DETAILED ACTION
Product by Process
Please note, claims 4 and 16 includes product by process language. The below arguments establish a rationale tending to show the claimed product is the same as what is taught by the prior art. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” Once the Examiner provides a rationale tending to show that the claimed product appears to be the same or similar to that of the prior art, although produced by a different process, the burden shifts to applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious different between the claimed product and the prior art product. MPEP 2113.
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.
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: “a device for producing a vacuum in the mixing tube” in claim 17.
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 § 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, 4-16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varga (US 20140117045 A1) in view of Orla-Jensen (US 20180043381 A1)
Claim 1, Varga discloses a coupling device (30), and having a mixing unit (18), which has a material inlet (60), and a coupling part (36) releasably connected to the coupling device at a first end, and, at a second end, a mixing tube (50) that has an exit opening (62) for the viscous material, as well as a mixing structure (70) arranged in the mixing tube, for mixing the components as they are passed through the mixing tube from the material inlet to the exit opening, the apparatus further comprising a needle valve (80, 82, 84) for releasing and closing the exit opening, wherein the needle valve has a valve needle that extends in a longitudinal direction that runs from the material inlet to the exit opening, wherein the valve needle releases the exit opening in a release position, and closes the exit opening in a closed position, by making contact with a valve seat (FIG 1-1A),
wherein the mixing structure has an inner tube (76), which is arranged in the mixing tube, and through which tube the valve needle extends, and from which tube a mixing spiral projects away radially, and
wherein the valve needle projects out of the inner tube at a front end of the inner tube, wherein the front end faces the valve seat, and is conducted to be sealed off at the front end, by means of a sealing element.
But is silent on a metering unit that has a number of metering valves that corresponds to the number of components of the viscous material.
Orla-Jensen teaches a metering unit (56) that has a number of metering valves (72, 73) that corresponds to the number of components of the viscous material (30, 31).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Varga with valves as taught by Orla-Jensen in order to provide intendent metering according to a desired ration of the first and second fluids.
Claim 4, Varga discloses wherein the mixing unit (18) is produced in one piece, by means of 3D printing (See Product by Process above).
Claims 5-7, 14, Varga discloses the claimed invention except for mixing unit, has different materials (claim 5), mixing tube and structure and produce from a first material and valve seat from a second material (claim 6), mixing tube and the mixing structure are produced from a first material, and the valve seat and the sealing element are produced from a second material or from different second materials (claim 7), mixing tube and mixing structure are produced from PLA or ABS (claim 14), wherein the valve needle is produce from metal (claim 15). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to, absent a showing of criticality in order to provide the desired wear properties, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious engineering choice. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
Claim 8, Varga discloses wherein the needle valve has a drive unit for moving the valve needle (86; [0026]).
Claim 9, Varga discloses wherein the drive unit is a pneumatic drive unit (86; [0026]).
Claim 10, Varga discloses wherein the drive unit is releasably connected to the metering unit (86; [0026]; actuator 86 is separate and coupled to shaft 84 and therefore may be uncoupled)
Claim 11, Varga discloses wherein the valve needle can be moved, by means of the drive unit, into the closed position in the longitudinal direction, and into the release position counter to the longitudinal direction (80; FIG 1-1A; [0026]).
Claim 12, Varga discloses wherein the valve needle can be moved, by means of the drive unit, into the release position in the longitudinal direction, and into the closed position counter to the longitudinal direction (80; FIG 1-1A; [0026]).
Claim 13, Varga discloses wherein the mixing structure is accommodated so as to rotate in the mixing tube, about a rotational axis that runs in the longitudinal direction ([0026]).
Claim 16, Varga discloses wherein the valve needle (80) is produced together with the mixing unit (FIG 1-1A), by means of 3D printing (See product by process above).
Claim 18, Varga discloses wherein the mixing structure is motor driven (86; [0026]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) above have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
ConclusionAny inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY W CARROLL whose telephone number is (571)272-4988. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 PM.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
JEREMY W. CARROLL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3754
/Jeremy Carroll/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights