JAW CRUSHER

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 § 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen CN 110193396 A in view of Eriksson et al. EP 2564928 A1. CN 110193396 A is a published patent hereinafter to be referred to as the Chen patent; and EP 2564928 A1 is a published patent hereinafter to be referred to as the Eriksson patent. Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a jaw crusher comprising: a crusher housing (Chen – 1; FIG. 3) having an inlet (See Chen FIG. 3 below) for material to be crushed, an outlet (Chen – 4; FIG. 4) for material that has been crushed, a moveable jaw (Chen – 3; FIG. 2), and a stationary jaw (Chen – 2; FIG. 2), the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) and the stationary jaw (Chen – 2) forming between them a crushing chamber (Chen Para [0024], Lines 3-5), and a toggle system wherein the toggle system includes a drive cylinder (Chen – 12; FIG.2) for adjusting the position of the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) relative to the stationary jaw (Chen – 2), wherein the drive cylinder (Chen – 12) is provided with an internally mounted sensor (Chen – 17; FIG. 2) arranged to measure a position of the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) relative to the stationary jaw (Chen – 2)(Chen Para [0030]). Chen fails to disclose the moveable jaw, provided with a wear plate and the stationary jaw, provided with a second wear plate; the moveable jaw being coupled to an eccentric jaw crusher shaft which causes the moveable jaw to reciprocate in an eccentric motion to crush the material between the moveable jaw and the stationary jaw; and the toggle system including a toggle plate, a toggle beam and toggle clamping cylinders connected to the toggle beam to clamp the toggle plate, wherein the toggle system further comprises a drive cylinder effective on the toggle beam. PNG media_image1.png 616 479 media_image1.png Greyscale Chen FIG. 3 Eriksson teaches a jaw crusher comprising a moveable jaw (Eriksson – 3; FIG. 1), provided with a wear plate (Eriksson – 8; FIG. 1) and a stationary jaw (Eriksson – 5; FIG. 1), provided with a second wear plate (Eriksson – 6; FIG. 1); the moveable jaw (Eriksson - 3) being coupled to an eccentric jaw crusher shaft (Eriksson – 7, FIG. 1) which causes the moveable jaw (Eriksson – 3) to reciprocate in an eccentric motion to crush the material between the moveable jaw (Eriksson – 3) and the stationary jaw (Eriksson – 5)(Eriksson Para [0019], Lines 4-5); and a toggle system (Eriksson – 23; FIG. 4) including a toggle plate (Eriksson – 11; FIG. 4), a toggle beam (Eriksson – 13; FIG. 4) and toggle clamping cylinders (Eriksson – 25; FIG. 2) connected to the toggle beam (Eriksson – 13) to clamp the toggle plate (Eriksson – 11)(Eriksson Para [0023]), wherein the toggle system (Eriksson – 23) further comprises a drive cylinder effective on the toggle beam (See Eriksson FIG. 4 below). PNG media_image2.png 429 621 media_image2.png Greyscale Eriksson FIG. 4 It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen to include a movable jaw provided with a wear plate and a stationary jaw provided with a wear plate, wherein the movable jaw is coupled to an eccentric jaw crusher shaft, as well as a toggle system that included a toggle plate, a toggle bean, and a toggle clamping cylinder connected to the toggle beam to clamp the toggle plate, as taught by Eriksson, where the toggle beam and toggle plate, being part of the toggle system, are used to adjust the position of the movable jaw to adapt the jaw crusher for crushing various types of materials, thus minimizing the wear of wear parts (Eriksson Para [0002], Lines 3-4; and Para [0021], Lines 5-7). Regarding claim 2, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 1 rejection above), wherein the drive cylinder (Chen – 12) is a hydraulic drive cylinder (Chen Para [0027]: In order to facilitate the installation of the hydraulic cylinder 12 on the rear wall 11 of the crusher when the moving jaw tooth plate 3 forms the moving jaw stroke). Regarding claim 3, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 1 rejection above), wherein the internally mounted sensor (Chen – 17) is centrally mounted in the drive cylinder (Chen – 12)(Chen Para [0030]: a displacement sensor 17 installed inside the hydraulic cylinder 12; Chen – FIG. 2). Regarding claim 5, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 1 rejection above), wherein the internally mounted sensor (Chen – 17) measures stroke distance of the drive cylinder (Chen – 12)(Chen Para [0030]: The sensing direction of the displacement sensor 17 is the same as the extension and retraction direction of the hydraulic cylinder 12, used to accurately measure the stroke displacement of the hydraulic cylinder 12.). Regarding claim 6, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 5 rejection above), wherein measurement of the stroke distance provides a linear distance between the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) and the stationary jaw (Chen – 2)(Chen Para [0030], Lines 9-18). Regarding claim 8, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 5 rejection above), wherein the stroke distance is constantly measured by the internally mounted sensor (Chen – 17)(Chen Para [0030]: The displacement sensor 17 detects the extension and retraction of the hydraulic cylinder 12 and sends the stroke data to the controller.). Regarding claim 10, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 1 rejection above), further comprising a control block with a pressure sensor (Chen Para [0031]: The pressure sensor is coupled to the controller.) configured to detect contact between the moveable jaw wear plate (Eriksson – 8) and the fixed jaw wear plate (Eriksson – 6)(Chen Para [0031]: when the pressure sensor senses the contact between the fixed jaw plate 2 and the movable jaw plate 3.). Regarding claim 13, Chen discloses a method for adjusting a jaw crusher, the jaw crusher comprising a crusher housing having an inlet (See Chen FIG. 4 below) for material to be crushed, an outlet (Chen – 4; FIG. 4) for material that has been crushed, a moveable jaw (Chen – 3; FIG. 2), and a stationary jaw (Chen – 2; FIG. 2), the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) and the stationary jaw (Chen – 2) forming between them a crushing chamber (Chen Para [0024], Lines 3-5), and a toggle system, wherein the toggle system includes a drive cylinder (Chen – 12; FIG.2) for adjusting the position of the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) relative to the stationary jaw (Chen – 2), wherein the drive cylinder (Chen – 12) is provided with an internally mounted sensor (Chen – 17; FIG. 2) arranged to measure a position of the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) relative to the stationary jaw (Chen – 2)(Chen Para [0030]), the method comprising moving, by means of the drive cylinder (Chen – 12) the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) into a position at or near the stationary jaw (Chen – 2) and measuring a stroke of the drive cylinder (Chen - 12) using the sensor (Chen - 17) to calculate the position of the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) relative to the stationary jaw (Chen – 2)(Chen Para [0030],Lines 8-18). Chen fails to disclose the moveable jaw, provided with a wear plate and the stationary jaw, provided with a second wear plate; the moveable jaw being coupled to an eccentric jaw crusher shaft which causes the moveable jaw to reciprocate in an eccentric motion to crush the material between the moveable jaw and the stationary jaw; and a toggle system including a toggle plate, a toggle beam and toggle clamping cylinders connected to the toggle beam to clamp the toggle plate, wherein the toggle system further comprises a drive cylinder effective on the toggle beam. Eriksson teaches a jaw crusher comprising a moveable jaw (Eriksson – 3; FIG. 1), provided with a wear plate (Eriksson – 8; FIG. 1) and a stationary jaw (Eriksson – 5; FIG. 1), provided with a second wear plate (Eriksson – 6; FIG. 1); the moveable jaw (Eriksson - 3) being coupled to an eccentric jaw crusher shaft (Eriksson – 7, FIG. 1) which causes the moveable jaw (Eriksson – 3) to reciprocate in an eccentric motion to crush the material between the moveable jaw (Eriksson – 3) and the stationary jaw (Eriksson – 5)(Eriksson Para [0019], Lines 4-5); and a toggle system (Eriksson – 23; FIG. 4) including a toggle plate (Eriksson – 11; FIG. 4), a toggle beam (Eriksson – 13; FIG. 4) and toggle clamping cylinders (Eriksson – 25; FIG. 2) connected to the toggle beam (Eriksson – 13) to clamp the toggle plate (Eriksson – 11)(Eriksson Para [0023]), wherein the toggle system (Eriksson – 23) further comprises a drive cylinder effective on the toggle beam (See Eriksson FIG. 4 below). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen to include a movable jaw provided with a wear plate and a stationary jaw provided with a wear plate, wherein the movable jaw is coupled to an eccentric jaw crusher shaft, as well as a toggle system that included a toggle plate, a toggle bean, and a toggle clamping cylinder connected to the toggle beam to clamp the toggle plate, as taught by Eriksson, where the toggle beam and toggle plate, being part of the toggle system, are used to adjust the position of the movable jaw to adapt the jaw crusher for crushing various types of materials, thus minimizing the wear of wear parts (Eriksson Para [0002], Lines 3-4; and Para [0021], Lines 5-7). Regarding claim 15, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the method for adjusting a jaw crusher (See claim 13 rejection above), wherein measurement of the stroke distance is used to set the position of the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) with respect to the stationary jaw (Chen – 2)(Chen Para [0030], Lines 8-18). Regarding claim 16, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the method for adjusting a jaw crusher (See claim 13 rejection above), wherein a pressure sensor (Chen – 17) is configured to detect contact between the moveable jaw (Chen – 3) and the stationary jaw (Chen – 2)(Chen Para [0031]: when the pressure sensor senses the contact between the fixed jaw plate 2 and the movable jaw plate 3.) Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Eriksson et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Serena et al. WO 2008010072 A2. WO 2008010072 A2 is a published patent application hereinafter to be referred to as the Serena patent. Regarding claim 4, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 1 rejection above), wherein the jaw crusher includes an internally mounted sensor (Chen – 17). Chen fails to disclose the internally mounted sensor is a magnetostrictive linear position sensor. Serena teaches movable jaw crusher comprised of internally mounted magnetostrictive position sensor (Serena – 26; FIG. 3)(Serena Description Page 5, Lines 1-3: auxiliary hydraulic cylinder 25 comprises a conventional double-acting hydraulic cylinder equipped with a magnetostrictive or similar position transducer). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the internally mounted sensor of the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen, to be a magnetostrictive position sensor, as taught by Serena, to provide instantaneous position of the movable crushing jaw inside the crushing chamber (See Serena Description Page 5, Lines 6-8). Claims 7 and 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Eriksson et al. as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Barscevicius et al. WO 2004004908 A1. WO 2004004908 A1 is a published patent application, hereinafter to be referred to as the Barscevicius patent. Regarding claim 7, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 5 rejection above), however, Chen in view of Eriksson fails to disclose the jaw crusher, wherein measurement of the stroke distance provides a measure of total wear on the moveable jaw wear plate and fixed jaw wear plate. Barscevicius teaches determining a distance between a movable jaw support surface from a fixed jaw support surface to thereon determine changes due to wear (Barscevicius Description Page 7, Lines 3-7). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen in view of Eriksson, such that measurement of the stroke distance provides a measure of total wear on the movable jaw wear plate and fixed jaw wear plate, as taught by Barscevicius, so as to be able to maintain a jaw crusher setting at a constant value and make adjustments to the jaw crusher according to the detected wear on the wear plates (See Barscevicius Description Page 7, 1st Paragraph, Lines 6-9). Regarding claim 14, Chen in view of Eriksson and Barscevicius discloses a method for adjusting a jaw crusher (See claim 13 rejection above), wherein measurement of the stroke distance provides a measure of total wear on the moveable jaw wear plate (Chen – 8) and fixed jaw wear plate (Chen – 6) (Barscevicius Description Page 7, Lines 3-7). Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Eriksson et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pinckney et al. US 2015/0069155 A1. US 2015/0069155 A1 is published patent application hereinafter to be referred to as the Pinckney patent. Regarding claim 9, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 1 rejection above), wherein the drive cylinder is driven to urge the movable jaw (Chen – 3) and hence the movable jaw wear plate (Eriksson – 8) into contact with the fixed jaw plate (Eriksson – 6), however, Chen in view of Eriksson fails to disclose moving the movable jaw wear plate (Eriksson – 8) into contact with the fixed jaw plate (Eriksson – 6) to calibrate the distance measured by the internally mounted sensor by obtaining a zero CSS position. Pinckney teaches a crusher, wherein an adjustable jaw (Pinckney – 22; FIG. 3) is moved toward a movable jaw (Pinckney – 24; FIG. 3), such that a flat portion of dies attached to wear plates of the adjustable jaw (Pinckney – 22) and the movable jaw (Pinckney – 24) come into contact with each other to establish a zero position (Pinckney Para [0043]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen in view of Eriksson such that movement of the movable, wherein the moveable jaw wear plate comes into contact with the fixed jaw wear plate to obtain a zero position, as taught by Pickney, so that the distance between the movable jaw and the fixed jaw can be any suitable amount and can be determined based on the established zero position (Pickney Para [0043]: The distance between the jaws 22, 24 in the use position may be any suitable amount and is determined based on the registered zero position.). Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Eriksson et al. and Barscevicius et al. as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Zec WO 2020210875 A1. WO 2020210875 A1 is a published patent application hereinafter to be referred to as the Zec patent. Regarding claim 11, Chen in view of Eriksson and Barscevicius discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 7 above), however, Chen in view of Eriksson and Barscevicius fails to disclose the jaw crusher further configured to store values of said wear measurement and to store values of crushing hours, and to calculate a wear rate of the wear plates based on said stored values. Zec teaches storing values of wear measurement (Zec Para [0130]: The data recorder 60 generates wear data from the signal of each sensor 30 and stores the data in the memory 64.) and measuring a time frame to calculate a wear rate (Zec Para [0083]: Additionally, the wear rate may be easily determined by associating the extent of wear with a measured time frame.). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen in view of Eriksson and Barscevicius, to further store values of wear measurement and crushing hours to calculate a wear rate based on stored values, as taught by Zec, due to the unpredictable nature of wear rate (Zec Para [0006]). Regarding claim 12, Chen in view of Eriksson, Barscevicius, and Zec discloses the jaw crusher (See claim 11 above), wherein Zec teaches calculating an estimate of a lifespan of a wear liner, wherein those skilled in the art appreciate that a reference to a wear liner may also apply to a wear plate (Zec Para [0094])(Zec Para [0141]). Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Eriksson et al. as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Pinckney et al. . Regarding claim 17, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the method for adjusting a jaw crusher (See claim 13 above), wherein the drive cylinder is driven to urge the movable jaw (Chen – 3) and hence the movable jaw wear plate (Eriksson – 8) into contact with the fixed jaw plate (Eriksson – 6), however, Chen in view of Eriksson fails to disclose moving the movable jaw wear plate (Eriksson – 8) into contact with the fixed jaw plate (Eriksson – 6) to calibrate the distance measured by the internally mounted sensor by obtaining a zero CSS position. Pinckney teaches a crusher, wherein an adjustable jaw (Pinckney – 22; FIG. 3) is moved toward a movable jaw (Pinckney – 24; FIG. 3), such that a flat portion of dies attached to wear plates of the adjustable jaw (Pinckney – 22) and the movable jaw (Pinckney – 24) come into contact with each other to establish a zero position (Pinckney [0043]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen in view of Eriksson such that movement of the movable jaw such that the moveable jaw wear plate comes into contact with the fixed jaw wear plate to obtain a zero CSS position, as taught by Pickney, so that the distance between the movable jaw and the fixed jaw can be any suitable amount and can be determined based on the established zero position (Pickney [0043]: The distance between the jaws 22, 24 in the use position may be any suitable amount and is determined based on the registered zero position.). Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Eriksson et al. as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Zec . Regarding claim 18, Chen in view of Eriksson discloses the method for adjusting a jaw crusher (See claim 14 above), however, Chen in view of Eriksson fails to disclose the jaw crusher further configured to store values of said wear measurement and to store values of crushing hours, and to calculate a wear rate of the wear plates based on said stored values. Zec teaches storing values of wear measurement (Zec Para [0130]: The data recorder 60 generates wear data from the signal of each sensor 30 and stores the data in the memory 64.) and measuring a time frame to calculate a wear rate (Zec Para [0083]: Additionally, the wear rate may be easily determined by associating the extent of wear with a measured time frame.). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the jaw crusher disclosed by Chen in view of Eriksson, to further store values of wear measurement and crushing hours to calculate a wear rate based on stored values, as taught by Zec, due to the unpredictable nature of wear rate (Zec Para [0006]). Regarding claim 19, Chen in view of Eriksson and Zec discloses the method for adjusting a jaw crusher (See claim 18 above), wherein Zec teaches calculating an estimate of a lifespan of a wear liner, wherein those skilled in the art appreciate that a reference to a wear liner may also apply to a wear plate (Zec Para [0094])(Zec Para [0141]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARLINGTON N IBEKWE whose telephone number is (571)272-2474. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4:00pm. 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. D.N.I. Patent Examiner Art Unit 3725 /Christopher L Templeton/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725