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 Objections
Claims 1 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2 recites “having storage compartment”. Correction is suggested to “having a storage compartment”.
Claim 5, line 9 recites “relative to linkage”. Correction is suggested to “relative to a linkage”.
Claim 7, line 2 recites “having storage compartment”. Correction is suggested to “having a storage compartment”.
Claim 8, line 2 recites “having storage compartment”. Correction is suggested to “having a storage compartment”.
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 2-6 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.
Claims 2-5 begin “The apparatus of claim 1…” but claim 1 is directed to a drive-over unloader.
Claim 6 begins “The apparatus of claim 5…” but claim 1 (from which claim 5 depends) is directed to a drive-over unloader.
Claim 3 recites “the unloader housing which lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 8 recites “the unloader housing which lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims.
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, 2, 4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Renyer (US 8,573,917).
Consider claim 1. Renyer teaches a drive-over unloader (24) comprising: a portable frame (see fig. 1) including a drive-over portion (proximate 60) arranged to support a portion of a truck thereon and a discharge portion (64) which is elevated relative to the drive-over portion; at least one unloader intake hopper (102) supported on the drive-over portion arranged to receive materials discharged from a belly discharge of the truck; and an unloader conveyor (62) supported on the portable frame to convey material from said at least one unloader intake hopper to the discharge portion; the discharge portion including an unloader discharge duct (112, 106) receiving conveyed material from the unloader conveyor; and the unloader discharge duct being arranged for communication with an intake hopper of a vertical conveyor so as to form a closed passage between the unloader and the vertical conveyor (via 116), whereby a flow of the conveyed material from the unloader to the vertical conveyor is fully enclosed (through enclosed conduits 106 and 116). Renyer’s unloader is capable of unloading particulate material from a truck having a storage compartment and a belly discharge on the storage compartment associated therewith to an intake hopper of a vertical conveyor. Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims and MPEP 2115 regarding article worked upon by an apparatus.
Consider claim 2. Renyer teaches that said at least one unloader intake hopper includes a collar (upper portion of 102 which engages 36, see fig. 11) defining an upper rim of the unloader intake hopper, the collar being adjustable in height relative to the portable frame between a lowered position (see fig. 10) in which passage of the truck over the unloader intake hopper is unobstructed by the collar and a raised position (see fig. 11) in which the collar is arranged to abut the belly discharge of the truck.
Consider claim 4. Renyer teaches that the unloader conveyor of the drive-over unloader comprises an endless belt conveyor (98) including an upper run for conveying material thereon and a lower run; the discharge portion of the drive-over unloader including a collector (112) below a discharge end of the unloader conveyor arranged to receive conveyed material from the unloader conveyor; and a beater member (conveyor roller proximate 99 around which belt 98 passes, see figs. 11 and 12) rotatably supported on the unloader housing so as to be arranged to repeatedly impact the lower run of the unloader conveyor at a location above the collector.
Consider claim 7. Renyer teaches a drive-over unloader (24) comprising: a portable frame (see fig. 1) including a drive-over portion (proximate 60) arranged to support a portion of a truck thereon and a discharge portion (64) which is elevated relative to the drive-over portion; at least one unloader intake hopper (102) supported on the drive-over portion arranged to receive materials discharged from a belly discharge of the truck; and an unloader conveyor (62) supported on the portable frame to conveyor material from said at least one unloader intake hopper to the discharge portion; said at least one unloader intake hopper includes a collar (upper portion of 102 which engages 36, see fig. 11) defining an upper rim of the unloader intake hopper, the collar being adjustable in height relative to the portable frame between a lowered position (see fig. 10) in which passage of the truck over the unloader intake hopper is unobstructed by the collar and a raised position (see fig. 11) in which the collar is arranged to abut the belly discharge of the truck. Renyer’s unloader is capable of unloading particulate material from a truck having a storage compartment and a belly discharge on the storage compartment associated therewith. Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims and MPEP 2115 regarding article worked upon by an apparatus.
Consider claim 8. Renyer teaches a drive-over unloader (24) comprising: a portable frame (see fig. 1) including a drive-over portion (proximate 60) arranged to support a portion of a truck thereon and a discharge portion (64) which is elevated relative to the drive-over portion; at least one unloader intake hopper (102) supported on the drive-over portion arranged to receive materials discharged from a belly discharge of the truck; an unloader conveyor (62) supported on the portable frame to conveyor material from said at least one unloader intake hopper to the discharge portion; the unloader conveyor of the drive-over unloader comprising an endless belt conveyor (98) including an upper run for conveying material thereon and a lower run; the discharge portion of the drive-over unloader including a collector (112) below a discharge end of the unloader conveyor arranged to receive conveyed material from the unloader conveyor; and a beater member (conveyor roller proximate 99 around which belt 98 passes, see figs. 11 and 12) rotatably supported on the unloader housing so as to be arranged to repeatedly impact the lower run of the unloader conveyor at a location above the collector. Renyer’s unloader is capable of unloading particulate material from a truck having a storage compartment and a belly discharge on the storage compartment associated therewith. Please see MPEP 2114 regarding functional limitations in apparatus claims and MPEP 2115 regarding article worked upon by an apparatus.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renyer (US 8,573,917) in view of Oren et al. (US 2017/0190523), hereafter referred to as Oren.
Consider claim 3. Renyer does not explicitly teach an unloader housing, and exhaust fan, and a dust collector as specifically recited in the claim. Oren teaches an unloader housing (130, 24, 42, etc.) fully enclosing an unloader conveyor (122); an exhaust fan (28) operatively connected to the unloader housing so as to maintain an interior of the unloader housing at a negative pressure (see paragraph [0086]); and a dust collector (166) operatively associated with the exhaust fan. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Renyer’s unloader with an unloader housing, an exhaust fan, and a dust collector as taught by Oren in order to minimize dust escaping from the system to improve the working environment around the unloader.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 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. The attached PTO-892 lists references which teach various unloaders of particulate material.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D SNELTING whose telephone number is (571)270-7015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00-4:30 EST.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. 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.
/JONATHAN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights