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 .
This is the First Office action on the Merits from the examiner in charge of this application.
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 1-4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 9278838).
With respect to claim 1, Apps discloses a pallet assembly comprising: a pallet (Fig. 1, pallet 12) including a deck (upper deck of pallet 12) and a plurality of feet extending downward from the deck (Fig. 1 shows a plurality of feet extending from the upper deck of pallet 12); and an interlock panel (tier 18) on the deck having a plurality of concave surfaces formed thereon (concave surfaces of bays 24, 25), each configured to receive a horizontally-oriented keg thereon (bays 24, 25 receive kegs 40 and sixth-barrels 41).
With respect to claim 2, Apps further discloses wherein the interlock panel (tier 18) includes a pair of side portions (front and rear ends of tier 18) each having a plurality of supports (bays 24, 25 defined by the opening between front and rear ends of tier 18), each of the plurality of supports including at least one of the plurality of concave surfaces (Fig. 2 shows bays 24 and 25 each include at least one concave surface).
With respect to claim 3, Apps further discloses wherein the plurality of supports (bays 24, 25) includes a center support (center bay 25 of tier 18), wherein the center support includes a first area (lobe 30) between two second areas (see annotated Fig. 1 below, second areas), wherein the first area is a concave first surface defined by a first radius from a first axis (lobe 30 is concave and has a small offset radius for accommodating sixth-barrel 41, the center of sixth-barrel 41 defining a first axis), wherein the second areas are concave second surfaces defined by a second radius from a second axis parallel to the first axis (second areas have a larger radius for accommodating keg 40, the center of keg 40 defining a second axis that is parallel to and non-coincident with the first axis), wherein the second radius is larger than the first radius (Fig. 1 shows the radius of the second areas is greater than the radius of lobe 30).
PNG
media_image1.png
839
794
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1
With respect to claim 4, Apps further discloses wherein the plurality of supports further includes a pair of outer supports (Fig. 1, left and right bays 24), wherein each of the pair of outer supports includes a third area (lobe 30 of each bay 24) adjacent a fourth area (see annotated Fig. 1 below, fourth area), wherein each third area is a concave third surface defined by a third radius from a third axis (lobe 30 is concave and has a small offset radius for accommodating sixth-barrel 41, the center of sixth-barrel 41 defining a third axis), wherein each fourth area is a concave fourth surface defined by a fourth radius from a fourth axis parallel to the third axis (the fourth area has a larger radius for accommodating keg 40, the center of keg 40 defining a fourth axis that is parallel to and non-coincident with the third axis), wherein the fourth radius is equal to the second radius (Fig. 1 shows the larger radius of left and right bays 24 is equal to the larger radius of center bay 25).
PNG
media_image2.png
474
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1
With respect to claim 15, Apps further discloses wherein the plurality of supports (bays 24, 25) includes a pair of outer supports (left and right bays 24), wherein each of the pair of outer supports includes a third area (lobe 30 of each bay 24) adjacent a fourth area (see annotated Fig. 1 below, fourth area), wherein each third area is a concave third surface defined by a third radius from a third axis (lobe 30 is concave and has a small offset radius for accommodating sixth-barrel 41, the center of sixth-barrel 41 defining a third axis), wherein each fourth area is a concave fourth surface defined by a fourth radius from a fourth axis parallel to the third axis (the fourth area has a larger radius for accommodating keg 40, the center of keg 40 defining a fourth axis that is parallel to and non-coincident with the third axis).
PNG
media_image2.png
474
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1
Claims 1-2, 10, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koefelda (U.S. Pub. 20210147106).
With respect to claim 1, Koefelda discloses a pallet assembly comprising: a pallet (Fig. 1, base unit 11) including a deck and a plurality of feet extending downward from the deck (see annotated Fig. 2 below, deck with plurality of feet); and an interlock panel (see annotated Fig. 2 below, lower housing half of storage unit 10 as described in Paragraph 0028) on the deck having a plurality of concave surfaces (Fig. 2 shows lower housing half of storage unit 10 has four upwardly-opening concave surfaces, each forming a portion of tunnel 15) formed thereon, each configured to receive a horizontally-oriented keg thereon (Fig. 1, cylindrical storable members 8).
PNG
media_image3.png
718
810
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
With respect to claim 2, Koefelda further discloses wherein the interlock panel (lower housing half of storage unit 10) includes a pair of side portions (Figs. 3-4 show storage unit 10 has front and rear side walls) each having a plurality of supports (Figs. 3 and 6, support cradles 50), each of the plurality of supports including at least one of the plurality of concave surfaces (Fig. 6 shows support cradles 50 have concave surfaces).
With respect to claim 10, Koefelda further discloses wherein the side portions (front and rear side walls) are spaced apart from one another to define openings therebetween (Figs. 3-4, front and rear walls are spaced apart, defining openings of tunnels 15).
With respect to claim 12, Koefelda further discloses the pallet assembly of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above) in combination with a plurality of kegs (cylindrical storable member 8. Note that there is no claimed structure or dimensions related to the keg, therefore any vessel capable of holding liquid is considered to be a keg), each received horizontally in one of the plurality of concave surfaces (Fig. 2, each cylindrical storable member 8 is received in a support cradle 50 of tunnels 15).
With respect to claim 13, Koefelda further discloses wherein the interlock panel is a lower interlock panel (lower housing half of storage unit 10), the combination further including an upper interlock panel on the plurality of kegs (Figs. 2 and 3, upper housing half of storage unit 10 above cylindrical storable members 8), the upper interlock panel including a lower surface having a plurality of concave surfaces thereon (Fig. 1, upper housing half of storage unit 10 four downwardly-opening concave surfaces), wherein the plurality of kegs are received in the plurality of concave surfaces on the lower surface of the upper interlock panel (Figs. 1 and 2, cylindrical storable members 8 are received by tunnels 15 which are formed by the upwardly-opening concave surfaces of the lower housing half and the downwardly-opening concave surfaces of the upper housing half of storage unit 10).
With respect to claim 14, Koefelda further discloses wherein the plurality of kegs is a first plurality of kegs (Figs. 1 and 2, lowermost row of cylindrical storable members 8), the upper interlock panel further includes an upper surface having a plurality of concave surfaces (see annotated Fig. 2 below, the upper housing half of the bottom storage module 10 interlocks with the lower housing half of the second storage module 10, therefore the upper housing half of the bottom storage module 10 includes the upwardly-opening concave surfaces of the lower housing half of the second storage module 10) each receiving one of a second plurality of kegs (second row of cylindrical storable members 8), wherein the second plurality of kegs are horizontally oriented in the plurality of concave surfaces on the upper surface of the upper interlock panel (Fig. 2, the second row of cylindrical storable members 8 are received in the upwardly-facing concave surfaces of the lower housing half of the second storage module 10 which is included on the upper housing half of the bottom storage unit 10).
PNG
media_image4.png
762
814
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 9278838) in view of Langston (U.S. Pub. No. 20160058182).
With respect to claim 5, Apps discloses the limitation set forth above except wherein the plurality of supports includes a pair of intermediate supports each having a fifth area, wherein each fifth area is a concave surface defined by a fifth radius extending from a fifth axis parallel to the fourth axis.
Langston discloses a pallet (Fig. 1, flat rack 8) includes a center support, a pair of intermediate supports, and a pair of outer supports (see annotated Fig. 1 below, supports between saddle frame 6 and frame member 1).
PNG
media_image5.png
575
720
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tier of Apps such that it has additional support bays between the center and outer bays, such as taught by Langston, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to accommodate a greater number of kegs. It is further noted that it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 VI (B).
The combination further discloses each intermediate support having a fifth area (Apps, lobe 30 of an intermediate bay 24 or 25), wherein each fifth area is a concave surface defined by a fifth radius (radius of lobe 30 of an intermediate bay 24 or 25) extending from a fifth axis parallel to the fourth axis (lobe 30 has a smaller, offset radius for accommodating sixth-barrel 41, the center of a sixth-barrel 41 defining a fifth axis that is parallel to and non-coincident with the fourth axis defined by the center of left and right bays 24).
With respect to claim 6, Apps in view of Langston discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein the fifth radius (radius of lobe 30 of an intermediate bay 24 or 25) is equal to the first radius (lobe 30 of center bay 25).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 9278838) in view of Martin (U.S. Pub. No. 20230147974).
With respect to claim 7, Apps discloses the limitation set forth above except for wherein the pallet is a half pallet.
Martin discloses a pallet is a half-pallet (Paragraph 0142, “the pallet 22 is a half pallet, its dimensions would be approximately 40 to approximately 48 inches by approximately 20 to approximately 24 inches).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the pallet of Apps such that it is a half pallet, such as taught by Martin, with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05. It is further noted that the length of tier 18 is reasonably near 48 inches since a standard keg has a diameter of 16.125” and the tier 18 supports three kegs across its length, with the diameters of bays 24 and 25 slightly overlapping. Similarly, the width of tier 18 as shown in Fig. 4 is reasonably near 24 inches since the height if a standard keg is about 23 inches. A half pallet, such as taught by Martin, would be a sufficient size to accommodate the tiers of Apps.
With respect to claim 8, Apps discloses the limitation set forth above except wherein the deck has a width between 18-24” (inclusive) and a length between 36-48” (inclusive).
Martin discloses wherein the deck has a width between 18-24” (inclusive) and a length between 36-48” (inclusive) (Paragraph 0142, “the pallet 22 is a half pallet, its dimensions would be approximately 40 to approximately 48 inches by approximately 20 to approximately 24 inches).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the pallet of Apps such that it is a half pallet, such as taught by Martin, with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05. It is further noted that the length of tier 18 is reasonably near 48 inches since a standard keg has a diameter of 16.125” and the tier 18 supports three kegs across its length, with the diameters of bays 24 and 25 slightly overlapping. Similarly, the width of tier 18 as shown in Fig. 4 is reasonably near 24 inches since the height if a standard keg is about 23 inches. A half pallet, such as taught by Martin, would be a sufficient size to accommodate the tiers of Apps.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koefelda (U.S. Pub. 20210147106) in view of Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 9278838) in further view of Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 10737832).
With respect to claim 9, Koefelda in view of Apps (‘838) discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination is silent to the material of the pallet (base unit 11) and interlock panel (lower housing half of storage unit 10).
Apps (‘838) further discloses wherein an interlock panel (Fig. 1, half 20 of tier 18) is molded as a single piece of plastic (Col. 3, line 1, “each half 20 is molded a single piece of plastic”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the lower housing half of storage unit 10 of Koefelda to be made of a single piece of plastic, such as taught by Apps (‘838), with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a lightweight supporting structure. It is further noted that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (for instance using a non-porous plastic when dealing with the transportation of liquids that may spill) as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07.
The combination is silent to the material of the pallet.
Apps (‘832) discloses a pallet (Figs. 1, half pallet 10) molded as a single piece of plastic (Col. 3, lines 18-19, “the entire half pallet 10 may be integrally molded as a single piece of suitable plastic”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base unit of Koefelda in view of Apps (‘838) such that it is molded as a single piece of plastic, such as taught by Apps (‘832), with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a lightweight, inexpensive pallet. It is further noted that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koefelda (U.S. Pub. 20210147106) in view of Ficker (U.S. Pub. No. 20090000527).
With respect to claim 11, Koefelda discloses the limitation set forth above except wherein the deck includes handle openings formed therethrough.
Ficker discloses a pallet deck (Figs. 1-2, top deck 12) includes handle openings formed therethrough (hand holds 28).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pallet deck of Koefelda to include hand holds, such as taught by Ficker, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow a user to easily grip and hold the pallet to pick it up or adjust its position.
The combination further discloses wherein the interlock panel (Koefelda, lower housing half of storage unit 10) includes handle access openings (see annotated Fig. 2 below, access openings) aligned with the handle openings (access openings of the storage unit 10 would allow access to hand holds 28 of Ficker)
PNG
media_image6.png
721
796
media_image6.png
Greyscale
.
Annotated Fig. 2
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koefelda (U.S. Pub. 20210147106) in view of Loskamp (U.S. Pat. No. 921855).
With respect to claim 21, Koefelda discloses a pallet assembly comprising: a pallet (Fig. 2, base unit 10) including a deck and a plurality of feet extending downward from the deck (see annotated Fig. 2 below, deck with plurality of feet); and an interlock panel on the deck (lower housing half of storage unit 10), the interlock panel including a pair of spaced apart side portions (front and rear walls of storage unit 10) each having a plurality of supports formed thereon (Figs. 3-4, front and rear walls are spaced apart, defining support cradles 50), the plurality of supports including a pair of outer supports (Fig. 3, leftmost and rightmost support cradles 50), wherein each of the outer supports include a first concave surface portion defined by a first radius (Fig. 5, concave surface of support rails 52 defined by radius R2) and a second concave surface portion defined by a second radius larger than the first radius (concave surface of circumferential wall 20 defined by R1, which is larger than R2), wherein the concave surface portions are configured to receive horizontally-oriented kegs thereon (support rails 52 and circumferential wall 20 are capable of receiving and supporting horizontally-oriented kegs)
Koefelda fails to disclose the plurality of supports includes a center support includes a first concave surface portion defined by a first radius and a second concave surface portion defined by a second radius larger than the first radius.
Loskamp discloses a center support (center/third barrel seat 12) located between a pair of outer supports (leftmost/first and rightmost/fifth barrel seats 12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the storage unit of Koefelda to include an additional support cradle at the center, such as taught by Loskamp, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to accommodate a greater number of containers. It is further noted that it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 VI (B).
The combination further discloses the center support (additional/center support cradle 50 of Koefelda in view of Loskamp, located at the center of storage unit 10) a first concave surface portion defined by a first radius (Fig. 5, concave surface of support rails 52 defined by radius R2) and a second concave surface portion defined by a second radius larger than the first radius (concave surface of circumferential wall 20 defined by R1, which is larger than R2), wherein the concave surface portions are configured to receive horizontally-oriented kegs thereon (support rails 52 and circumferential wall 20 are capable of receiving and supporting horizontally-oriented kegs)
PNG
media_image3.png
718
810
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
With respect to claim 22, Koefelda in view of Loskamp discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Koefelda) further discloses wherein the plurality of supports further includes a pair of intermediate supports (inner support cradles 50) positioned between the center support (additional/center support cradle 50 of Koefelda in view of Loskamp) and the outer supports (leftmost and rightmost support cradles 50), each intermediate support (inner support cradles 50) having a concave surface defined by a radius equal to the first radius (concave surface of support rails 52 of the inner support cradles 50 defined by radius R2).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koefelda (U.S. Pub. 20210147106), Loskamp (U.S. Pat. No. 921855), and Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 10737832), in view of Apps (U.S. Pat. No. 9278838), in further view of Ficker (U.S. Pub. No. 20090000527).
With respect to claim 23, Koefelda in view of Loskamp discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Koefelda) further discloses the side portions (front and rear walls of storage unit 10) are spaced apart from one another to define openings therebetween capable of receiving a belly portion of horizontally-oriented kegs (front and rear walls of storage unit 10 are spaced apart and define tunnels 15 which are capable of receiving a belly portion of a horizontally-oriented keg).
The combination fails to disclose wherein the pallet is a half pallet molded as a single piece of plastic with the deck having a width between 18-24 inches inclusive and a length between 36-48 inches inclusive.
Apps (‘832) discloses a pallet is a half pallet (Figs. 1 and 10, half pallet 10) molded as a single piece of plastic (Col. 3, lines 18-19, “the entire half pallet 10 may be integrally molded as a single piece of suitable plastic”) with the deck having a width between 18-24 inches inclusive and a length between 36-48 inches inclusive (Col. 2, lines 10-11, “the half pallet 10 has a deck 12 that is approximately 24 by approximately 40 inches”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pallet assembly dimensions of Koefelda in view of Loskamp such that the base unit is a half pallet, such as taught by Apps (‘832), with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05. It would have further been obvious modify the pallet such that it is molded as a single piece of plastic in order to provide a lightweight, inexpensive pallet. It is further noted that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07.
The combination fails to disclose the interlock panel is molded as a single piece of plastic.
Apps (‘838) discloses an interlock panel is molded as a single piece of plastic (Col. 3, line 1, “each half 20 is molded a single piece of plastic”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the lower housing half of storage unit 10 of Koefelda in view of Loskamp in further view of Apps (‘832) such that it is made of a single piece of plastic, such as taught by Apps (‘838), with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a lightweight supporting structure. It is further noted that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (for instance using a non-porous plastic when dealing with the transportation of liquids that may spill) as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07.
The combination fails to disclose the deck includes handle openings formed therethrough.
Ficker discloses a pallet deck (Figs. 1-2, top deck 12) includes handle openings formed therethrough (hand holds 28).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pallet deck of Koefelda and Loskamp in view of Apps (‘832) in further view of Apps (‘828) to include hand holds, such as taught by Ficker, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow a user to easily grip and hold the pallet to pick it up or adjust its position.
The combination further discloses wherein the interlock panel (Koefelda, lower housing half of storage unit 10) includes handle access openings (see annotated Fig. 2 below, access openings) aligned with the handle openings (access openings of the storage unit 10 would allow access to hand holds 28 of Ficker)
PNG
media_image6.png
721
796
media_image6.png
Greyscale
.
Annotated Fig. 2
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koefelda (U.S. Pub. 20210147106) in view of Loskamp (U.S. Pat. No. 921855) in further view of Martin (U.S. Pub. No. 20230147974).
With respect to claim 24, Koefelda discloses a pallet (Fig. 2, base unit 10) comprising: an upper surface (upper surface of lower housing half of storage unit 10) including a pair of outer supports (Fig. 3, leftmost and rightmost support cradles 50), wherein each of the outer supports include a first concave surface portion defined by a first radius (Fig. 5, concave surface of support rails 52 defined by radius R2) and a second concave surface portion defined by a second radius larger than the first radius (concave surface of circumferential wall 20 defined by R1, which is larger than R2), wherein the concave surface portions are configured to receive horizontally-oriented kegs thereon (support rails 52 and circumferential wall 20 are capable of receiving and supporting horizontally-oriented kegs), the upper surface further including an intermediate support (inner support cradles 50) between the outer supports (leftmost and rightmost support cradles 50), wherein each intermediate support (inner support cradles 50) includes an intermediate concave surface portion defined by the first radius (concave surface of support rails 52 of the inner support cradles 50 defined by radius R2); and a plurality of feet extending downward to support the upper surface of the half pallet (Fig. 2 shows a base unit 10 has a plurality of feet extending downward to support the deck of the base unit 10 and the lower housing half of storage unit 10).
Koefelda fails to disclose a center support includes a first concave surface portion defined by a first radius and a second concave surface portion defined by a second radius larger than the first radius, the intermediate supports located between the center support and each of the outer supports.
Loskamp discloses a center support (center/third barrel seat 12), a pair of outer supports (leftmost/first and rightmost/fifth barrel seats 12), and intermediate supports located between the center support and each of the outer supports (second and forth barrel seats 12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the storage unit of Koefelda to include an additional support cradle at the center, such as taught by Loskamp, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to accommodate a greater number of containers. It is further noted that it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 VI (B).
The combination fails to disclose that the pallet is a half pallet.
Martin discloses a pallet is a half-pallet (Paragraph 0142, “the pallet 22 is a half pallet, its dimensions would be approximately 40 to approximately 48 inches by approximately 20 to approximately 24 inches).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the pallet assembly dimensions of Koefelda in view of Loskamp such that the pallet is a half pallet, such as taught by Martin, with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and all show structures similar to various elements of applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH IRENE ARTALEJO whose telephone number is (571)272-4292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6.
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, Daniel Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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.
/E.I.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 3637 /DANIEL J TROY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights