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 .
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
Phrases that can be implied, such as “Some embodiments described herein relate” (see line 1) should not be present therein.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 17, lines 8-12 disclose the vertical plane 230 and/or 232 (see Figure 2C) intersects the sidewall, first protrusion and/or second protrusion, however, as seen in Figure 2C, the vertical planes 230, 230 are not shown to intersect any of these elements; and
In paragraph 0036, on line 3, it appears “when followed by” should be “which follow”.
Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
The terms/limitations “apparatus” (see claims 1-6 and 11-17, line 1), “threshold force” (see claim 2, line 4), “sliding, in a first direction” (see claim 8, line 2), “sliding, in a second direction” (see claim 8, line 5), the recitations of a third container and second auger (as defined in claim 9) and “coupling portion” (see claim 15, line 3) do not have antecedent basis in the specification. The Applicant should review the claims to ensure all of the terms and limitations defined therein have an antecedent basis in the specification.
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 11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kiltz (U.S. Patent 5,110,015).
In regard to claim 11, the Kiltz reference discloses an apparatus comprising:
a container 12 including a first protrusion defining a first opening 26 (see Figure 1) and a second protrusion 16 substantially opposite the first protrusion and defining a second opening 18;
an auger 20 configured to rotate within the first protrusion and the second protrusion and to expel materials from the container through the first protrusion; and
a motor 38 coupled to the auger via the second protrusion, the motor removably coupled (via linkage 52, see Figure 2) to the auger such that the container and auger can be collectively removed from the motor (see column 4, lines 33-50 wherein it is disclosed the container and auger are removed from the motor via linkage 52).
In regard to claim 16, the container and auger are removably coupled to the motor such that removing the container from the motor causes the auger to be removed from the motor and remain disposed in the container, i.e., after drive shaft 30 is removed from collar 58, as seen in Figure 2, the container with the auger positioned therein can be removed from the motor.
In regard to claim 17, the container and auger are configured to be transported together without the motor.
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilts in view of DeWind et al. (US 2022/0194720, hereinafter DeWind).
In regard to claim 12, although the Kilts reference does not disclose the use of a cap releasably coupled to the first protrusion to cover the first opening, attention is directed to the DeWind reference, which discloses another container/auger type device wherein a cap 135 is used to cover the discharge opening 123 when the device is not in use in order to prevent material escaping from the container (see paragraph 0042). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made the Kilts device can include such a cap over the first protrusion in order to cover the first (discharge) opening when the device is not in use in order to prevent material escaping from the container.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowed.
Claims 13-15 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The Kautz reference is cited as being directed to the state of the art as a teaching of another container and hopper arrangement wherein a motor is removably connected to the container and hopper.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J WALCZAK whose telephone number is (571)272-4895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30-4:00.
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 Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
DJW
8/26/26
Prosecution Insights