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 § 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 1-3, 6, 9, 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Mumford (US 1,458,915) as in the previous office action.
In regard to claim 1, Mumford shows a spiral chute (figure 1) that includes a center column assembly with a column 6, a plurality of support arm mounting brackets 8/12 affixed to an exterior of the column in a spiral configuration, and a plurality of chute segments 2/3/4/5/14/18/19/22/23. Each chute segment includes a support arm 14 with a distal end DE and a proximal end PE. A stiffener 18 is coupled to the distal end DE of the support arm 26. A chute section 2/3/4/5 is operatively coupled to the support arm 14 and the stiffener 18. The proximal end PE of each of the plurality of support arms 14 is removably attached to a respective support arm mounting bracket 8/12 by bolts 15/16.
In regard to the added language of claim 1, It should be noted that the column 6 in circular in horizontal cross-section along its length as can be seen in figure 2. Additionally, the support arm mounting bracket 8/12 is not formed by a bolt extended through the column 6.
In regard to claim 2, each support arm mounting bracket 8/12 has an upper portion UP, a middle portion MP, and a lower portion LP. Each support arm 26 has a middle portion X that is attached to the middle portion MP of the support arm mounting bracket 8/12.
Each support arm 14 has a lower portion Y that is attached to the lower portion LP of the support arm mounting bracket 8/12.
In regard to claim 6, chute section mounting brackets 22/23 couple the chute section 2/3 to the support arm 14.
PNG
media_image1.png
652
858
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 9, the support arm mounting brackets 8/12 are affixed to the exterior of the column 6. This fixation would be permanent as long as the botts 9 and 10 aren’t loosened.
In regard to claims 11-12, the spiral chute includes a base assembly 7 disposed at a lower end of the column 6 that is configured to be affixed to a support surface and selectively detachable from the column 6 (see lines 100-110 on page 1 discussing mounting the column in a base suggesting if the column can be mounted to the base, it may be detachable is some fashion or with enough force).
In regard to claim 13, when being assembled, the spiral chute described above would be secured to a column to a support surface (see column 3, lines 25-30). The column 6 would have a plurality of support arm mounting brackets 8/12 affixed to an exterior surface of the column 6 in a spiral configuration. A plurality of chute segments 2/3/4/5/14/18/19/22/23 would be provided, each of which would have a support arm 14 with a distal end DE and a proximal end PR. A stiffener 18 would be integrally coupled to the distal end of the support arm 14 and chute sections 2/3/4/5 would be operatively coupled to the support arm 14 and the stiffener 18. The proximal end PE of each of the plurality of support arms 14 would also be attached to respective ones of the plurality of support arm mounting brackets 8/12.
In regard to claims 14-15, each support arm mounting bracket 8/12 has an upper portion UP, a middle portion MP, and a lower portion LP. Each support arm has a middle portion X. As such, the step of attaching the proximal end PE to the support arm mounting brackets 8/12 would include attaching the middle portion X of the support arm to the middle portion MP of the support arm mounting bracket. Each support arm 14 also has a lower portion Y and the step of attaching the proximal end PE to the support arm mounting brackets 8/12 would include attaching the lower portion Y of the support arm to the lower portion LP of the support arm mounting bracket 8.
In response to this rejection, the applicant’s representative asserts that Mumford fails to show the structure required by claims 1 and 13 because the group of bottom rails 2/3 and side rails 4/5 are not chute segments arranged in a spiral. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
In support of the argument, the applicant’s representative asserts that “Mumford does not look or perform anything like the structure recited in the claims”. While the relevance of this broad assertion in difficult to parse in the absence of any reference to particular claim language, the examiner disagrees with this broad assertion. While the rails do not define flat planar surfaces like the members 66 shown in the drawings of the present application as forming the chute segments, they do follow a spiral path like these chute segments and they do perform in a nearly identical fashion to the members 66 as they allow items to slide along their support surfaces downwardly from a higher elevation to a lower elevation under the force of gravity.
Additionally, while the applicant’s representative asserts that the bottom rails 2/3 and side rails 4/5 do not form chute segments arranged in a spiral, it should be noted that it was not only the rails that were considered to from the claimed chute segments but the rails 2/3/4/5 and the attached support structures 14/18/19/22/23 supporting each of the rails thar formed chute segments. When viewed in this fashion, it is clear that each group of support structures 14/18/19/22/23 and their adjacent rail portions 2/3/4/5 form chute segments arranged in a spiral as required by the claims. While the rails 2/3/4/5 adjacent to each of the support structures 14/18/19/22/23 may be integrally formed with the rails 2/3/4/5 adjacent to other support structures 14/18/19/22/23, there is no requirement that the chute segments be separate from each other, and as such, the chute segments described above have all the structure required by the claims.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mumford.
In regard to the welding of the mounting brackets to the column required by claim 10, it should be noted that welding as a means of attaching two components of a chute would be well know ton any ordinary mechanic and well knows to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application. As such, the use of welding is deemed to have been an obvious design choice absent some disclosure in the applicant' s specification of some unusual advantage or result. In re Kuhle, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 and 16-18 are allowed.
Claim 19 is 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.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights