132, 152, 154, 166, 226, 245-248, 281, and 298-301.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the dosing unit comprises: an automatic material dosing device comprising a material container with a dispensing port and a dispensing mechanism arranged in the material container; a material transfer container; and a weighing device;
wherein the dispensing mechanism is used for dispensing the solid material into the material transfer container- through the dispensing port, and the weighing device is used for weighing the solid material in the material transfer container, because Belham teaches a loss in weight feeder serves as an effective dosing device for the coating and manufacture of particulate filters. (See Belham, Abstract, Fig. 1 and 5, paragraphs 63, 66, 95-97, 119, 132, 152, 154, 166, 226, 245-248, 281, and 298-301.)
Regarding claim 3, the Tsuji does not explicitly teach dispensing mechanism and the weighing device are respectively in communication with the control unit and the control unit- receives a weight measurement value of the solid material dispensing into the material transfer container from the weighing device, and compares the weight measurement value with the set weight of the solid material to be conveyed, and the control unit- will control the dispensing mechanism to stop dispensing the solid material, if the weight measurement value is equal to the set weight.
Belham teaches it is known to use a weight in loss dosing device for the manufacture and coating of particulate filters is under the control of a controller. (See Belham, paragraphs 84, 92, 154, 246, and 299-301.)
Belham teaches dispensing mechanism (inlet of 15 connecting to 14 ) and the weighing device are respectively in communication with the control unit and the control unit- receives a weight measurement value of the solid material dispensing into the material transfer container from the weighing device, and compares the weight measurement value with the set weight of the solid material to be conveyed, and the control unit (controller)- will control the dispensing mechanism to stop dispensing the solid material, if the weight measurement value is equal to the set weight. (See Belham, Abstract, Fig. 1 and 5, paragraphs 63, 66, 95-97, 119, 132, 152, 154, 166, 226, 245-248, 281, and 298-301.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include dispensing mechanism and the weighing device are respectively in communication with the control unit and the control unit- receives a weight measurement value of the solid material dispensing into the material transfer container from the weighing device, and compares the weight measurement value with the set weight of the solid material to be conveyed, and the control unit- will control the dispensing mechanism to stop dispensing the solid material, if the weight measurement value is equal to the set weight., because Belham teaches a loss in weight feeder under the control of a controller is effective for dosing the powder by weight in the manufacture and coating of particulate filters and performing these series of steps would enable the process to proceed so that the coating process begins with the proper weight of powder. (See Belham, Abstract, Fig. 1 and 5, paragraphs 63, 66, 95-97, 119, 132, 152, 154, 166, 226, 245-248, 281, and 298-301.)
Claims 4 and 6-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being anticipated by Tsuji et al. (US 2011/0229635) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20220362698 A1 to Chen et al (hereinafter Chen) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20210187529 A1 to Ikushima (hereinafter Ikushima).
Regarding claim 4, Tsuji teaches the conveying unit (20) comprises:
a conveying pipe (21, 28, 29) having an inlet end (end of 28 near 23) and an outlet end ( end of 21 under and facing 42 in Fig. 2)
a fan (23 gas source) for generating a conveying gas flow flowing from the outlet end (21 b) of the conveying pipe to the receiving unit (10, 12); and,
a connecting pipeline (22) fluidly communicating the fan (23) with the outlet end ( end 21) of the conveying pipe and the receiving unit. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 35, 75, 78, 80, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Tsuji does not explicitly teach a first check valve and a second check valve are provided between the inlet end and the outlet end
Tsuji teaches two pressure control devices (26, 27) are located within the pipe of the conveying device.
Ikushima teaches use of multiple check valve are known elements used in a pipeline for gas supply.
Ikushima teaches two check valves are used to ensure flow of gas in the supply direction is kept positive. (See Ikushima, paragraph 35, Fig. 4, and Abstract.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a first check valve and a second check valve are provided between the inlet end and the outlet end, because Ikushima teaches this would have provide protection for other parts of the system maintaining gas supply in a positive direction. (See Ikushima, paragraphs 33-37, Fig. 4, and Abstract.)
Regarding claim 6, Tsuji teaches the receiving unit (10) comprises: a holding mechanism (12, 13b) for fixedly holding the substrate (11), the holding mechanism is connected (13, 14) to the fan (source of air flow 23, 33) by means of the connecting pipeline (34). (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 35, 75, 78, 80, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Tsuji does not explicitly teach the holding mechanism is airtightly connected to the fan by means of the connecting pipeline.
Chen teaches the holding mechanism is airtightly connected (13, 14) to the fan (source of airflow) by means of the connecting pipeline (16). (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the holding mechanism is airtightly connected to the fan by means of the connecting pipeline, because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 7, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the holding mechanism (31) is an inflatable flexible holder which can be adjusted to hold the substrates of different sizes.
Chen teaches the holding mechanism (31) is an inflatable flexible holder which can be adjusted to hold the substrates of different sizes. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the holding mechanism (31) is an inflatable flexible holder which can be adjusted to hold the substrates of different sizes., because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 8, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, and a second tapered pipe section- connected to the receiving unit-, the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is equal to the first cross section, and the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section which is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate.
Chen teaches the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section (32) connected to the fan (source of air flow 17) and the outlet end (6) of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, and a second tapered pipe section- connected to the receiving unit-, the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section (bottom of 15) is equal to the first cross section, and the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section (part of 4) which is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate). (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, and a second tapered pipe section- connected to the receiving unit-, the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is equal to the first cross section, and the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section which is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate, because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating of the substrate. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 9, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the diameter of the first cross section is in the range of 0.3D-0.75D, preferably 0.4D-0.6D; the maximum diameter of the second cross section is in the range of 1 D-1.2D, preferably 1.02D-1.1 D, and the height of the second tapered pipe section 22b is in the range of 0.3D-0.9D, preferably 0.4D-0.8D, wherein D means the diameter of the circular cross-section of the substrate or the minor axis of the elliptical cross- section of the substrate in case the substrate is an elliptic cylinder.
Tsuji teaches the flow rate can be controlled by varying the diameter of the duct. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute different ducts with different diameters, through routine experimentation, with a reasonable expectation of success, to the select the proper diameter, as a result-effective variable, in order to provide the optimal flow rate of the gas. (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1969)) (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 10, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, a second tapered pipe section connected to the receiving unit, and a third pipe section connecting the first pipe section with the second tapered pipe section, the third pipe section is connected to the first pipe section by a tapered connecting portion thereof, the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section, the second cross section is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate, and the cross section of the third pipe section is defined as a third cross section, wherein the third cross section is greater than the first cross section and equal to the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section.
Chen teaches the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section (16) connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe (near 15) and having a first cross section (cross section between 16 and 17), a second tapered pipe section (15) connected to the receiving unit, and a third pipe section (slanted section between 4 and 16) connecting the first pipe section with the second tapered pipe section, the third pipe section is connected to the first pipe section by a tapered connecting portion thereof, the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section, the second cross section is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate (2), and the cross section of the third pipe section is defined as a third cross section, wherein the third cross section is greater than the first cross section and equal to the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 23, 26, 28-29, 31, 35, 38, 49, 54-55, 64, 113, 121-123, 125-127, 130-131, 137, 140, 142, 157, 168, 185, 189, 194-195, 199, 203, 205, 211, 222, 227-228, 236, and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, a second tapered pipe section connected to the receiving unit, and a third pipe section connecting the first pipe section with the second tapered pipe section, the third pipe section is connected to the first pipe section by a tapered connecting portion thereof, the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section, the second cross section is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate, and the cross section of the third pipe section is defined as a third cross section, wherein the third cross section is greater than the first cross section and equal to the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section, because Chen teaches this structure would allow the filter to have a more even distribution of the dry powder across the inlet face. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 23, 26, 28-29, 31, 35, 38, 49, 54-55, 64, 113, 121-123, 125-127, 130-131, 137, 140, 142, 157, 168, 185, 189, 194-195,199, 203, 205, 211, 222, 227-228, 236, and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 11, Tsuji teaches the substrate (11) is a substrate for a wall-flow filter and has an inlet side ( bottom of 11) and an outlet side (top of 11). (See Tsuji, Abstract, Fig. 2.)
Regarding claim 11, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the substrate is arranged in the inflatable flexible holder with its inlet side facing the conveying unit.
Chen teaches the substrate (2) is arranged in the inflatable flexible holder (13, 14) with its inlet side (3) facing the conveying unit (22). (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 109, 113, 138, and 150 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the substrate is arranged in the inflatable flexible holder with its inlet side facing the conveying unit, because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Claims 4 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being anticipated by Tsuji et al. (US 2011/0229635) in view of US Pat. Pub. No. 20220362698 A1 to Chen et al (hereinafter Chen) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US Pat. Num. 12,409,464 B1 to Hong (hereinafter Hong).
Regarding claim 4, Tsuji teaches the conveying unit (20) comprises:
a conveying pipe (21, 28, 29) having an inlet end (end of 28 near 23) and an outlet end ( end of 21 under and facing 42 in Fig. 2)
a fan (23 gas source) for generating a conveying gas flow flowing from the outlet end (21 b) of the conveying pipe to the receiving unit (10, 12); and,
a connecting pipeline (22) fluidly communicating the fan (23) with the outlet end ( end 21) of the conveying pipe and the receiving unit. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 35, 75, 78, 80, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Tsuji does not explicitly teach a first check valve and a second check valve are provided between the inlet end and the outlet end
Tsuji teaches two pressure control devices (26, 27) are located within the pipe of the conveying device.
Hong is directed to a powder sprayer.
Hong teaches use of multiple check valve are known elements used in a pipeline for gas supply for powder spraying. (See Hong, Abstract, Figs. 4 and 7, and col 11, lines 1-12.)
The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. lnterchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See MPEP 2144.07. Therefore, taking the references as a whole, it would have been obvious to have a first check valve and a second check valve are provided between the inlet end and the outlet end with a reasonable expectation of success, because Hong teaches multiple check valves are a known element to ensure stability in powder spraying. (See Hong, Abstract, Figs. 4 and 7, and col 11, lines 1-12.)
Regarding claim 6, Tsuji teaches the receiving unit (10) comprises: a holding mechanism (12, 13b) for fixedly holding the substrate (11), the holding mechanism is connected (13, 14) to the fan (source of air flow 23, 33) by means of the connecting pipeline (34). (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 18-19, 35, 75, 78, 80, and Figs. 1-2 and 4 .)
Tsuji does not explicitly teach the holding mechanism is airtightly connected to the fan by means of the connecting pipeline.
Chen teaches the holding mechanism is airtightly connected (13, 14) to the fan (source of airflow) by means of the connecting pipeline (16). (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the holding mechanism is airtightly connected to the fan by means of the connecting pipeline, because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 7, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the holding mechanism (31) is an inflatable flexible holder which can be adjusted to hold the substrates of different sizes.
Chen teaches the holding mechanism (31) is an inflatable flexible holder which can be adjusted to hold the substrates of different sizes. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the holding mechanism (31) is an inflatable flexible holder which can be adjusted to hold the substrates of different sizes., because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 8, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, and a second tapered pipe section- connected to the receiving unit-, the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is equal to the first cross section, and the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section which is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate.
Chen teaches the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section (32) connected to the fan (source of air flow 17) and the outlet end (6) of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, and a second tapered pipe section- connected to the receiving unit-, the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section (bottom of 15) is equal to the first cross section, and the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section (part of 4) which is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate). (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, and a second tapered pipe section- connected to the receiving unit-, the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is equal to the first cross section, and the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section which is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate, because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating of the substrate. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 9, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the diameter of the first cross section is in the range of 0.3D-0.75D, preferably 0.4D-0.6D; the maximum diameter of the second cross section is in the range of 1 D-1.2D, preferably 1.02D-1.1 D, and the height of the second tapered pipe section 22b is in the range of 0.3D-0.9D, preferably 0.4D-0.8D, wherein D means the diameter of the circular cross-section of the substrate or the minor axis of the elliptical cross- section of the substrate in case the substrate is an elliptic cylinder.
Tsuji teaches the flow rate can be controlled by varying the diameter of the duct. (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute different ducts with different diameters, through routine experimentation, with a reasonable expectation of success, to the select the proper diameter, as a result-effective variable, in order to provide the optimal flow rate of the gas. (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1969)) (See Tsuji, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 10, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, a second tapered pipe section connected to the receiving unit, and a third pipe section connecting the first pipe section with the second tapered pipe section, the third pipe section is connected to the first pipe section by a tapered connecting portion thereof, the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section, the second cross section is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate, and the cross section of the third pipe section is defined as a third cross section, wherein the third cross section is greater than the first cross section and equal to the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section.
Chen teaches the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section (16) connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe (near 15) and having a first cross section (cross section between 16 and 17), a second tapered pipe section (15) connected to the receiving unit, and a third pipe section (slanted section between 4 and 16) connecting the first pipe section with the second tapered pipe section, the third pipe section is connected to the first pipe section by a tapered connecting portion thereof, the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section, the second cross section is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate (2), and the cross section of the third pipe section is defined as a third cross section, wherein the third cross section is greater than the first cross section and equal to the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 23, 26, 28-29, 31, 35, 38, 49, 54-55, 64, 113, 121-123, 125-127, 130-131, 137, 140, 142, 157, 168, 185, 189, 194-195, 199, 203, 205, 211, 222, 227-228, 236, and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the connecting pipeline comprises a first pipe section connected to the fan and the outlet end of the conveying pipe and having a first cross section, a second tapered pipe section connected to the receiving unit, and a third pipe section connecting the first pipe section with the second tapered pipe section, the third pipe section is connected to the first pipe section by a tapered connecting portion thereof, the maximum cross section of the second tapered pipe section is defined as a second cross section, the second cross section is greater than or equal to the cross section of the substrate, and the cross section of the third pipe section is defined as a third cross section, wherein the third cross section is greater than the first cross section and equal to the minimum cross section of the second tapered pipe section, because Chen teaches this structure would allow the filter to have a more even distribution of the dry powder across the inlet face. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 23, 26, 28-29, 31, 35, 38, 49, 54-55, 64, 113, 121-123, 125-127, 130-131, 137, 140, 142, 157, 168, 185, 189, 194-195,199, 203, 205, 211, 222, 227-228, 236, and Figs. 1-15.)
Regarding claim 11, Tsuji teaches the substrate (11) is a substrate for a wall-flow filter and has an inlet side ( bottom of 11) and an outlet side (top of 11). (See Tsuji, Abstract, Fig. 2.)
Regarding claim 11, Tsuji does not explicitly teach the substrate is arranged in the inflatable flexible holder with its inlet side facing the conveying unit.
Chen teaches the substrate (2) is arranged in the inflatable flexible holder (13, 14) with its inlet side (3) facing the conveying unit (22). (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 109, 113, 138, and 150 and Figs. 1-15.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the substrate is arranged in the inflatable flexible holder with its inlet side facing the conveying unit, because Chen teaches this would allow the filter to have the proper orientation to receive air flow to facilitate coating. (See Chen, Abstract, paragraphs 19-22, 81, 109, 150, and 181 and Figs. 1-15.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and addressing all objections to all of the claims from it which depends and the dependent claim itself.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach or suggest the claimed location of the conveying unit further comprises: a gas buffer box arranged between the fan and the conveying pipe
a cooler arranged between the fan and the gas buffer box
a first control valve provided between the cooler and the gas buffer box;
a second control valve provided between the gas buffer box and the conveying pipe and
a branch pipe provided between the cooler and the first control valve which fluidly communicating the connecting pipeline with the external environment, and a third control valve is disposed in the branch pipe of claim 5.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/684,554 (reference application ‘554). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following:
Regarding claim 1, Reference Application ‘554 discloses a coating system for coating a substrate (a coating system for coating a substrate) , comprising: a dosing unit for a solid material conveyed (a dosing unit for a solid material conveyed); a conveying unit for conveying the solid material to the substrate to be coated by a conveying gas flow (a conveying unit for conveying the solid material to the substrate to be coated by a conveying gas flow ) a receiving unit for receiving the substrate and located downstream of the conveying unit (a receiving unit for receiving the substrate and located downstream of the conveying unit) along a flowing direction of the conveying gas flow; and a control unit for controlling the operation of the dosing unit, the conveying unit and the receiving unit (a control unit for controlling the operation of the dosing unit, the conveying unit and the receiving unit) . (See Reference Application ‘554, claim 1 .)
Regarding claim 12, Reference Application ‘554 teaches comprising: an automatic transfer mechanism (an automatic transfer mechanism) for transferring the substrate (substrate) to be coated to the receiving unit and removing the coated substrate from the receiving unit. (See Reference Application ‘554, claim 1 .)
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Pat. Num. 12,390,827 B1 teaches check valves are an art recognized form of equivalent valve equivalent to 3 way stop cock, air flow control valves, and modular air directional control valves. (See Bass, col. 7, lines 4 -16.)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARL V KURPLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3477. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 AM-5 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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at (571) 272-1295. 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.
/KARL KURPLE/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights