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 . 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 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.
DETAILED NON-FINAL ACTION
This is the initial Office Action (OA), on the merits, based on the 18/716,918 application filed on June 5, 2024. Claims 1-4 are pending and have been fully considered. The examined claims are directed to an apparatus.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Examiner has considered the information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/05/2024 (3). Please refer to the signed copy of the PTO-1449 form attached herewith.
Claim Objections
Claim 1-4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Certain claim language reads awkwardly and appears to be missing either an indefinite or definite article. In claim 1, for example, the phrase “disposed on underside” should likely include ‘an’ or ‘the’ before ‘underside,’ and the phrase “precipitated on the bottom plate of the coolant tank with magnetic force of the permanent magnets” should likely include ‘a’ or ‘the’ before magnetic force.
There are similar issues in other claims such as “composed of plurality of baths,” “downstream side” and “upstream side” in claim 2, and “magnetic strength” in claim 3.
Claims 2-4 depend on claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1-4, or portions thereof, follow, with the underlined portions either causing or intended to assist in an understanding of the indefiniteness rejection.
Claim 1: A coolant device for grinding for separating chips from coolant discharged from a grinding machine, the coolant device for grinding comprising:
a coolant tank made of non-magnetic material receiving the coolant discharged from the grinding machine and separating chips,
a magnetic chip conveyer disposed on underside of a bottom plate of the coolant tank, provided with permanent magnets disposed so as to have determined distance between each other and also provided with an endless chain driven rotationally, thus adsorbing magnetic chips precipitated on the bottom plate of the coolant tank with magnetic force of the permanent magnets and separating the magnetic chips from the coolant to discharge them,
a magnetic inline filter for purifying coolant fed from the coolant tank and feeding the purified coolant to the grinding machine, said magnetic inline filter being provided with:
a pipe-shaped body as a double pipe consisting of an inner pipe and an outer pipe, which are coaxially disposed, for causing the coolant purified in the coolant tank to flow through space as a gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe of the double pipe;
inner circumferential side magnets disposed on the inner circumferential side of the inner pipe; and
outer circumferential side magnets disposed on the outer circumferential side of the outer pipe, and a pump for feeding the coolant, from which magnetic chips have been separated in the coolant tank, to the magnetic inline filter.
The language “for grinding for separating chips” and “the grinding machine and separating chips” should be clarified.
The meaning of “for causing the coolant purified in the coolant tank to flow through space as a gap,” is unclear or the language should be clarified.
Claim 2: The coolant device for grinding according to claim 1,
wherein the coolant tank is composed of plurality of baths contoured with partition walls respectively so that the coolant flows in a direction, and magnetic force of permanent magnets disposed underside of the bottom plate of downstream side bath is stronger than that of permanent magnets disposed underside of the bottom plate of upstream side bath of flow of the coolant.
The statement that the “the coolant flows in a direction” suggests that the coolant or another substance eventually flows in an alternate direction. However, no alternate flow direction is specified. Also, it is unclear what structure is associated with this functionality since the coolant would flow in a direction even without partition walls. Also, the language suggests that the partition walls affect the magnetic force, which renders the overall language unclear.
Claim 3: The coolant device for grinding according to claim 2,
wherein the plurality of baths are composed of a first bath, a second bath, a third bath and a fourth bath sequentially in a direction of flow of the coolant, and magnetic strength of the permanent magnets is arranged such that the first bath and the second bath are of a same magnetic strength and the third bath and the fourth bath are of another same magnetic strength stronger than that of the first bath and the second bath.
It is unclear how another same magnetic strength could be stronger than that of the first bath and the second bath. This implies that the magnetic strengths are not the ‘same.’
Claim 4: The coolant device for grinding according claim 1,
wherein the coolant is oily one and the grinding machine is a gear grinding machine grinding gear face with a grinding wheel of CBN.
The language “the coolant is oily one” is unclear.
The phrase or structure of “a gear grinding machine grinding gear face” is unclear.
Also of “a grinding wheel of CBN” is unclear. The term CBN should be introduced.
Claims 2-4 depend on claim 1.
Conclusion
Examiner did not apply prior art at this time.
Examiner recommends that Applicant carefully review all objections/rejections before responding to this office action to properly advance the case in light of the pertinent objections/rejections and the prior art.
Examiner further recommends that for any substantive claim amendments made in response to this Office Action, or to otherwise advance prosecution, or for any remarks concerning support for added subject matter or claim priority, that Applicant include either a pinpoint citation to the original Specification (i.e. page and/or paragraph and/or line number and/or figure number) to indicate where Applicant is drawing support for such amendment or remarks, or a clear explanation indicating why the particular limitation is implicit or inherent to the original disclosure.
Electronic Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or an earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hayden Brewster whose telephone number is (571) 270-1065. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9 AM - 4 PM.
Alternatively, to contact the examiner, Applicant may send a communication, via e-mail or fax. Examiner’s direct fax number is: (571) 270-2065. Examiner's official e-mail address is: "Hayden.Brewster@uspto.gov." However, since e-mail communication may not be secure, Examiner will not respond to a substantive e-mail unless Applicant’s communication is in accordance with the provisions of MPEP §502.03 & related sections that discuss the required Authorization for Internet Communication (AIC). Nonetheless, all substantive communications will be made of record in Applicant’s file.
To facilitate the Internet communication authorization process, Applicant may file an appropriate letter, or may complete the USPTO SB439 fillable form available at https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf, preferably in advance of any substantive e-mail communication. Since one may use an electronic signature with this particular form, Applicant is encouraged to file this form via the Office’s system for electronic filing of patent correspondence (i.e., the electronic filing system (Patent Center)). Otherwise, a handwritten signature is required. In addition to Patent Center, Applicant can submit their Internet authorization request via US Postal Service, USPTO Customer Service Window, or Central Fax. Examiner can also provide a one-time oral authorization, but this will only apply to video conferencing. It is improper to request Internet Authorization via e-mail.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and via 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) form available at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice, or Applicant may call Examiner, if preferable. Applicant can access a general list of patent application forms at either https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms-patent-applications-filed-or-after-september-16-2012 (applications filed on or after September 16, 2012) or https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms (applications filed before September 16, 2012). Note that the language in an AIR form is not a substitute for the requirements of an AIC, where appropriate. The mere filing of an Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form (PTOL-413A) or a Letter Requesting Interview with Examiner, in EFS-Web, may not apprise Examiner of such a request in a timely manner.
If attempts to reach the Examiner are unsuccessful, Applicant may reach Examiner’s supervisor, Bobby Ramdhanie at 571-270-3240. The central 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.
/HAYDEN BREWSTER/Examiner, AU 1779
Prosecution Insights