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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected groups II-IV, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/27/2026
Priority
Examiner acknowledges claims to priority under 35 U.S.C. 120 or 121 for U.S. application 18810939 to U.S. provisional application serial No. 63520802 filed on 8/21/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/24/2025 and 8/22/2024 were filed after/on the filing date of the application on 8/21/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borvitz (US 5249494) in view of Reimann (US 20080257128 A1) and Repac (US 20100037471 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Borvitz teaches a size-reduction machine having a case (1) and an impeller (2) that rotates within the case, is surrounded by the case (see Figure 1), and has a common axis with the case (center axis of 1 and 2, see Figure 1), the case comprising:
a slicing knife (6) mounted on a perimeter of the case (via 30, see Figure 1);
a moveable gate (7) leading the slicing knife such that products slide across an inner wall of the gate before encountering the slicing knife (see Figure 1); and
an adjustment device that translates the gate and restricts the gate to a rotational movement (see Figure 1).
Borvitz fails teach an adjustment device that translates the gate and restricts the gate to linear translation along a linear path.
Reimann teaches a thickness adjustment device the gate and restricts the gate to a rotational movement (see Figure 4-5).
Repac teaches an adjustment device that translates the gate and restricts the gate to linear translation along a linear path (Figures 3 along 15a).
As discussed by Reimann and Repac, pivot thickness adjustment device and linear moving thickness adjustment device are known for the same purpose of changing the cut thickness of a device. Such modification will achieve the predictable result of providing thickness adjustment, since both adjustment device of Reimann and Repac are known for the same purpose in the art. See MPEP § 2143 I. (B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Borvitz to change the pivot adjustment device into a linear moving adjustment device for the same purpose of adjust cutting thickness.
Regarding claim 2, modified Borvitz further teaches the adjustment device translates the gate so that a trailing edge of the gate translates linearly toward and away from a cutting edge of the slicing knife to result in, respectively, a decrease and increase in a radial distance between the trailing edge of the gate and the cutting edge of the slicing knife (as modified by Repac, see Figure 1 of Borvitz and Figure 3 of Repac).
Regarding claim 3, modified Borvitz further teaches a surface of the inner wall of the gate is contiguous with a trailing edge of the gate and parallel to a radially outer surface of the slicing knife throughout the translation of the gate (see Figure 1 of Borvitz).
Regarding claim 4, modified Borvitz further teaches the case and the gate form a throat that increases as the gate is translated radially outward relative to the slicing knife (see Figure 1 of Borvitz).
Regarding claim 5-9, modified Borvitz further teaches the inner wall of the gate is exposed within the case and encompasses an arc within the case having an angle of some degrees as measured from a junction of the gate and the case to a trailing edge of the gate.
Modified fails to teach 90 degrees (as required by claim 5), the angle is less than 120 degrees (as required by claim 6), the angle is about 95 to 100 degrees (as required by claim 7), the angle is about 105 to 110 degrees (as required by claim 8) or the angle is about 110 to less than 120 degrees (as required by claim 9).
Furthermore, with respect to the specific angle of 90 degrees, the angle is less than 120 degrees, the angle is about 95 to 100 degrees, the angle is about 105 to 110 degrees or the angle is about 110 to less than 120 degrees, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the device of Borvitz to have the specific angle set forth in the claim in order to get the desired shape device wanted by the end user.
Regarding claim 10, modified Borvitz further teaches the inner wall of the gate in the vicinity of a junction with an inner wall of the case follows a circular shape of an inner diameter of the case (see Figure 1 of Borvitz).
Claims 11-13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borvitz (US 5249494) in view of Pallmann (GB 2292880 A).
Regarding claim 11, Borvitz teaches a size-reduction machine having a case (1) and an impeller (2) that rotates within the case, is surrounded by the case, and has a common axis with the case, the size-reduction machine comprising:
a slicing knife (6) mounted on a perimeter of the case (see Figure 1);
a moveable gate (7) leading the slicing knife such that products slide across an inner wall of the gate before encountering the slicing knife (see Figure 1).
Borvitz fails to teach a cutting device leading the slicing knife, the cutting device comprising a mounting fixture and stationary strip knives that are spaced apart and parallel to each other by the mounting fixture.
Pallmann teaches a cutting device (see Figure 8) leading the slicing knife, the cutting device comprising a mounting fixture and stationary strip knives that are spaced apart and parallel to each other by the mounting fixture (see Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Borvitz to add the cutting device, as taught by Pallmann, in order to cut strips (see Figure 3 of Pallmann).
Regarding claim 12, modified Borvitz further teaches the strip knives pass through slots located at a trailing edge of the gate to immobilize the strip knives in the axial direction of the case (see Figure 3 of Pallmann).
Regarding claim 13, modified Borvitz further teaches the strip knives extend to the slicing knife such that tips of the strip knives contact a surface of the slicing knife at locations in the trailing direction behind a cutting edge of the slicing knife (see Figure 3 of Pallmann).
Regarding claim 15, modified Borvitz further teaches each of the strip knives has a cutting edge disposed at an angle of inclination relative to a radial of the case so that the cutting edges cause the products to gradually undergo strip cutting (see Figure 3 of Pallmann).
Regarding claim 16, modified Borvitz further teaches an assembly fixture in which the strip knives are assembled with the mounting fixture (see Figure 3 of Pallmann).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borvitz (US 5249494) in view of Pallmann (GB 2292880 A) and in further view of Fehse (US 2223342).
Regarding claim 14, modified Borvitz teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 11 above.
Modified Borvitz fails to teach the strip knives have a dovetail feature received and retained by the mounting fixture.
Fehse teaches the use of a dovetail feature for mounting a blade (see Figure 3-5).
It would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Borvitz to change the mounting arrangement, as taught by Fehse. As one of ordinary skill in the art understand that a dovetail feature is a common way to mount a blade.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIANG DONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 AM-6 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, Ashley Boyer can be reached at 571-272-4502. 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.
/LIANG DONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 6/19/2026
Prosecution Insights