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 § 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.
With respect to claims 35-39, 56-58:
Claim 35 is drawn to a “chute” and refers back to claim 25 which is drawn to “a singulating arrangement”, accordingly it is unclear if claim 35 is dependent claim from claim 25 because they do not claim the same subject matter because claim 35 cannot be said to be further limiting of claim 25, which is the definition of a dependent claim. This makes the claim unclear. Further, if claim 35 is intended to be an independent claim it cannot include a reference to claim 25 for the same reason, the two claims do not claim the same subject matter.
N.B. claims 36-37 and claims 56-58 are dependent from claim 35 and are therefore rejected.
Similarly claims 38 and 39 are rejected, claim 39 is rejected because it is dependent on claim 38, as indefinite because claim 38 is drawn to a “method of singulating scrap objects” and claim 25 is drawn to a “singulating arrangement”. It is unclear if claim 38 is a dependent claim or an independent claim.
Claim 56 is also rejected, claim 56 is drawn to “a method of singulating scrap objects” and claim 35 is drawn to a “chute”, the “chute” cannot be said to be further limited by the “method of singulating scrap objects”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 25, 30-31, 33-34, 36-37, and 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20190111455 to Killmann, in view of BRPI1006417 to Fourney.
(N.B. Claims rejected under both 35 U.S.C. 103 and 35 U.S.C. 112(d), herein are rejected as best understood given the status of some of the claims as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(d).)
With respect to claim 25, Killmann discloses a singulating arrangement for singulating scrap objects, comprising a substantially horizontally disposed feeder that extends from a receiving area for receiving scrap objects to a feed gate positioned at a top portion of a chute to feed scrap objects to the chute, the chute having a trough shaped cross section that includes a bottom portion and sidewalls extending upwardly therefrom, said chute extending downwardly from the top portion to a bottom portion, see annotated Fig. 1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
769
1079
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Killmann does not disclose including a funneled section in which the width of the trough-shaped cross section reduces, said bottom portion of the chute forming an edge gate positioned at a substantially horizontally disposed receiving conveyor to receive objects travelling down the chute.
Fourney teaches a singulating arrangement having a funneled section in which the width of the trough-shaped cross section reduces, said bottom portion of the chute forming an edge gate positioned at a substantially horizontally disposed receiving conveyor to receive objects travelling down the chute (see annotated Fig. 2, below).
PNG
media_image2.png
588
999
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the disclosure of Killmann with the teachings of Fourney to be able to singulate articles.
With respect to claim 30, Fourney teaches wherein the bottom portion of the chute is substantially horizontally disposed (see Fig. 3, infra).
With respect to claim 31, Fourney teaches wherein at the gate of the chute the side walls protrude in direction of travel of the objects beyond the bottom section and extend to overlap with the conveyor (see annotated Fig. 2 below):
PNG
media_image2.png
588
999
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 33, Fourney teaches wherein the chute includes one or more actuators to act on individual objects travelling down the chute (see numeral 44 in Fig. 3 and see page 3 of the NPL to Fourney submitted herein, pertinent section highlighted).
With respect to claim 34, Fourney teaches wherein the feeder includes a trough-shaped cross section that having a bottom portion and sidewalls extending upwardly therefrom, which cross section tapers towards the feed gate (see annotated Fig.3 below):
PNG
media_image3.png
519
787
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 36, Fourney teaches wherein the bottom portion of the chute is substantially horizontally disposed, and wherein at the gate of the chute the sidewalls protrude beyond the bottom section (see annotated Fig 3 below):
PNG
media_image4.png
675
545
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
519
787
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 37, Forney teaches wherein the chute includes one or more actuators to act on individual objects travelling down the chute, in particular nozzles and/ or movable fingers (see numeral 44 in Fig. 3 and see page 3 of the NPL submitted herein with the pertinent section highlighted).
With respect to claim 57, Fourney teaches wherein the chute includes one or more actuators to act on individual objects travelling down the chute, in particular movable fingers (see numeral 44 in Fig. 3 and page 3, last paragraph, second sentence).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-29 and 32 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 LESTER RUSHIN, III whose telephone number is (313)446-4905. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4p.
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.
/LESTER RUSHIN, III/
Examiner
Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights