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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: paragraph 0042 makes repeated reference to support brackets 28, but it appears the support brackets should be designated with numeral 26.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the framework of claims 1-15 and the conveyor of claims 14-15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). With regard to the framework, it should be noted that no framework structure separate from the skirting panels is shown, but it is possible that such a framework may be illustrated schematically in the figures. Similarly, a conveyor may also be schematically illustrated. No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim maker reference to “the set at least one set” but it appears the quoted language should read “the at least one set”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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, “assembly” 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: the “locking assembly” configured to restrict rotation of the skirting panel from a horizontal position to a vertical position in claim 13.
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 § 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 8-9 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.
Claims 8 and 9 respectively state that “the rotation assembly comprises a pin aperture configured to engage with a pin” and that “each mounting member comprises a pin configured to co-operate with the pivot aperture”. However, the drawings show, and the specification describes, the pin aperture as a pivot point 48 located in the lower end 36 of the mounting member 34 rather than the rotation assembly 29 of the support bracket 26 and show and describe the pin 46 as being part of the rotation assembly 29 of the support bracket 26 rather than part of the mounting member 34. Effectively the claims appear to have reversed the locations of the pins 46 and the pin apertures/pivot point 48. This discrepancy between the claims and the specification renders the scope of the claims impossible to ascertain.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-10 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ostman (US 6,763,935).
In regard to claims 1 and 14, Ostman shows a conveyor skirting removal system that removes skirting panels from a conveyor 20. The conveyor skirting removal system includes a framework 30/33 and at least one skirting panel 60 releasably fixed to the framework 30/33. At least one set of support brackets is formed by flanges 35. Each support bracket 35 includes a rotation assembly 32 and a horizontal arm 99 extending laterally from the support bracket and the framework (see figure 1). At least one set of mounting members formed by flanges 55 is fixed to the skirting panel 60 via member 50. Each mounting member 55 comprising a lower portion LP and an upper portion UP (see the annotated figure below). The lower portion LP of each mounting member 50/55 is configured to engage with the rotation assembly 32 of one of the support brackets 35. The engagement permits rotational movement of the skirting panel 60 to a position where the upper portion of each mounting member abuts the horizontal arm 99 of one of the support brackets 35 (see figure 1 and column 3, line 65 to column 4, line 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
540
420
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 2, each skirting panel 60 has a ceramic wear liner 65 attached thereto.
In regard to claim 3, a set of two 35 support brackets is mounted to the framework 30/33 at the location of each skirting panel (see figure 1).
In regard to claim 4, the at least one set of support brackets 35 is releasably mounted to the framework 30 via top wall portion 40 (see column 3, lines 25-35).
In regard to claim 5, a set of two mounting members 55 is fixed to each skirting panel 60.
In regard to claim 6, the set at least one set of mounting members 55 is releasably mounted to the rear of the skirting panel 60 via member 50 and bolts 58.
In regard to claim 7, the lower portion LP of each mounting member 55 includes a rotation member 52/54 configured to engage a pin of the rotation assembly 32 of a support bracket (a pin through the apertures 32/52 and bushing 54 is inherently required for the pivotal connection between the mounting member 55 and support bracket 35).
In regard to claim 8, the rotation assembly 32 includes a pivot aperture 32 configured to engage with a pin.
The lower portion LP of each mounting member 55 includes a pin extending through the apertures 52 configured to co-operate with the pivot aperture 32 in the rotation assembly of the support bracket 55.
In regard to claim 10, the rotation assembly 32 includes a pivot surface defined by the surface of the pin therethrough about which the mounting member 55 may rotate.
In regard to claim 15, the system of Ostman may be used to replace the wear liners 65 on the skirting panel 60 of the conveyor 20. This would be done by engaging the system described above with the skirting panel 60 and then unfastening the skirting panel 60 from the framework 30/33, support brackets 35, and mounting members 55 by rotating the skirting panel 60 from a vertical orientation to a horizontal orientation and removing the bolts 58 so that the wear liners 65 could be replaced (see column 4, lines 1-35) The skirting panel 60 would then be rotated from a horizontal orientation to a vertical orientation after fastening the skirting panel 60 to the framework 30/33 by using the bolts 58.
In regard to claim 16, the step of engaging the system with the skirting panel 60 includes mounting the set of support brackets 35 to the framework 30 via the top wall portion 40 as described above and then mounting the set of mounting members 55 to a rear face of a skirting panel 60 via the member 50 and bolts 58.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The prior art not relied upon show a variety of conveyor skirting mounting assemblies that allow skirting panels to be removed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK A DEUBLE whose telephone number is (571)272-6912. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday flex schedule.
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.
/MARK A DEUBLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights