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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
19 (rolling axis)
22 (roll surface)
41.3 (third air connection)
43.1 (third water feed opening)
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “of equal length” in line 5 should be moved after “comprising at least six side surfaces” in line 4. 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 2, 6, and 8-11 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.
In regards to claim 2, it is unclear how one side surface is oriented at a 120-degree angle to each of the side surfaces. Each angle is 120 degrees thus one side surface is not at a 120-degree angle to the opposite side surface.
In regards to claim 6, it is unclear what shape a regular hexagon looks like.
In regards to claim 8, it is unclear how the stand is closed when rods and pipes are rolled through.
In regards to claims 9 and 10, it is unclear whether or not the motor is being claimed.
In regards to claim 11, it is unclear what structure the remote adjustment connector entails.
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.
Claims 1-8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cernuschi (WO 2017068533 A1) in view of Qin (CN 102728616 A).
Regarding claim 1, Cernuschi discloses a stand for rolling metal rods, wires, or pipes along a rolling axis (Abstract), comprising: a stand housing including an outside; three rollers 31, 32, 33 positioned on a respective roller shaft in each case (Cernuschi: Abstract; Page 1, line 8; Figs. 8 and 9), the three rollers surrounding the rolling axis in a star-shaped manner collectively forming a caliber, wherein the three roller shafts are mounted by way of eccentric bushings in bearing holes of the stand housing such that a radial spacing of the rollers from the rolling axis is adjustable (Cernuschi: Page 21, lines 3-5).
Cernuschi does not explicitly disclose the stand housing, including an outside comprising at least six side surfaces when viewed along the rolling axis of equal length, the at least six side surfaces arranged in a rotationally symmetrical manner about the rolling axis, wherein each side surface is included in a pair of side surfaces that are located in parallel with one another.
However, Qin teaches a stand housing, including an outside comprising at least six side surfaces of equal length when viewed along the rolling axis, the at least six side surfaces arranged in a rotationally symmetrical manner about the rolling axis, wherein each side surface is included in a pair of side surfaces that are located in parallel with one another (Qin: Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the stand housing of Cernuschi with the hexagon stand housing of Qin. One ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution and the results of the substitution would have achieved the predictable result of rolling metal and allowing stand replacement. After modification, the rollers would be positioned relative to the side surface as shown in Qin.
Regarding claim 2, which is dependent on claim 1, Qin teaches at least one further of the outside side surfaces oriented at an angle of 120° relative to each of the side surfaces when viewed from the rolling axis (Qin: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, which is dependent on claim 1, Qin teaches that each of the three roller shafts (2) extends in parallel with a respective one of the pairs of mutually parallel side surfaces (Qin: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, which is dependent on claim 1, Qin teaches the outside of the stand comprises exactly six side surfaces forming a regular hexagon (Qin: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, which is dependent on claim 1, Cernuschi discloses an adjustment connector (175, 175’) for introducing an adjustment torque, the adjustment connector configured to adjust a radial position of the roller shafts for setting the caliber (Cernuschi: Page 21, lines 15-17; Figs. 12-14).
Regarding claim 6, which is dependent on claim 4, Cernuschi discloses an adjustment connector (175, 175’) for introducing an adjustment torque, the adjustment connector configured to adjust a radial position of the roller shafts for setting the caliber, wherein the adjustment connector is arranged on the outside of the stand housing (Cernuschi: Figs. 12 and 13). Cernuschi does not disclose the connector in a corner of the regular hexagon. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reposition the connector to a corner of the stand housing, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (Japikse, 86 USPQ 70).
Regarding claim 7, which is dependent on claim 5, Cernuschi discloses the adjustment connector is manually actuatable or wherein the remote adjustment connector is automatically actuatable by a motor 131 (Cernuschi: Page 20, lines 24-27).
Regarding claim 8, which is dependent on claim 1, Cernuschi in view of Qin discloses the stand housing being closed and undivided (Qin: Fig. 1) (the side surfaces of the stand are closed and undivided in the same manner as applicant’s).
Regarding claim 11, which is dependent on claim 5, Cernuschi discloses that the adjustment connector is a remote adjustment connector (Cernuschi: Page 21, lines 16-17).
Regarding claim 12, which is dependent on claim 1, Cernuschi in view of Qin teaches the stand housing is produced from a monobloc (Qin: Fig. 1) (The claimed phrase “produced from a monbloc” is being treated as a product by process limitation. As set forth in MPEP 2113, product by process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. Once a product appearing to be substantially the same or similar is found, a 35 USC 102/103 rejection may be made and the burden is shifted to applicant to show an unobvious difference. MPEP 2113.).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cernuschi in view of Qin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cernuschi (US 20150128678 A1) (hereinafter referred to Cernuschi #2).
Regarding claim 9, which is dependent on claim 1, Cernuschi in view of Qin fail to disclose that each of the three roller shafts or rollers can be driven separately by a respective motor associated with each of the three roller shafts or rollers.
However, Cernuschi #2 teaches that each of the three roller shafts or rollers (2, 2’, 2”) can be driven separately by a respective motor associated with each of the three roller shafts or rollers (Cernuschi #2: Paragraph 58). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roller shafts of Cernuschi in view of Qin to include respective motors for each roller shaft as taught by Cernuschi #2 in order to drive each roller separately.
Regarding claim 10, which is dependent on claim 9, Cernuschi #2 teaches that the three roller shafts each comprise a drive-side end (5, 5’, 5”) for separate driving protruding towards the outside at one of the side surfaces of the stand housing (Cernuschi #2: Paragraph 60; Fig. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ORLANDO J RIOS whose telephone number is (571)270-0828. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
/ORLANDO J RIOS/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights