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.
Claim 23 is 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. The phrase “optionally” renders the claim indefinite.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 18-19, 21, 23 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 11,925,939 to Meier et al (Meier).
Concerning claim 18, Meier discloses a method for adjusting a horizontal shaft impact crusher comprising a crusher housing having an inlet (at 14) for material to be crushed, an outlet (at 24) for material that has been crushed, an impeller (30) being mounted on a horizontal shaft in the crusher housing and being operative for rotating around a horizontal axis, a curtain (41) against which material accelerated by the impeller may be crushed, and an adjustment device (100) for adjusting the position of said curtain relative to the impeller, the method comprising:
moving, by means of a drive cylinder, the curtain into a position at which the curtain is in contact with an impeller beater element (see figure 2); and
measuring a stroke of the drive cylinder using a sensor (102), which is internally mounted in the drive cylinder to calculate a position of the curtain relative to an impeller beater element (column 9, lines 4-13).
Concerning claim 19, Meier discloses measurement of the stroke distance provides a measure of total combined wear on the curtain and impeller beater element, and to set the position of the curtain with respect to the impeller beater element (column 9, lines 45-55).
Concerning claim 21, Meier discloses further comprising one or more of: periodically providing said measure of wear and storing the measurements; calculating wear rate of beater elements and liners of the curtain; calculating an estimated lifespan of the beater elements and liners of the curtain (column 9, lines 56-64).
Concerning claim 23, Meier discloses further comprising one or more of: continually monitoring a closed side setting gap; compensating for total combined wear within a machine programmable logic controller of the crusher to ensure an accurate closed side setting gap setting; continually monitoring the closed side setting gap and predicting wear rates for a user specific application; optionally, provide an indication as to when the wear parts need replacing (column 9, lines 56-64).
Concerning claim 25, Meier discloses further comprising one or more of: determining a value of liner wear after a beater change; recording said value of liner wear; calculating liner wear over time; extrapolating said liner wear over time to provide predicted liner wear rates (column 9, lines 56-64).
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 12-13, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,668,158 to Dallimore et al (Dallimore) in view of CN 112412899A to Zhang et al (Zhang).
Concerning claim 1, Dallimore discloses a horizontal shaft impact crusher comprising:
a crusher housing (2) having an inlet (8) for material to be crushed, an outlet (10) for material that has been crushed, an impeller (4) being mounted on a horizontal shaft (6) in the crusher housing (2) and being operative for rotating around a horizontal axis, a curtain (28, 30) against which material accelerated by the impeller may be crushed; and
an adjustment device (42, 60) comprising:
an adjustment bar (44) arranged for adjusting a position of said curtain (28, 30) relative to the impeller;
a cross beam (84) to which said adjustment bar (44) is connected, said crossbeam being adjustable relative to the impeller; and
a drive cylinder (95) arranged for displacing the cross beam (84) to set the position of the curtain (44) relative to the impeller (4).
However Dallimore does not disclose the drive cylinder includes an internally mounted sensor arranged to measure the curtain position relative to the impeller.
Zhang discloses in figure 2 a horizontal shaft impact crusher comprising:
a crusher housing an impeller being mounted on a horizontal shaft in the crusher housing and being operative for rotating around a horizontal axis, a curtain against which material accelerated by the impeller may be crushed and a drive cylinder (12)
wherein the drive cylinder (12) includes an internally mounted sensor (15) arranged to measure the curtain position relative to the impeller.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to substitute the drive cylinder of Dallimore with the drive cylinder of Zhang (thus including the sensor) because, as disclosed by Zhang this allows for detection of the position of the piston ring (see step 4).
Concerning claim 2, Dallimore in view of Zhang discloses the drive cylinder (95 of Dallimore and 12 of Zhang) is a hydraulic drive cylinder.
Concerning claim 3, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses the internally mounted sensor (15) is centrally mounted in the drive cylinder (12).
Concerning claim 4, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses the internally mounted sensor (15) is a magnetostrictive linear position sensor.
Concerning claim 5, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses the internally mounted sensor (15) measures stroke distance of the drive cylinder.
Concerning claim 6, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses measurement of the stroke distance provides a linear distance between an impeller beater element and the curtain (as it is capable of performing said function).
Concerning claim 7, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses measurement of the stroke distance provides a measure of wear on the curtain (as it is capable of performing said function).
Concerning claim 8, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses the stroke distance is constantly measured by the internally mounted sensor (as it is capable of performing said function).
Concerning claim 9, Zhang, as applied to Dallimore, discloses measurement of the stroke distance is used to set the position of the curtain with respect to the impeller beater element to give a requested closed side setting gap (as it is capable of performing said function).
Concerning claim 12, Dallimore in view of Zhang discloses a pressure sensor measures a mechanical load acting on the curtain.
Concerning claim 13, Dallimore in view of Zhang discloses the crusher is configured to store wear measurements, and to calculate, based on the stored wear measurements, a wear rate of a liner of the curtain and beater elements of the crusher, and to calculate, using the stored wear measurements, an estimated lifespan of the liners and beater elements (as it is capable of performing said function).
Concerning claim 15, Dallimore in view of Zhang discloses the crusher is configured to continually monitor the closed side setting gap and to compensate for wear to ensure an accurate closed side setting gap setting, and to continually monitor the closed side setting gap and predict wear rates for a user specific application, and optionally, to provide an indication as to when the wear parts need replacing (as it is capable of performing said function).
Concerning claim 17, Dallimore in view of Zhang discloses the crusher is further configured to: provide a value of liner wear after a beater change; record said value of liner wear; calculate liner wear over time; and extrapolate said liner wear over time to provide predicted curtain liner wear rates (as it is capable of performing said function).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dallimore in view of Zhang and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,844,851 to Solomon (Solomon).
Concerning claim 10, Dallimore in view of Zhang does not disclose the drive cylinder includes a holding side and a retraction side.
Solomon discloses a horizontal shaft impact crusher comprising:
a crusher housing (1) an impeller (7) being mounted on a horizontal shaft in the crusher housing and being operative for rotating around a horizontal axis, a curtain (9) against which material accelerated by the impeller may be crushed and a drive cylinder (21, 31) and the drive cylinder includes an internally mounted sensor (41);
wherein the drive cylinder (21, 31) includes a holding side (31c) and a retraction side (31d) and a control block (117) configured to reroute fluid from the holding side to the retraction side of the drive cylinder.
Because both these references are concerned with a similar problem, i.e. horizontal shaft impact crusher it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the type of drive cylinder of Solomon in the device of Dallimore in view of Zhang. In KSR (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)) the courts held that combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. Accordingly a simple substitution of the drive cylinder of Solomon in the device of Dallimore in view of Zhang will obtain predictable results and is therefore obvious and proper combination of the references is made. The predictable results being control over the drive cylinder.
Concerning claim 11, Solomon, as applied to Dallimore in view of Zheng, discloses the control block reroutes fluid from the holding side to the retraction side of the cylinder, in response to an overload pressure, via a relief valve.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent No. 10279354 discloses a similar device using a zero point determination. U.S. Patent No. 7293725 also discloses gap adjustment
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Katcoff whose telephone number is (571)270-1415. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8-4, Fri: Flex.
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.
/Matthew Katcoff/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
06/12/2026
Prosecution Insights