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
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park U.S. Patent No. 10,781,079.
Claim 1, Park teaches a comb plate 20 for a conveyor device Fig. 1, wherein the comb plate 20 is provided with a plurality of teeth 110 arranged across a width of a conveyor belt of 10 of the conveyor device Fig. 1 and substantially parallel to each other Fig. 1, where each of the plurality of teeth 200,310,320 fits into a corresponding groove of 10 Fig. 2 arranged on steps of the conveyor belt of 10 during operation C2 L45-60, and the comb plate 20 further comprises: a plurality of rollers 200,310,320 arranged at front parts of at least some teeth 110 C3 L15-35.
Claim 2, Park teaches the plurality of rollers 200,310,320 are arranged in grooves of 10 at the front parts of the at least some teeth 110 Fig. 2.
Claim 3, Park teaches each of the grooves of 10 is provided with: a first roller 310 fixed in the groove of 10 in a rotatable manner, where the first roller 310 is configured, when the tooth 110 in which it is arranged fits into the corresponding groove 11, to contact with and driven by the bottom of the corresponding groove 11 to rotate in a first direction; and a second roller 320 fixed in the groove 11 in a position closer to the step in a rotatable manner, and configured to contact with and driven by the first roller 320 to rotate in a second direction opposite to the first direction C4 L35-55.
Claim 4, Park teaches the second roller 320 is configured not to contact with the bottom of the corresponding groove 11 when the tooth 110 in which it is arranged fits into the corresponding groove of 10 Fig. 2.
Claim 5, Park teaches the groove 11 is configured to partially expose the second roller 320 Fig. 6.
Claim 7, Park teaches a diameter of the second roller 320 is greater than a clearance between adjacent steps 10 Fig. 2.
Claim 8, Park teaches each of the plurality of teeth 110 is provided with the first roller 310 and the second roller 320 Fig. 2.
Claim 15, Park teaches a conveyor device Fig. 1, comprising: a truss (as known in escalators); a conveyor belt of 10 comprising a plurality of steps 10; and a first floor plate (as known in escalators); and a second floor plate (as known in escalators) Fig. 2; arranged at both ends of the conveyor belt of 10, wherein the first floor plate and the second floor plate are each provided with a comb plate 20 according to claim 1 at a transition area with the steps 10 C1 L30-55.
Claim 16, Park teaches the conveyor device is an escalator or a moving walk Abstract.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park U.S. Patent No. 10,781,079 in view of Turek U.S. Patent No. 10,214,389.
Claim 6, Park teaches the first roller 310 and second roller 320, but does not teach as Turek teaches rollers is made of elastic material, and roller is made of rigid material C7 L20-30. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Park with the material choices taught in Turek with a reasonable expectation of success because
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14 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. The prior art does not fairly teach form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims “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