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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
The applicant’s priority to foreign application CN202123269840.2 and CN202222566490.4 filed on December 22nd, 2021 and September 26th, 2022 has been accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on June 10th, 2024 and January 12th, 2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: in L4 “s top of the material” should be “a top of the material.” 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.
Claims 7-12 and 19-23 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 8 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the silicone brushes.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This claim will be interpreted as if it read “the discrete flexible brushes.”
Claim 11 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the silicone brushes.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This claim will be interpreted as if it read “the discrete flexible brushes.”
Claim 12 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the silicone brushes.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This claim will be interpreted as if it read “the discrete flexible brushes.”
Regarding claim 19, the phrase "pencil-type " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what is encompassed by “type.”
Claim 20 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the baffle discs (L3).” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 22 is rendered indefinite for reciting “the baffle (L6).” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 9-10, 21, and 23 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies.
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(s) 1-2, 4, 6, 11-17 and 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 5051169) further in view of Jessup (US 0891424).
With regards to claim 1, King discloses a flour sifting device (Abstract), comprising: a flour accommodating basin (UL) having a first flour outlet (opening D) at a bottom of the flour accommodating basin; a flour sifting tank (hopper insert 40) being located below the flour accommodating basin (Fig. 2), and the flour sifting tank being provided with a flour sifting trough (sifting screen 41) with flour sifting holes at a bottom thereof; a transmission device (motor and timer assembly 18) adapted to drive a rotary brush shaft (auger shaft 36) that is set in the flour sifting tank to rotate, the rotary brush shaft being provided with brushes (bristle array 37) helically distributed in space (Col. 5, L39-41), and the rotary brush shaft rotating to drive the brushes to rotate in a direction and brush the flour sifting holes (Col. 6, L5-8); a fine flour basin (LL), being located below the flour sifting tank, and fine flour in a flour mixture being sifted through the flour sifting holes of the flour sifting tank and being adapted to fall into the fine flour basin (Col. 6, L58-60); and a coarse flour basin (31) being located on a side away from the first flour outlet , and coarse flour, after being sifted by the flour sifting tank , being adapted to slide into the coarse flour basin from a flour discharge passage (chute 30) located on one side of the flour sifting tank. King does not disclose that the flexible brushes are discrete flexible brushes.
However, Jessup discloses a separator (Fig. 2) with discrete flexible bushes (3; Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the flexible brushes disclosed by King, discrete as disclosed by Jessup in order to make the device easier to clean.
With regards to claim 2, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King and Jessup do not disclose wherein characterized in that the discrete flexible brushes are made of silicone. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that it is known in the art to use silicone for the discrete flexible brushes and therefore is rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to reduce wear on the discrete flexible brushes.
With regards to claim 4, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. Jessup further discloses wherein the discrete flexible brushes are arranged in an axial direction of the brush shaft in columns, wherein the columns are in circumferential direction evenly distributed in a circumferential direction around the brush shaft (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the discrete flexible brushes disclosed by King arranged in the manner disclosed by Jessup in order to reduce clogging by having the brushes contact the screen more often.
With regards to claim 6, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the discrete flexible brushes are inclined with respect to radial planes by a tilt angle (Fig. 4).
With regards to claims 11, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King and Jessup do not directly disclose wherein an included angle of 70° is formed between axes of the discrete flexible brushes and the rotary brush shaft, and discrete flexible brushes can be detached and replaced are detachable and replaceable. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that tilting brushes is known in the art and therefore obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to have a desired dwell time of the flour in the device. Furthermore, making something detachable is considered to be obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to facilitate maintenance (MPEP 2144.04.V.C).
With regards to claims 12, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein a radial angle between adjacent ones of the silicone brushes is 90° (Fig. 2), and the discrete brushes brush the flour sifting holes four times for each revolution of the rotary brush shaft.
With regards to claims 13, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King further discloses the flour sifting trough comprises: an arc-shaped bottom surface (Fig. 3), two vertical side surfaces (generally indicated by 51 in Fig. 3) extending upward from two sides of the arc- shaped bottom surface respectively; snap-on portions (42a) extending horizontally outward from the two vertical side surfaces (Fig. 3) the snap-on portions of the flour sifting trough being installed in the flour sifting tank (Fig. 2).
King and Jessup do not disclose a radius of the arc-shaped bottom surface matching a distance from an outermost end of the discrete flexible brushes to a centre of the rotary brush shaft. However, this is a simple change in size that is rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention based on a desired throughput (MPEP2144.04.IV.A).
With regards to claims 14, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the transmission device comprises a gear motor (motor 22), a delivery wheel (mating cap 27), a transmission shaft (22a), an elastic linking rod (washer 29) and a spring (28), wherein and the elastic linking rod is slidable on the transmission shaft.
With regards to claims 15, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 14 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the elastic linking rod is adapted to automatically return to an original position under action of the spring (Col. 5, L22-24).
With regards to claims 16, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 14 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the gear motor drives the rotary brush shaft to rotate via the delivery wheel (Col. 5, L17-21).
With regards to claims 17, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King and Jessup do not disclose a rack and a driving box, the driving box being adapted to drive the transmission device. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that this feature is known in the art and therefore rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order for the transmission device to function as intended.
With regards to claim 25, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King further discloses a flour coating table (Fig. 1), the flour sifting device as claimed in claim 1 (Fig. 2).
With regards to claim 26, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 25 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the flour coating table further comprises: a rack(table 11); a flour accommodating basin, a first flour outlet being provided at a bottom of the flour accommodating basin; a driving box, the driving box being used that is adapted to drive a transmission device, and the transmission device being connected with the flour sifting device; a fine flour basin, the fine flour basin being located below the flour sifting device and being adapted to collect sifted fine flour; a coarse flour basin, the coarse flour basin being located on one side below the flour sifting device1and far away from the first flour outlet. and being adapted to collect sifted coarse flour (See rejections outlined above with regard to claim 1).
King and Jessup do not directly disclose rollers installed at a bottom of the rack and used to drive the flour coating table to move. However, making a device mobile is considered to be obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to facilitate cleaning (MPEP2144.04.V.A)
With regards to claim 27, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 26 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the transmission device comprises a gear motor (motor 22), a delivery wheel (mating cap 27), a transmission shaft (22a), an elastic linking rod (washer 29) and a spring (28), wherein and the elastic linking rod is slidable on the transmission shaft wherein the elastic linking rod is adapted to automatically return to an original position under action of the spring (Col. 5, L22-24).
With regards to claims 28 , King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 27 as outlined above. King further discloses wherein the gear motor drives the rotary brush shaft to rotate via the delivery wheel (Col. 5, L17-21).
Claim(s) 3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Jessup as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hosokawa et al. (US 3391785), hereafter Hosokawa.
With regards to claim 3, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King and Jessup do not disclose wherein the discrete flexible brushes comprise discrete paddles with gaps between in circumferential direction between adjacent ones of the paddles.
However, Hosokawa discloses a powder sifter (Abstract), wherein the discrete flexible brushes comprise discrete paddles (19a-19d) with gaps (not labeled in Fig. 1) between in circumferential direction between adjacent ones of the paddles. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the discrete flexible brushes as disclosed by King and Jessup be discrete paddles as disclosed by Hosokawa for ease of maintenance.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Jessup as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Parsons (US 1313729).
With regards to claim 5, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King and Jessup do not disclose wherein the discrete flexible brushes have a toothed edge at radially outer ends thereof.
However, Parsons discloses a flour sifting device (Col. 1, L7), wherein the discrete flexible brushes (agitators 8) have a toothed edge at radially outer ends thereof (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the brushes disclosed by King and Jessup have a toothed edge as disclosed by Parsons in order to reduce clumping.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Jessup as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cappozzo (US 20210387232)
With regards to claim 7, King and Jessup disclose all the elements of claim 1 as outlined above. King and Jessup do not disclose wherein the rotary brush shaft carries stops in the form of formed as baffle discs arranged in an axial direction between groups of the discrete flexible brushes.
However, Cappozzo discloses a wherein the rotary brush shaft (3) carries stops in the form of formed as baffle discs (rings 12) arranged in an axial direction between groups of the discrete flexible brushes (discs 4; Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add baffle discs as disclosed by Cappozzo to the device as disclosed by King and Jessup in order to increase separation based on a desired size of a final product (P0062).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa further in view of Cappozzo and Parsons
With regards to claim 18, Hosokawa discloses a flour sifting device comprising (Abstract): a flour sifting tank (generally indicated by frame 9), the flour sifting tank comprising a tank cover (cylindrical wall 4) and a tank body (end plates 2 and 3), the tank cover being provided at a top of the tank body (Fig. 1), a rotary brush shaft (18), the rotary brush shaft being provided in the tank body (Fig. 1), a plurality of brushes (19a-19d) a flour sifting trough (sieve 10), the flour sifting trough being provided between a middle and a bottom of the tank body, and a plurality of flour sifting holes being provided in the flour sifting trough. Hosokawa does not directly disclose a handle being also provided at a centre of a top of the tank cover, wherein the brushes are silicone
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that handles are known in the art and it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a handle to the tank cover in order to facilitate maintenance by opening the tank cover. Additionally, the examiner takes Official Notice that it is known in the art to use silicone for the brushes and therefore is rendered obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to reduce wear on the brushes. Hosokawa does not disclose a plurality of notched baffles being provided on the rotary brush shaft, and each of the baffles being provided between the brushes
However, Cappozzo a plurality of notched baffles (rings 12; notches 13 on Fig. 4) being provided on the rotary brush shaft (3; Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add baffle discs as disclosed by Cappozzo to the device as disclosed by Hosokawa in order to increase separation based on a desired size of a final product (P0062). Hosokawa and Cappozzo do not disclose that the brushes are toothed.
However, Parsons discloses a flour sifting device (Col. 1, L7), wherein the brushes (agitators 8) have a toothed edge (Fig. 1). ). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the brushes disclosed by Hosokawa have a toothed edge as disclosed by Parsons in order to reduce clumping which improves efficiency.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa Cappozzo and Parsons as applied to claim 18 above further in view of Augst (US 7882959)
With regards to claim 19, Hosokawa, Cappozzo, and Parsons disclose all the elements of claim 18 as outlined above. Hosokawa further discloses a material receiving port at one end of the tank cover, the material receiving port configured with a vertical funnel shape, Hosokawa, Cappozzo and Parsons do not disclose and grids being provided at a top of the material receiving port.
However, Augst discloses a material inlet port (screen 38) with grids (openings 43) before a processing station (Col. 3, L44-46). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add grids as disclosed by Augst to the material inlet port as disclosed by Hosokawa in order to remove impurities from the flour before sifting.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa Cappozzo and Parsons as applied to claim 18 above further in view of King.
With regards to claim 24, Hosokawa, Cappozzo, and Parsons disclose all the elements of claim 18 as outlined above. Hosokawa, Cappozzo and Parsons do not disclose wherein the flour sifting trough further comprises an arc-shaped bottom surface, two vertical side surfaces extending upward from two sides of the arc-shaped bottom surface respectively, and snap-on portions extending horizontally outward from a top of the vertical side surfaces and keeping the flour sifting trough snapped on the flour sifting tank.
However, King discloses wherein the flour sifting trough (sifting screen 41) further comprises an arc-shaped bottom surface (Fig. 3), two vertical side surfaces (generally indicated by 51 in Fig. 3) extending upward from two sides of the arc- shaped bottom surface respectively; snap-on portions (42a) extending horizontally outward from the two vertical side surfaces (Fig. 3) and keeping the flour sifting trough snapped on the flour sifting tank (Fig. 2).It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the flour sifting trough disclosed by Hosokawa and Parsons be configured in the manner recited by King in order to facilitate disassembly for cleaning.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 20-23 would be allowable once the 35 U.S.C 112 rejections are overcome and if written in independent form.
Claims 8 and 20 would be allowable for disclosing “a group of first installation parts and a group of second installation parts are provided on the rotary brush shaft.” There is no teaching or suggestion in the prior art that would render it obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to have installation parts as recited.
Claims 9-10 and 21-23 would be allowable by virtue of their dependencies.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LYNN BURKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5824. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am to 6:00pm 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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571)272-7805. 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.
/J.L.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights