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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 36 of claim 1 reads “the system onto its downstream conveyor (”, the ( does contain a closing ). 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the distance" in line 23. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the first period" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the second period" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the subsequent third period" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the fourth period" in line 23. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the press speed" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the distance" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the first period" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the second period" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the subsequent third period" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the fourth period" in lines 21-22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 9 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The prior art does not fairly teach “a conveyor system containing at least two variable speed conveyors connected in series and at least one controller, the first conveyor being configured to be placed in series with a preceding start conveyor, downstream which the system is attached, and the last of said at least two conveyors being configured to be placed in series with a target conveyor upstream which the system is attached, the start conveyor outputting batches of product at a start speed V0, and the target conveyor receiving the batches of product at a target speed Vt, the target speed Vt being lower than the start speed V0, and wherein the controller is communicatively connected to the first variable speed conveyor and to each of at least the second variable speed conveyor, characterized in that, in the conveyor system each successive conveyor is shorter” in combination with the rest of the claim language.
Claims 2, 8, and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 3-7 and 11-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm.
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.
/KAVEL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
KS