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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(m) as they make improper use of shading that does not aid in understanding and that reduces legibility of the drawings.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “such than” in line 4 of the claim appears to be a typographical error. It is suggested that the phrase should read “such that”. 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 2, 5, 7, and 13 are 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 2 says that the ridge will “engage(click into)” the groove in line 5. It is unclear of the limitation within the parentheses is a required limitation or an optional limitation.
Claim 5 states that 5 indentations in the underside are “provided superposed the knobs” extending from the upper surface of the main module. It is unclear what the above quoted language means. It is speculated that the above quoted language was meant to describe the insertion of the knobs into the indentations. If this was the intention, it is suggested that the above quoted language be amended to read, “provided in alignment with the knobs”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the knobs" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that the claim should depend from claim 5 to provide proper antecedent basis for the above quoted term.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "for example" 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).
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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Corley et al. (US 2003/0085106).
In regard to claim 1, Corley shows a modular conveyor belt module 320 incorporating rollers 361in the belt module (see figure 6B). The module is configured for installation in a modular conveyor belt of the type assembled from a plurality of substantially identical modular belt links where one or more modular belt links forms lateral rows (see figure 9). Each modular belt link 320 has a main body extending in the modular belt link’s width direction. A plurality of eye parts EP extend forwards and rearwards from the main body (see the annotated figure below). The eye parts are spaced in the width direction of the modular belt link creating an opening between adjacent eye parts, such that when two modular conveyor belt links are pushed together, the eye parts on one link will inter-fit between eye parts on the other modular belt link (see figures 9 and 11).
PNG
media_image1.png
500
620
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lateral apertures LA in all eye parts are provided, such that when the eye parts of modular belt links in one row are overlapping eye parts in an adjacent row a through-going aperture is formed from side to side of the conveyor belt. A connection pin (see the hinge pin discussed in paragraph 0028 for example) may be inserted through the lateral through-going aperture to hingedly connect adjacent modular belt links 320. The belt module 320 includes an upper cover 323 and a lower main module part 322. The upper cover 323 is configured to be arranged above and fitted onto the main module part 322. A first plurality of eye parts EP are arranged both on the main module part 322 and on the upper cover 323, such that when the upper cover 323 is positioned on the main module part 322 eye parts EP will be arranged evenly spaced along the modular conveyor module’s width direction. Cavities 354 are arranged in the main module part 322 and apertures 355 are provided in the upper cover 323 such that a roller 366 may be placed in the cavity between the main module part 322 and the upper cover 323 and at least a part of the roller projects above the upper cover 323 through the one or more apertures 355.
In regard to claim 6 the upper cover 323 is provided with one or more eye lugs EL. On the main module part 322, positioned adjacent the eye lugs EL, the main module part is provided with a bore LA where a pin may be inserted through the eye lug EL in the upper cover and into the bore thereby fastening the main module part 322 to the upper cover 323.
In regard to claim 7, a roller 366 arranged on an axle 362 may be fitted in one or more of the cavities 354 provided in the main modular part 322. The axle 362 is the axis of rotation for the roller 366. The axle 362 extends beyond the roller 366 in both ends of the roller 366. Each end of the axle 362 may be inserted and retained between pairs of knobs defining the sides of the indentations 360. The pairs of knobs are arranged on opposite sides of the cavity 354 allowing the roller to freely rotate about the axle.
In regard to claim 12, the main module part 322 may be made from a different material than the upper cover 323 (see the end of paragraph 0007).
In regard to claim 14, a plurality of the conveyor belt modules 320 are used to form an endless conveyor belt. Each of the modules has all the structure described in regard to claim 1 above and as required by claim 14. When the belt is assembled, the eye parts EP of adjacent modular belt modules are interleafed (see figures 9 and 11) a connection pin (not shown) is inserted laterally through overlapping apertures LA in the eye parts EP to hingedly connect adjacent eye parts EP. The connection pin is inserted through apertures LA in eye parts EP of the main module part 322 and eye parts ELO of the upper cover 323.
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.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Corley in view of Lapeyre et al. (US 3,367,616).
Lapeyre shows a conveyor belt module 24/105 similar to that of Corley. Lapeyre shows a module 105 with balls 94 supported in a cavity 92 in the shape of a part of a sphere suitable to accommodate a ball 94 such that the ball extends above an upper cover 106 when the upper cover 106 is fitted on a main module part 105 so that the ball may rotate freely within the cavity. Corley teaches that these balls may be used interchangeably with cylindrical rollers 48 similar to the rollers 366 of Corley. As such it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to utilize balls supported in a cavity in the main module part 322 in the shape of a part of a sphere suitable to accommodate a ball such that the ball extends above the upper cover 323 when the upper cover 323 is fitted on the main module part 322 so that the ball may rotate freely within the cavity according to the teachings of Lapeyre. When this is done the resulting structure would have all the structure required by claim 9.
In regard to claim 10, it should be noted that Corley states that the main module part 322 and the upper cover 323 are preferably injection molded from a plastic material (see paragraph 0029). However, Corley does not specify the materials of its rollers 366 and axles 362. Lapeyre teaches that cylindrical rollers 48 similar to the rollers of Corley may advantageously be injection molded from a plastic material such as polypropylene and that the axle may advantageously be made of steel to provide durability to the rollers (see column 5, lines 20-40). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to injection mold the rollers 366 from a plastic material and to make the axles 362 of steel in order to provide durability to the rollers according to the teachings of Lapeyre. When this is done, the structure would have all the structure required by claim 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 8, and 11 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.
Claims 2, 5, and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK A DEUBLE whose telephone number is (571)272-6912. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday flex schedule.
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.
/MARK A DEUBLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651