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 .
Status of Claims
Currently claims 1-14 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 1, “The multi-directional jet cleaning apparatus” should read “A multi-directional jet cleaning apparatus”
Line 5, “The transmission assembly” should read “the transmission assembly”
Line 12, “The frame assembly” should read “the frame assembly
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:
Primary transmission mechanism in claim 1.
Secondary transmission mechanism in claim 1.
Second nozzle transmission mechanism in claim 1.
Sub-transmission mechanism in claim 4.
The limitation specifically being “transmission mechanism” in each instance invokes 112(f) and no structure for what the transmission mechanism is found in claim 1.
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 4-14 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 4 recites the limitation "the sub-transmission mechanism" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “a sub-transmission mechanism” in line 2. This is double inclusion as the sub-transmission mechanism was already claimed in claim 4 from which this claim depends.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walendowski (U.S. 4.989.785) in view of Fujita (U.S. 2017/0156557).
With respect to claim 1, Walendowski discloses the multi-directional jet cleaning apparatus (title) for a steam generator (intended use, see background of invention), is characterized in that it comprises a frame assembly (figures 9 and 13, the frame assembly comprising the elements of 150, which house the various components, including the walls about 154 and 184, and having the wall of 158, having a front and back wall, with a noted sidewall shown in the sideview in figure 9, extending between 154 and 184), and a transmission assembly (figure 9, being the gears from 172’ to those of 184, for transmitting rotation from 160/168 to the nozzles at 152), a first nozzle (figure 9, the right 152) assembly and a second nozzle assembly (the left 152) located on the frame assembly (as seen in figures 9 and 13), and a motor assembly (160/168 with shaft leading to gear 170) used to drive the transmission assembly (as shown in figure 9, where 160/168 have 172 which then turns 172’);
The transmission assembly comprises a primary transmission mechanism (figures 9-13, that of 172’), a secondary transmission mechanism (180), a second nozzle transmission mechanism (184); the motor assembly is used to drive the primary transmission mechanism (as 172 drives 172’); the second nozzle transmission mechanism is provided with a second nozzle assembly, and the primary transmission mechanism and/or the secondary transmission mechanism are provided with a first nozzle assembly (as the secondary transmission 180, has multiple 184’s one going to the first nozzle assembly and the second going to the second nozzle assembly);
The frame assembly comprises an upper cover (figures 9-13, being the upper cover which encompasses the gears of 184) and a lower cover (the lower cover having 158 and the side coverings about the nozzles 154), the first nozzle assembly and the second nozzle assembly located on the lower cover (as shown in figure 9, where the lower cover is the elements that 154 extend from), a plurality of first nozzle assemblies asymmetrically located on both sides of a center line in a lengthwise direction of the lower cover (as there are 4 nozzles, taking 2 of the nozzles as the first nozzle assemblies, they both being located on both sides of an axis line of the lower cover, see figure 10, putting a center line through 158, a nozzle lies on both sides of the cover), the lower cover provided with a water flow channel (as shown in figure 13, being the center flow channel bringing fluid from within 174 to the nozzles 152), the water flow channel being in communication with the second nozzle assembly and the first nozzle assembly (as shown in figure 13, where the flow channel splits to each nozzle). Walendowski fails to disclose and a synchronous belt for synchronous rotation of the primary transmission mechanism, the secondary transmission mechanism, and the second nozzle transmission mechanism. Though disclosing synchronous rotary movement of the components, as they are all geared/connected as shown in figures 9-13, no use of a belt is shown.
Fujita, paragraph 0059, discloses using a toothed belt for further synchronous rotation of the mechanisms in the system, being known in the art to apply such synchronous rotation.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize e toothed belt as disclosed by Fujita into the system of Walendowski, as such a combination utilizing a toothed belt between gears would be a simple substitution as being another known element in the art for allow for synchronous rotation between gear elements.
With respect to claim 2, Walendowski as modified discuses the motor assembly comprises a motor (motor being that of 160 with variable speed hydraulic drive 168) and a first gear (172) located at the output end of the motor (172 at the output from 160/168), the motor being used to drive the first gear to rotate (160/168 drives/rotates 170 being the motor side transmission gear), the first gear being in contact with the primary transmission mechanism (as 172 is coupled to 172’, figure 9-11). Walendowski fails to disclose the gear is a bevel gear.
Fujita, paragraph 0040, discloses using bevel gears as such gears reduce vibration and noise.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize bevel gears as disclosed by Fujita into the system of Walendowski to reduce vibration and noise in the system.
With respect to claim 3, Walendowski as modified discloses the primary transmission mechanism comprises a first rotating shaft (figure 9, 162), and a second bevel gear (being the gear at 172’, understood that such gears would be bevel gears as disclosed above by Fujita), a driving synchronous wheel (the cam at 194, figure 11), a driving spur gear (being the spurred gears about 180, figure 12) and a third bevel gear set outside the first rotating shaft (the gear at 184, being understood as being beveled as made obvious above, and being outside the rotating shaft as the shaft is within 180, and 184 is outside the outer diameter of 180) in order from top to bottom (as the gears go from the top of the system where the second and first bevel gear is located, and taking 180 to then be the bottom of the system); the second bevel gear engaging with the first bevel gear (as shown in figure 11); the third bevel gear being in contact with the first nozzle assembly (such that it rotates the nozzle assembly when it rotates, see figure 12-13).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to disclose “the sub-transmission mechanism comprises a second rotating shaft and a driven synchronous wheel, a driven spur gear and a fourth bevel gear set outside the second rotating shaft in order from top to bottom; the fourth bevel gear being in contact with the first nozzle assembly.” As the limitation which depends off of claim 3, was not found in the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A GREENLUND whose telephone number is (571)272-0397. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Arthur Hall can be reached at 571-270-1814. 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.
/JOSEPH A GREENLUND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752