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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 11 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/16/2024 and 03/06/2026 were filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sang (KR20210039586 A) see machine translation attached.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Sang discloses a roller cleaning apparatus (automatic roll cleaning device; Fig. 1; Paragraph [0041]) comprising: a first pad (cloth unit; Paragraph [0021]) configured to remove foreign substances by being in contact with a surface of a roller (Paragraph [0043]); a second pad (polishing unit; Paragraph [0021]) configured to be in contact with the surface of the roller while passing through an area through which the first pad has passed from the surface of the roller (Paragraph [0071]); a head (cleaning head, 1) configured to fix the first pad and the second pad such that the first pad and the second pad are spaced apart from each other by a predetermined distance (Paragraph [0071]; Fig. 4); and a driving assembly (Paragraph [0043]) configured to move the head (1) to a portion of the roller to which foreign substances are attached (Paragraph [0043]).
Regarding Claim 2, Sang discloses the roller cleaning apparatus (automatic roll cleaning device; Fig. 1), further comprising: a nozzle (nozzle of cleaning liquid spraying unit as shown in Fig. 6) configured to apply a cleaning solution toward an area through which the first pad will pass (Paragraph [0047]); and a cleaning solution supply unit (cleaning liquid spraying unit , 22) configured to supply the cleaning solution to the nozzle (Paragraph [0047]).
Regarding Claim 3, Sang discloses the roller cleaning apparatus (automatic roll cleaning device; Fig. 1), wherein the driving assembly (Paragraph [0043]) comprises: a first driving assembly (lifting unit, 2) connected to the head and configured to move the head in a first direction toward the roller (up and down; Paragraph [0043]); and a second driving assembly (transport unit, 3) connected to the first driving assembly (2) and configured to be moved along a guide frame (Fig. 5) that extends in a second direction which is a longitudinal direction of the roller (100; Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 4, Sang discloses the roller cleaning apparatus (automatic roll cleaning device; Fig. 1), wherein the first pad (cloth unit; Paragraph [0021]) comprises a first jig (clamp, 12; Fig. 4) which is inserted inside the first pad and which supports the first pad (Paragraph [0071]), the second pad (polishing unit; Paragraph [0021]) comprises a second jig (clamp, 12; Fig. 4) which is inserted inside the second pad and which supports the second pad (Paragraph [0071]), and the first pad and the second pad are coupled to the first jig (12) and the second jig (12) such that the first pad and the second pad are capable of being attached to and detached from the first jig and the second jig (clamp, 12; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 5, Sang discloses the roller cleaning apparatus (automatic roll cleaning device; Fig. 1), wherein each of the first jig (12) and the second jig (12) has each lower end thereof provided with a fastening groove (13) into which a fastener (11) is inserted, and the head (1) comprises: a first jig mount (Annotated Fig. 4) configured to fix the first jig (12) such that the first jig (12) is capable of being attached to and detached from the first jig mount (Annotated Fig. 4); and a second jig mount (Annotated Fig. 4) configured to fix the second jig (12) such that the second jig (12) is capable of being attached to and detached from the second jig mount (Annotated Fig. 4).
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.
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 is 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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sang (KR20210039586 A) see machine translation attached in view of Changsu (KR 20230090508 A) see machine translation attached.
Regarding Claim 8, Sang discloses the roller cleaning apparatus of claim 5, as discussed above.
Sang does not teach an angle adjustment part connected to the first jig mount and the second jig mount and configured to adjust an angle of the first jig and an angle of the second jig with respect to the roller.
Changsu, however, discloses an angle adjustment part (cylindrical body part, 21) connected to the first jig mount (wing part, 22) and the second jig mount (wing part, 22) and configured to adjust an angle of the first jig (22) and an angle of the second jig (22) with respect to the roller (Changsu discloses a cylindrical part, 21 with wing pats, 22, wherein rotating the cylindrical part allows for angular adjustment of the wing parts as shown in Fig. 8).
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 apparatus of Sang to further include an angle adjustment part connected to the first jig mount and the second jig mount and configured to adjust an angle of the first jig and an angle of the second jig with respect to the roller, as taught by Changsu, to provide an apparatus that is efficient for high-speed applications due to the nature of circular motion, which doesn’t require starting and stopping.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 6: although Sang discloses the roller cleaning apparatus (automatic roll cleaning device; Fig. 1), wherein each of the first jig (12) and the second jig (12) has a trench (Annotated Fig. 4) that is concave inwardly and parallel to a first surface of the head (1), and the roller cleaning apparatus further comprises: a first pressing part (Annotated Fig. 4) which is connected to the first jig mount (Annotated Fig. 4) and which has a protrusion part (Annotated Fig. 4) that protrudes toward the trench (Annotated Fig. 4) as shown in Annotated Figure 4 below, Sang fails to teach, suggest or make obvious the protrusion part being configured to press the first pad covering the first jig, thereby fixing the first pad by pushing the first pad toward an inside of the trench; and a second pressing part which is connected to the second jig mount and which has a protrusion part that protrudes toward the trench, the protrusion part being configured to press the second pad covering the second jig, thereby fixing the second pad by pushing the second pad toward the inside of the trench, as required by claim 6.
PNG
media_image1.png
375
432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent of objected claim 6.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 9: although Sang in view of Changu discloses the roller cleaning apparatus 8, the references – alone or in combination, fail to teach, suggest or make obvious the angle adjustment part comprises: a first hinge configured to adjust an angle of the first jig mount so as to adjust an angle at which the first jig faces the roller; and a second hinge configured to adjust an angle of the second jig mount so as to adjust an angle at which the second jig faces the roller.
Claims 10 – 11 are objected to as being a dependent of objected claim 9.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Monica Carter whose telephone number is (571) 272-4475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET.
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, Marivelisse Santiago Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights