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 lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6, 10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticiapated by Blickley (US 2010/0264243 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Blickley discloses a rotary feeder with the following elements of the claim:
a housing wherein an interior space is formed, which is confined by a housing wall with a cylindrical inner wall surface and comprises a central center axis (Blickley, Fig. 1, cylindrical housing 102), wherein the housing has
an introducing unit in an introducing zone that opens with an inlet opening into the interior space (Blickley, Fig. 1, feeder inlet 104) and, in
a discharge zone spaced apart in relation to the introducing zone in the peripheral direction of the center axis, a discharge unit comprising an outlet opening likewise opening into the interior space (Blickley, Fig. 1, first feeder outlet 106), with
a bucket wheel arranged in the interior space and rotatable about an axis of rotation coinciding with the center axis while executing a conveying rotary movement (Blickley, paragraph [0015], line 4 “rotor”), which comprises bucket wheel scoops extending radially from the center axis to the inner wall surface (Blickley, paragraph [0015], lines 8-9 “adapted to sweep the wall”, wherein a bucket wheel compartment for receiving granules is formed between each two consecutive bucket wheel scoops (Blickley, paragraph [0015], lines 5-6 “pockets”) and moves during the conveying rotary movement from the introducing zone to the discharge zone (Blickley, [0015], lines 14-18), wherein
the housing wall extends over the outlet opening (Blickley, Fig. 1, cylindrical housing 102) and, in the region of the outlet opening, comprises
a screen wall section designed as a screen (Blickley, Fig. 1, separating screen 118).
Regarding claim 2, Blickley discloses the following elements:
The rotary valve according to claim 1, wherein
the screen can be removed and/or replaced (Blickley, paragraph [0058] lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 3, Blickley discloses the following elements:
The rotary valve according to claim 1 wherein
the inner wall surface is at least partially designed as a sealing surface and/or each bucket wheel scoop comprises a scoop surface that is at least partially designed as a sealing surface (Blickley, paragraph [0015], lines 8-9 “adapted to sweep the wall”).
Regarding claim 4, Blickley discloses the following elements:
The rotary valve according to claim 1, wherein the rotary valve comprises
a drive unit that causes the bucket wheel to perform the conveying rotary movement (Blickley, paragraph [0057], lines 2-6).
Regarding claim 5, Blickley discloses the following elements:
The rotary valve according to claim 4, wherein the
drive unit that causes the drive unit is suitable for performing a uniform conveying rotary movement or an alternating conveying rotary movement (Blickley, paragraph [0057], lines 8-12).
Regarding claim 6, Blickley discloses the following elements:
The rotary valve according to claim 5, wherein the
the alternating conveying rotary movement comprises a rotation of the bucket wheel in the conveying direction and a subsequent rotation of the bucket wheel in the opposite direction to the conveying direction, the rotation of the bucket wheel in the conveying direction being greater than the rotation of the bucket wheel in the opposite direction to the conveying direction.
Regarding claim 10, Blickley discloses the following elements:
The rotary valve according to claim 1, wherein
the introducing zone and the discharge zone are arranged asymmetrically to one another in the housing (Blickley, Fig. 1, inlet 104 and first feeder outlet 106).
Regarding claim 12, Blickley discloses:
The rotary valve according to claim 1, wherein the rotary valve comprises
at least one nozzle arrangement for compressed-air-controlled emptying of the bucket wheel compartments (Blickley, paragraphs: [0035]; [0036]; and [0081] lines 1-4).
Regarding claim 13, Blickley discloses:
The rotary valve according to claim 12, wherein the bucket wheel comprises
the nozzle arrangement for emptying each bucket wheel compartment and/or a housing cover comprises the nozzle arrangement for emptying each bucket wheel compartment (Blickley, Fig. 9, purge gas nozzle 902).
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.
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blickley in view of Allen (GB 963045 A).
Regarding claim 9, Blickley discloses a rotary feeder comprising all of the elements of the rotary valve of claim 1.
As stated above, Blickley discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including all of the elements of claim 1 of the current invention except for:
the bucket wheel scoops are designed in such a way that the bucket wheel compartments form a multi-start helical space,
on which Blickley is silent.
However, Allen teaches rotor for a rotary feeder comprising the following:
the bucket wheel scoops are designed in such a way that the bucket wheel compartments form a multi-start helical space (Allen, Fig. 2, pockets 10),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of plumbing before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the disclosures of the rotary feeder of Blickley with the helical rotor of Allen to allow for reduced pulsation in the flow of material through the rotary valve.
Regarding claim 11, Blickley discloses a rotary feeder comprising all of the elements of the rotary valve of claim 1.
As stated above, Blickley discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including all of the elements of claim 1 of the current invention except for:
the bucket wheel compartments comprise an asymmetrically designed cross-sectional area.
However, Allen teaches a rotor for a rotary feeder comprising the following:
the bucket wheel compartments comprise an asymmetrically designed cross-sectional area (Allen, Fig. 2, pockets 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the disclosures of the rotary feeder of Blickley with the teaching of the asymmetrically shaped pockets of Allen to allow for improved loading and unloading of the bucket wheel compartments.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendix et al. (US 6179893 B1), hereinafter Bendix, in view of Blickley.
Regarding claim 14, Bendix teaches a process plant comprising the following elements:
A granulator (Bendix, Fig. 2, granulator 119)
a rotary valve connected to a discharge of the granulator (Bendix, Fig. 2, rotary valve 125), wherein the rotary valve is designed as a rotary valve for dosing, introducing and/or discharging granules.
As stated above, Bendix teaches the invention substantially as claimed, including all of the elements of claim 14, except for the details of the rotary valve comprising:
a housing wherein an interior space is formed, which is confined by a housing wall with a cylindrical inner wall surface and comprises a central center axis, wherein the housing has
an introducing unit in an introducing zone that opens with an inlet opening into the interior space and, in
a discharge zone spaced apart in relation to the introducing zone in the peripheral direction of the center axis, a discharge unit comprising an outlet opening likewise opening into the interior space, with
a bucket wheel arranged in the interior space and rotatable about an axis of rotation coinciding with the center axis while executing a conveying rotary movement, which comprises bucket wheel scoops extending radially from the center axis to the inner wall surface, wherein a bucket wheel compartment for receiving granules is formed between each two consecutive bucket wheel scoops and moves during the conveying rotary movement from the introducing zone to the discharge zone, wherein
the housing wall extends over the outlet opening and, in the region of the outlet opening, comprises
a screen wall section designed as a screen,
on which Bendix is silent.
However, Blickley teaches a rotary valve comprising:
a housing wherein an interior space is formed, which is confined by a housing wall with a cylindrical inner wall surface and comprises a central center axis (Blickley, Fig. 1, cylindrical housing 102), wherein the housing has
an introducing unit in an introducing zone that opens with an inlet opening into the interior space (Blickley, Fig. 1, feeder inlet 104) and, in
a discharge zone spaced apart in relation to the introducing zone in the peripheral direction of the center axis, a discharge unit comprising an outlet opening likewise opening into the interior space (Blickley, Fig. 1, first feeder outlet 106), with
a bucket wheel arranged in the interior space and rotatable about an axis of rotation coinciding with the center axis while executing a conveying rotary movement (Blickley, paragraph [0015], line 4 “rotor”), which comprises bucket wheel scoops extending radially from the center axis to the inner wall surface (Blickley, paragraph [0015], lines 8-9 “adapted to sweep the wall”), wherein a bucket wheel compartment for receiving granules is formed between each two consecutive bucket wheel scoops (Blickley, paragraph [0015], lines 5-6 “pockets”) and moves during the conveying rotary movement from the introducing zone to the discharge zone (Blickley, [0015], lines 14-18), wherein
the housing wall extends over the outlet opening (Blickley, Fig. 1, cylindrical housing 102) and, in the region of the outlet opening, comprises
a screen wall section designed as a screen (Blickley, Fig. 1, separating screen 118).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the disclosures of the process plant with the rotary feeder of Blickley to allow for a more efficient control of particle separation and flow of particulate material.
Regarding claim 15, the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 14 through Bendix teaches the following:
The process plant according to claim 14,
wherein the granulator (Bendix, Fig. 2, granulator 119) is designed as a fluidizing apparatus or a spouted bed apparatus (Bendix, Fig. 2, fluidized bed above nozzles 117 and 118).
Therefore, the incorporation of the granulator as a fluidizing bed apparatus in the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 14 through Blickley teaches the invention of claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 14 through Blickley teaches the following:
The process plant according to claim 14,
wherein the rotary valve comprises a drive unit that causes the bucket wheel to perform the conveying rotary movement (Blickley, paragraph [0057] lines 2-6, device for rotating the rotor 110).
Therefore, the inclusion of the drive unit to effect the conveying rotary motion in the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 14 through Blickley teaches the invention of claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 16 through Blickley teaches the following:
The process plant according to claim 16,
wherein the drive unit is suitable for performing a uniform conveying rotary movement or an alternating conveying rotary movement (Blickley, paragraph [0057], lines 8-12).
Therefore, the inclusion of the drive unit to effect the uniform conveying rotary motion in the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 16 through Blickley teaches the invention of claim 17.
Regarding claim 18, the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 16 through Blickley teaches the following:
The process plant according to claim 17,
wherein the alternating conveying rotary movement comprises a rotation of the bucket wheel in the conveying direction and a subsequent rotation of the bucket wheel in the opposite direction to the conveying direction, the rotation of the bucket wheel in the conveying direction being greater than the rotation of the bucket wheel in the opposite direction to the conveying direction (Blickley, paragraph [0057], lines 8-12).
Therefore, modifying the alternating conveying rotary motion to be greater in the conveying direction than the opposite direction in the modified device of Bendix through Blickley as applied to claim 17 through Blickley teaches the invention of claim 18.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 and 19-20 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.
As regards claims 7 and 8, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the most pertinent prior art of record teaches or fairly suggests employing a progressive advancement of the rotary valve by means of alternating forward/reverse advancements of the scoops to allow for increased efficiency in the emptying of the cavities through the screen device.
As regards claims 19 and 20, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the most pertinent prior art of record teaches or fairly suggests employing a progressive advancement of the rotary valve by means of alternating forward/reverse advancements of the scoops to allow for increased efficiency in the emptying of the cavities through the screen device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Boos (US 6644847 B2) discloses a granulator comprising a cylindrical rotor on a horizontal axis which is driven with an alternately changing direction of rotation.
Altmeyer (US 2002/013767 A1) discloses a device for continuously drying bulk goods which comprises a rotary valve connected to a granulator.
Yoon (KR 20260036752) discloses a Valid Particle Extraction Device which comprises a belt-like conveyer with progressively-advancing alternating motion of a linear belt conveyor used for separating particles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN RAYMOND ETZEL whose telephone number is (571)305-5217. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 7:00a-4:30p Fri 7:00a-11:00p.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/ALAN RAYMOND ETZEL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/PAUL R DURAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754 July 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights