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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 07/29/2022 and applicant has filed a certified copy of this Japanese application on 01/16/2025.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Group I (claims 1-13) in the reply filed on 07/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 14-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected group.
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 1-3, 5-9, 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(!) as being anticipated by Davi (US 20100244347 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a support jig for supporting a tank (hollow body/work piece 13) that is cylindrical in shape (par. 0001: “hollow shells having a cylindrical and/or conical body suitable for the construction of tanks”) and is lying and for moving the tank rotationally (par. 0034: “for positioning and driving in rotation a circular work piece having a hollow body 13”), the support jig comprising: a plurality of bases (base frame 10) configured to abut (via support rolls 15) on an outer circumferential face of the tank slidably in a circumferential direction to the outer circumferential face; and at least one auxiliary member (auxiliary member comprises at least support roll 15, horizontal axis 16 and gear motor 17) provided to at least one of the plurality of bases, the auxiliary member being configured to abut on the outer circumferential face of the tank slidably in the circumferential direction to the outer circumferential face (par. 0037: “both rolls 15 come in contact with the hollow body 13 of the work piece to be supported”), wherein the plurality of bases and the auxiliary member are configured to support the tank that is lying such that the tank is allowed to move rotationally.
PNG
media_image1.png
966
935
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the auxiliary member comprises a plurality of mount sets (support roll 15, horizontal axis 16) that abuts on the outer circumferential face of the tank slidably in the circumferential direction to the outer circumferential face (par. 0037: “both rolls 15 come in contact with the hollow body 13 of the work piece to be supported”).
Regarding claim 3, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) each of the plurality of mount sets comprises at least one auxiliary-member roller (15) provided rotatably to one of the plurality of bases, and the auxiliary-member roller abuts on the outer circumferential face of the tank (par. 0037: “both rolls 15 come in contact with the hollow body 13 of the work piece to be supported”).
Regarding claim 5, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the auxiliary member is detachably provided to the at least one of the plurality of bases (by removal of the horizontal axis 16).
Regarding claim 6, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the auxiliary member is provided adjacent to the one of the plurality of bases in an axial direction of the tank (see auxiliary member 1 and base b in annotated Fig. 9 above).
Regarding claim 7, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the plurality of bases is arrayed along an axial direction of the tank and is mutually spaced in the axial direction of the tank (see annotated Fig. 9 above).
Regarding claim 8, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) each of the plurality of bases comprises: a base body (lateral walls 11 and bottom part); and a plurality of functional members (hydraulic cylinder 20 and support frame which supports rotational axis 16) that is provided to the base body and is arrayed along an outer circumferential direction of the tank, and the plurality of functional members abuts (via support rolls 15) on the outer circumferential face of the tank slidably in the circumferential direction to the outer circumferential face.
Regarding claim 9, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) each of the plurality of functional members comprises: a support frame (support frame which supports rotational axis 16) provided to the base body; and a plurality of base rollers (support rolls 15) provided rotatably to the support frame, and the plurality of base rollers abuts on the outer circumferential face of the tank (par. 0037: “both rolls 15 come in contact with the hollow body 13 of the work piece to be supported”).
Regarding claims 11 and 13, Davi teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the auxiliary member is provided with an auxiliary-member-roller control device (electronic control unit 35) that controls a rotation rate of the auxiliary-member roller (see entire par. 0051).
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 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davi in view of Yoon (KR 20150004288 U).
Regarding claims 10 and 12, Davi does not teach the claimed protective tape.
Yoon teaches a support jig for a pipe having coated with layers of an elastic material such as urethane on rollers 120, to prevent damage such as scratches on the pipe.
PNG
media_image2.png
52
906
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use protective coating on rollers. Doing so would prevent scratches on the tank.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davi in view of Teeza (US 20140301680 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Davi teaches the plurality of bases is provided with a plurality of the auxiliary members
Teeza teaches a load bearing device in which “the number of rollers in the second section may be reduced and the number of rollers 122a,b in the first half may be increased to account for an expected local load distribution due to the drop and impact of the shaft 102” (see par. 0039 and compare Figs. 2-5 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
1191
954
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use different number of rollers on different sections of the tank based on sectional load of the tank.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang (CN 110883719 A):
PNG
media_image4.png
657
603
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Mitsui (JP 51-13413A):
PNG
media_image5.png
379
725
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHDI H NEJAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-4pm 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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
MAHDI H. NEJAD
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/MAHDI H NEJAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights