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 Objections
Claim 20 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 20, the phrase “wherein the transition zone comprises an angled portion, a first vertical portion” should be changed to “wherein the transition zone comprises the angled portion, the first vertical portion”.
Regarding claim 21, the phrase “and the second vertical portion has an extension in an axial direction and an extension in a tangential direction of the hub” should be changed to “and the second vertical portion has an extension in the axial direction and an extension in the tangential direction of the hub”.
Regarding claim 29, the phrase “wherein the transition zone comprises more than one angled portion and more than two vertical portions, wherein each angled portion extends between two vertical portions” should be changed to “wherein the transition zone comprises more than one of the angled portion and more than two of the vertical portions, wherein each of the angled portion extends between two of the vertical portions”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 17-30 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the central axis" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 18-30 are rejected because they depend from claim 17.
Claim 23 recites the limitation " the tangential direction" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the tangential direction" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation " the second vertical portion" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 25 the phrase “the second vertical portion” render the claim indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “the second vertical portion”.
Therefore the claim is unclear and indefinite, thus the Examiner is provided a a prior art rejection as best as understood.
Regarding claim 27, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 30 does not further limit the subject matter of “A gear well for a crusher” of claim 17 which claim 30 depends from.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
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 17 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Svensson (US20200282404A1).
Regarding claims 17 and 30, Svensson discloses a gear well for a crusher (fig.2: (100)) comprising:
a hub circumventing portion, arrangeable for circumventing at least a portion of a hub of the crusher, and comprising a groove (figs.2 and 4: (110)) having first and second side walls and a groove base (fig.4: (111));
a pinion recess (fig.4: (120)) having a bottom (fig.4: (122)); and
a transition zone (fig.4: (126)) extending between an end of the hub circumventing portion and the pinion recess (fig.4: (120)),
wherein the transition zone provides a stepped transition (fig.4: the element (126) is stepped shape) of the groove from the hub circumventing portion to the bottom of the pinion recess, wherein the transition zone comprises a step for providing the stepped transition (fig.4), and
wherein the transition zone comprises an angled portion (fig.4: (112)), which is angled with respect to a plane transverse to the central axis, and
a first vertical portion (fig.4: the vertical portion of element (126) between elements (112) and (112)), wherein the angled portion extends between the end of the hub circumventing portion and the first vertical portion, and the first vertical portion extends between the angled portion and the pinion recess (fig.4).
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 18-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svensson (US20200282404A1).
Regarding claims 18-29, Svensson does not disclose wherein the transition zone comprises at least two steps for providing the stepped transition; and wherein the at least two steps are arranged at different angular positions with respect to a central axis of the hub.
However, optimizing numbers, size and shape of the parts would have resulted from routine engineering practices and it therefore not patentable and would be obvious because there is no unexpected result;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have the limitations of claims 18-29 in order to have a gear well with specific configuration as desired.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED S ALAWADI whose telephone number is (571)272-2224. The examiner can normally be reached 08:00 am- 05:00 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, 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.
/MOHAMMED S. ALAWADI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights