DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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 4-6, 8, 11, 13, 15-17, 19, and 53 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 first end" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 further recites the limitations “a shaft” in line 3 and “a first end” in line 6, each of which have already been recited (see line 2 of claim 2 and line 3 of claim 4, respectively). As a result, it is unclear if these are additional and distinct elements from those previously recited, or if they refer to those elements previously recited.
Claims 5-6, 11, and 13 are rejected for depending from indefinite claim 4.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the outlet orifice" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 15-17 all recite the limitations "the first material" and “the second material”. There are insufficient antecedent bases for these limitations in the claims.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the helical extension" in lines 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 53 recites the limitation "the opposite end" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 53 is also rejected as being indefinite because the arrangement required by the limitation in lines 3-4 is unclear. As written it appears to require the “one open end” connect a path housing and the opposite end with a nozzle orifice, but the disclosed invention seems to show that the one open end connects with a path housing, and the opposite end connects with a nozzle orifice. It is unclear which configuration is required by the claim.
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 1-7, 9-19, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hillert et al. (US 2014/0070017).
Regarding claim 1, Hillert teaches a nozzle assembly (fig. 1) comprising:
a nozzle housing (1) defining an inner chamber (fig. 1 – inside volume of 2); and
a mixer (4/7) disposed within the inner chamber (fig. 2), the mixer defining a flow path (5) and comprising an air channel (8) extending partially through the mixer (figs. 1, 2);
wherein the air channel is configured to deliver air (par. 30 – element 8 is a channel capable of containing a fluid; therefore, it is considered to be “configured to deliver air”) to a mix point (fig. 1 – at 9) along the flow path.
Regarding claim 2, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the mixer comprises: a shaft (7); and an extension (4) extending from the shaft (fig. 2), wherein the extension and an inner surface of the nozzle housing define the flow path (fig. 2; par. 30).
Regarding claim 3, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 2, and further wherein the air channel is formed in the shaft (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 2, and wherein the shaft comprises: an inlet orifice formed in the first end of a shaft and fluidly connected to the air channel (fig. 2 – inlet orifice is the opening of 8 at the right end of 7); and an outlet orifice (9) formed through the shaft between the air channel and an exterior of the shaft at a point location between a first end of the shaft and a second end of the shaft (fig. 1 – the second end of the shaft is the left end of 7).
Regarding claim 5, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 4, and wherein the outlet orifice is located between a midpoint of the shaft and the second end of the shaft (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 4, and further wherein the outlet orifice is spaced from the first end of the shaft by a distance of between 50% and 75% of a length of the shaft (see annotated figure).
PNG
media_image1.png
300
410
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 2, and wherein the extension forms a helix that wraps around the shaft such that the flow path is a helical flow path (par. 30 – “a profiled groove 5 that runs continuously in a spiral around the outside wall of the cylinder 4”).
Regarding claim 9, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein the air channel is configured to deliver air at a location that is not downstream of the mixer (par. 32; fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein the air channel is configured to deliver air at a location that is not upstream of the mixer (fig. 1 – the outlet is disposed at a midpoint along the length of the mixer).
Regarding claim 11, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 4, and wherein the mixer includes only one outlet orifice (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the air channel is configured emit air at a single location, the single location disposed at the mix point (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 4, and further wherein the nozzle assembly is configured to accept a flow of air only at the inlet orifice and is fluidically sealed to air at locations other than the inlet orifice (figs. 1, 2 – air can only enter at inlet and can only exit at 9; when outlet 9 is within 4, the it is fluidically sealed except at the inlet).
Regarding claim 14, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein:
the nozzle housing includes nozzle receiver (2) and a nozzle orifice (fig. 2);
the nozzle assembly extends along an axis from the nozzle receiver to the nozzle orifice (fig. 1);
the nozzle receiver is configured to receive a first material, a second material, and air (fig. 1 – two inlets for separate materials are provided and air will be present within the nozzle housing before these materials fill it);
the nozzle orifice is configured to spray an aerated plural component material formed by a mixture of the first material and the second material and the air (par. 32; fig. 2 – the first and second materials and the air are mixed by 4 and discharged by the outlet); and
the nozzle housing is fluidically sealed along the axis from the nozzle receiver to the nozzle orifice (figs. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 15, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein the first material and the second material are not aerated upstream of the mix point. It is noted that "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114.II.
Regarding claim 16, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein the first material and the second material are not aerated upstream of the mixer. It is noted that "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114.II.
Regarding claim 17, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein air is not delivered to the first material or the second material upstream of the mixer. It is noted that "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114.II.
Regarding claim 18, Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 1, and wherein the mixer extends along an axis (fig. 1); and the mixer does not include an axial orifice outlet for flowing air to the inner chamber on a downstream axial end of the mixer (fig. 2 – the outlet 9 is arranged upstream of the left end of the mixer, the “downstream axial end”) .
Regarding claim 19, Hillert teaches a nozzle assembly (fig. 1) comprising:
a nozzle housing (2) defining an inner chamber (fig. 1), the nozzle housing including:
a nozzle receiver (fig. 1 – right end of 2 disposed in 1) configured to connect to a sprayer housing (1) and to receive a first material, a second material, and air fig. 1 – two inlets for separate materials are provided and air will be present in the nozzle housing before these materials fill it); and
a nozzle orifice (fig. 2 – at the left end of 2) for spraying a plural component material formed by a mixture of the first material and the second material (par. 32; fig. 2 – the first and second materials and the air are mixed by 4 and discharged by the outlet); and
a mixer (4/7) disposed within the inner chamber (fig. 1), the mixer comprising:
a shaft (7) oriented along a shaft axis (fig. 1), the shaft having a first end and a second end (fig. 1 – the right and left ends, respectively), wherein the second end is oriented towards the nozzle orifice of the nozzle housing (fig. 1);
an extension (4) extending from an outer surface of the shaft to an inner surface of the housing and extending along the shaft (fig. 1), such that the helical extension defines a mixing channel (5) extending between the shaft and the inner surface of the housing (par. 30);
an air channel (8) defined by an inner surface of the shaft (par. 30; fig. 2), the air channel extending partially axially through the shaft (fig. 2);
an inlet orifice formed in the first end of the shaft fig. 2 – inlet orifice is the opening of 8 at the right end of 7); and
an outlet orifice (9) formed through the shaft between the air channel and the outer surface of the shaft at a location between the first end and the second end (fig. 2; par. 30).
Regarding claim 53, Hillert teaches a nozzle assembly (fig. 1) comprising:
a nozzle housing (2) forming a mixing chamber (fig. 1), the nozzle housing structured with one open end for connecting with a path housing (1) and the opposite end with a nozzle orifice (fig. 1) for spraying foam (par. 25);
the path housing for receiving compressed air, a first fluid component, and a second fluid component, wherein the path housing is structured to be connected to the nozzle housing (fig. 1 - it is noted that the “path housing” is not positively recited by the claim; the only limitation that the “path housing” has on the recited invention is that the nozzle housing must have a structure that is able to connect with the “path housing”);
a mixer (4/7), the mixer structured to fit at least partially within the nozzle housing (fig. 1, 2) and to receive compressed air from the path housing (fig. 1 – the mixer, 4/7, is arranged within the nozzle housing and fluidly connected to the path housing, 1; therefore, it can “receive compressed air”), the mixer further including:
a central shaft (7) having an internal channel (8) for compressed air,
a helical extension (par. 30 – “a profiled groove 5 that runs continuously in a spiral around the outside wall of the cylinder 4”) arranged around at least a portion of the central shaft (figs. 1, 2), the helical extension forming at least two helical turns around the central shaft (figs. 1, 2), thereby creating a helical channel (5),
and, an air orifice (9) arranged on the central shaft (par. 30; fig. 1), structured to release compressed air from the central shaft at an angle other than a direction of the internal channel (fig. 1 – outlet 9 is orthogonal to the direction of the internal channel).
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hillert.
Hillert teaches the nozzle assembly described regarding claim 7, and further wherein the outlet orifice is disposed at a location along the shaft between 1.5 and 2 helical turns of the flow path from an upstream end (fig. 1 – interpreted to be the right end of 4) of the helical flow path (fig. 1). Hillert does not disclose the outlet orifice is disposed at a location along the shaft between 2.5 and 3.5 helical turns of the flow path from an upstream end.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nozzle assembly of Hillert such that the outlet orifice is disposed at a location along the shaft between 2.5 and 3.5 helical turns of the flow path from an upstream end since it has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779. Providing the outlet orifice at a location along the shaft between 2.5 and 3.5 helical turns of the flow path from an upstream end would ensure that the the outlet opening is fully covered and closed when the needle 7 is in the shut-off position (par. 30 – “In addition, the needle shut-off mechanism is introduced part-way into the hollow cylinder 4 of the mixing system 3. As a result the outlet opening 9 of the needle shut-off mechanism 7 is fully covered by the cylinder 4 that serves as the cover. The outlet opening 9 is thus likewise closed. Consequently there is no flow of a second component.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jerdee et al. (US 2019/0151871), Schulz et al. (US 2016/0175788), and Brown (US 5,529,245) all disclose nozzle assemblies having elements of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CODY J LIEUWEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4477. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8-5, Friday varies.
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.
/CODY J LIEUWEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights