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
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the at least one passageway is arranged at least one of at least partially” is grammatically incorrect. 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.
Claim 6, 10 and 11 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the liquid guide" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitations “the second block storage element”, lines 3 and 4 and "second block storage element according to claim 6" in lines 1 and 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "second block storage element according to claim 1" in lines 1 and 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “the second block storage element”, lines 3 and 4, and "the first liquid guide of the second block storage element" in lines 5 and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gode (FR2761575).
Regarding claim 1, the Gode reference discloses a block storage element comprising: a tub area (8); an overflow (141; Fig. 14); and an overflow distributor (26, 27) having a distributor limit (defined by top of distributor 27) with at least one passageway (130; Fig. 14) to the tub area, wherein a first cross section (132) of the at least one passageway is smaller than a second cross section (131) of the overflow.
Regarding claim 2, wherein the at least one passageway (130) is arranged at least one of at least partially at a height of an upper end of the overflow in the direction of gravity or at least partially below the upper end of the overflow in the direction of gravity. Overflow (141) is adjustable on passageway (130), which indicates the passageway (130) is at least partially below the overflow (see Figure 14).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the overflow distributor (27) is arranged in a corner area (22) of the tub area (8).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the overflow distributor (27) has a liquid guide (28; i.e. cutout, see Fig. 6), a lower end of which is arranged below an upper end of the overflow in the direction of gravity. A lower end of liquid guide (28) would be defined by the surface of tub (8), which places the liquid guide below an upper end of overflow (141).
Regarding claim 11, wherein the first block storage element (1) is arranged above the second block storage element (1; see Figures 1 and 12) in a direction of gravity, and wherein, the overflow (141) of the first block storage element is arranged above the first liquid guide of the second block storage element. Overflow (141) can be defined as a “first liquid guide” of the second block storage element as seen in Figure 15.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 7– 9 are 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.
Claims 6 and 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 5, none of the prior art, alone or in combination, teach a block storage element further comprises an overflow collector and a second overflow with a first inlet and a second inlet, and wherein the first inlet interacts with an interior of the overflow collector, and the second inlet interacts with an exterior of the overflow collector.
Claims 7-9 are dependent on claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The Lame et al. (10264742) reference discloses a device for controlling water in a water reserve with level control. See Figure 8.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY LEWIS MAUST whose telephone number is (571)272-4891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7am - 5pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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.
/TIMOTHY L MAUST/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753