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 § 102
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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Cornelis et al. (NL 2013611) as in the Non-Final Rejction of April 23, 2026.
As was stated in the previous office action:
Regarding claim 19, '611 discloses a stationary rounding element for a conveyor for transporting products (Fig. 3, No. 2), the stationary rounding element comprising: a nose-over with a curved rounding surface (Fig. 3, No. 56) and strip-shaped contact elements located in a plane (Fig. 3, Nos. 22 & 52), spaced apart with mutual interspace transversely to a conveying direction of the conveyor (Fig. 3, No. 59), which extend in conveying direction up to the nose-over (Fig. 3, No. 4): terminal end adjoining the nose over (Fig. 1); and a comb adjoining the nose-over is formed by the terminal end and the nose-over (Fig. 3, Nos. 52, 56, 57).
In response to this rejection, the applicant’s representative asserts that the above document fails to show all the structure required by claim 19. The present examiner respectfully disagrees. While the “strip-shaped contact elements 22 between elements 54 up to the nose over” come into contact with the elements 52/54, this does not mean that “the strip-shaped elements 22 are not spaced apart with interspace”. In particular, while there is no lateral interspace between the strip-shaped elements 22 and the elements 52/54, the claim language does not define the mutual interspace as being between these different elements. The clause of the claim after the first comma in line 4, may be reasonably viewed as referring only to the most recently recited strip-shaped contact elements as being “spaced apart with mutual interspace transversely to a conveying direction of the conveyor, and not to both the strip0shaped contact elements and the nose over with a curved rounding surface. The strip shaped elements 22 and spaced apart with mutual interspace relative to each other as are the elements 52/54 spaced apart with mutual interspace relative to each other. As such, the above reference shows all the structure required by claim 19.
The applicant’s representative further goes on to note that “both strip-shaped elements 22 and elements 52 are provided to support the conveyor, and are not provided to engage rollers (emphasis in original).” While this may be true, it does not support overturning the above rejection as there are no limitations in claim 19 requiring any engagement between these elements and any product support rollers. This is also true of the statement that “strip-shaped contact elements 22 and elements 52 are in overlap to allow continuity of the support”. While this is a true statement, this does nothing to distinguish the claimed structure in claim 19 from the above reference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-11, 14, and 16-18 are allowed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK A DEUBLE whose telephone number is (571)272-6912. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday flex schedule.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at 571-272-6911. 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.
/MARK A DEUBLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights