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 .
It is noted that the instant application is a continuation of US Patent Application No. 17/928,969, filed December 1, 2022, issued as US Patent No. 12,234,096. Any information considered in the parent application has been considered in the instant application.
The specification, abstract, drawings and claims of January 24, 2025 are under examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) was/were submitted on January 24, 2025. The submission(s) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: At Paragraph 1, no US Patent No. has been provided. The text of the paragraph is “XX,XXX,XXX”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
See “locking member…to operatively engage the mounting formation” in claim 1, with “member” being the generic placeholder and “to operatively engage the mounting formation” being the modifying functional language.
See “locking member… operatively engaging the mounting formation” in claim 12, with “member” being the generic placeholder and “operatively engaging the mounting formation” being the modifying functional language. The specification discloses a fastener.
See “locking member to lock the chute liner to the shelf” in claim 12, with “member” being the generic placeholder and “to lock the chute liner to the shelf” being the modifying functional language. The specification discloses a fastener.
See “retaining arrangement…for retaining the locking member” in claim 17, with “arrangement” being the generic placeholder and “for retaining the locking member” being the modifying functional language. The specification discloses openings.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 5. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moller et al. (USPN 20100127109A1).
Regarding Claim(s) 1, Moller et al. teaches a chute liner (lining element 1) for mounting on a shelf (supporting construction 2) of a chute with shelves including at least one locking formation aperture (hole 10) formed therein, the chute liner comprising: a base (valley part 7) for mounting on the shelf and an arm (upper surface 4) extending away from the base to a free end (the surface extends away from the valley part and forms a free end), the base having an operatively lower surface (bottom 3) and an opposed operatively upper surface that contacts material passing through the chute (there is an upper surface as seen in Figure 1), the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon (the shape of the lining element as seen in Figure 1 would retain some amount of material), at least one mounting formation (holder 13) depending from the operatively lower surface of the base that is in use passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf, wherein the mounting formation forms a part of a passage extending therethrough below the shelf [Para. 24, “a second lock member 30 in the form of a hole”]; and a locking member (first lock member 29) that is displaced into the passage in use to operatively engage the mounting formation and clamp the base to the shelf [Para. 27, “wear lining element 1…guided…through interaction between the guide 14 and holed wall of the attachment holes 10 of the supporting construction…wear lining element 1 can be temporarily fixed…by means of the locking means and in that the locking members are brought into positions at which they interact”].
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 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(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moller et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Muller (USPN 5799803).
Regarding Claim(s) 7, Moller et al. teaches the limitations described above, yet fails to teach the chute liner further comprises a base engagement formation for engaging a shelf retainer on the shelf to lock the chute liner down on the shelf during use of the chute. Muller (USPN 5799803) teaches a shelf (10) having an engagement formation (rear face 24) for engaging a retainer (surface 48) of a shelf bracket (30) to lock the shelf down on the shelf bracket. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Moller et al. to include a base engagement formation for engaging a shelf retainer on the shelf to lock the chute liner down on the shelf during use of the chute in a similar manner as taught by Muller to lock the shelf to the shelf bracket. The retainer and engagement formation would work in a similar manner to lock the liner onto the shelf.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Australian Document (AU 2015100154A4, copy in the English language provided by applicant in the 17/928,969 application) in view of Moller et al.
Regarding Claim(s) 12, ‘154 teaches a shelf and liner arrangement for a chute (chute 100) with shelves, the shelf and liner arrangement comprising: a shelf (102) having an inner end mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall (as seen in Figure 9); and a chute liner (10) mounted on the shelf, comprising: a base (14) mounted on the shelf and an arm (16) extending away from the base to a free end (22), the base having an operatively lower surface (42) and an opposed operatively upper surface (32) that contacts material passing through the chute, the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon during operation of the chute. ‘154 fails to teach the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein, at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf, wherein the mounting formation forms a part of a passage extending therethrough below the shelf; and a locking member received in the passage and operatively engaging the mounting formation and the shelf to lock the chute liner to the shelf. Moller et al. teaches a shelf (supporting construction 2) having a locking formation aperture (hole 10) formed therein, and a liner (lining element 1) having at least one mounting formation (holder 13) defining a passage (second lock member 30) therethrough, the mounting formation passed through the locking formation aperture; and a locking member (first lock member 29) received in the passage and operatively engaging the mounting formation and the shelf to lock the chute liner to the shelf. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of ‘154 such that the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein, at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf, wherein the mounting formation forms a part of a passage extending therethrough below the shelf; and a locking member received in the passage and operatively engaging the mounting formation and the shelf to lock the chute liner to the shelf. The teachings of Moller et al. would allow rapid assembly and disassembly of the chute liner.
Claim(s) 18, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘154 in view of Moller et al. as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Muller.
Regarding Claim(s) 18, ‘154 teaches the limitations described above, yet fails to teach the shelf includes a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end, and the chute liner further includes a base engagement formation on the base, the base engagement formation being engaged by the liner retainer and held down on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner onto the shelf. Muller teaches a bracket (30) having a retainer (surface 48) spaced from its free outer end (as seen in Figure 2), and a shelf (10) having a base engagement formation (face 24), the base engagement formation being engaged by the retainer and held down on the bracket to assist in locking the shelf to the bracket. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify ‘154 such that the shelf includes a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end, and the chute liner further includes a base engagement formation on the base, the base engagement formation being engaged by the liner retainer and held down on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner onto the shelf in a similar manner to Muller. The retainer and engagement formation would work in a similar manner to lock the liner onto the shelf.
Regarding Claim(s) 19, ‘154 teaches the limitations described above, yet fails to teach the liner retainer comprises a channel member extending substantially from one side of the shelf to the other, and the base engagement formation is received in the channel member. Muller teaches a channel member (surface 48 forms a channel) and the engagement formation is received in the channel (as seen in Figure 5A-5C). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a channel member and the base engagement formation is received in the channel member to align and secure the liner to the shelf.
Claim(s) 24-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘154 in view of Moller et al. and Muller.
Regarding Claim(s) 24, ‘154 teaches a shelf and liner arrangement for a chute (chute 100) with shelves, the shelf and liner arrangement comprising: a shelf (102) having an inner end mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall (as seen in Figure 9); and a chute liner (10) for mounting on the shelf, the chute liner comprising: a base (14) for mounting on the shelf and an arm (16) extending away from the base to a free end (22), the base having an operatively lower surface (42) and an opposed operatively upper surface (32) that in use contacts material passing through the chute, the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon during operation of the chute. ‘154 fails to teach the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein, wherein the shelf includes a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end; and at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base, the mounting formation in use passing through the locking formation aperture in the shelf and having an end part, distal from the operatively lower surface of the base, configured to receive a locking member to lock the chute liner to the shelf, wherein the chute liner further includes a base engagement formation on the base, the base engagement formation being engaged in use by the liner retainer and held down on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner onto the shelf. Moller et al. teaches a shelf (supporting construction 2) having a locking formation aperture (hole 10) formed therein, and a liner (lining element 1) having at least one mounting formation (holder 13) depending from an lower surface of a base (bottom 3), the mounting formation in use passing through locking formation aperture (see Figures 3, 4) and having an end part (guide 14), distal from the operatively lower surface of the base, configured to receive a locking member (first lock member 29) to lock the chute liner to the shelf. Muller teaches a shelf bracket (30) having a retainer (face 48) spaced from its free end (see Figure 2), and a shelf (10) having an engagement formation (24) being engaged in use by the retainer to lock the shelf to the shelf bracket. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify ‘154 such that the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein, wherein the shelf includes a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end; and at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base, the mounting formation in use passing through the locking formation aperture in the shelf and having an end part, distal from the operatively lower surface of the base, configured to receive a locking member to lock the chute liner to the shelf, wherein the chute liner further includes a base engagement formation on the base, the base engagement formation being engaged in use by the liner retainer and held down on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner onto the shelf as taught by Moller et al. and Muller. The modification would allow quick assembly and disassembly of the liner from the shelf.
Regarding Claim(s) 25, ‘154 teaches the limitations described above, yet fails to teach the liner retainer comprises a channel member and the base engagement formation is received in the channel member. Muller teaches a channel member (surface 48 forms a channel) and the engagement formation is received in the channel (as seen in Figure 5A-5C). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a channel member and the base engagement formation is received in the channel member to align and secure the liner to the shelf.
Regarding Claim(s) 26, ‘154 teaches a shelf (102) for a chute with shelves, the shelf being configured to have a chute liner (10) secured thereto, and said shelf comprising an inner end configured to be mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall (as seen in Figure 9). ‘154 fails to teach the shelf having: at least one locking formation aperture formed therein for receipt therethrough of a mounting formation of a chute liner; and a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end, the liner retainer being configured to engage an engagement formation on a base of a chute liner, to thereby hold down the base on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner on the shelf. Moller et al. teaches a shelf (supporting construction 2) having: at least one locking formation aperture (hole 10) formed therein for receipt therethrough of a mounting formation (holder 13) of a chute liner (lining element 1). Muller teaches a bracket (30) having retainer (48) spaced from a free outer end to engage an engagement formation (24) of a shelf (10) to hold the shelf on the bracket (as illustrated). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify ‘154 such that the shelf having: at least one locking formation aperture formed therein for receipt therethrough of a mounting formation of a chute liner; and a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end, the liner retainer being configured to engage an engagement formation on a base of a chute liner, to thereby hold down the base on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner on the shelf as taught by Moller et al. and Muller. The modification would allow rapid assembly and disassembly of the shelf and liner.
Regarding Claim(s) 27, ‘154 teaches the limitations described above, yet fails to teach the liner retainer comprises a channel member extending substantially from one side of the shelf to the other and the base engagement formation is received in the channel member. Muller teaches a channel member (surface 48 forms a channel) extending from one side of the bracket to the other and the engagement formation is received in the channel (as seen in Figure 5A-5C). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a channel member and the base engagement formation is received in the channel member to align and secure the liner to the shelf.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-23, 26, 27 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 234,096. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter of the instant claims is fully encompassed by the subject matter of the patented claims.
Instant Application (Claim 1)
USPN 12,234,096
A chute liner for mounting on a shelf of a chute with shelves including at least one locking formation aperture formed therein
(Claim 1), “A chute liner for mounting on a shelf of a chute with shelves including at least one locking formation aperture formed therein”
the chute liner comprising: a base for mounting on the shelf and an arm extending away from the base to a free end
(Claim 1), “the chute liner comprising: a base for mounting on the shelf and an arm extending away from the base to a free end”
the base having an operatively lower surface and an opposed operatively upper surface that contacts material passing through the chute
(Claim 1), “the base having an operatively lower surface and an opposed operatively upper surface that contacts material passing through the chute”
the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon
(Claim 1), “the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon”
at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base that is in use passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf
(Claim 1), “at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base that is in use passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf”
wherein the mounting formation forms a part of a passage extending therethrough below the shelf
(Claim 1), “wherein the mounting formation forms a passage extending therethrough below the shelf”
and a locking member that is displaced into the passage in use to operatively engage the mounting formation and clamp the base to the shelf
(Claim 1), “and a locking member that is displaced into the passage of the mounting formation in use to operatively engage the mounting formation and lock the base to the shelf”
Regarding Claim(s) 2, ‘096 teaches the shelf has a lower surface that forms a part of the passage [Claim 1, “one side of the passage being formed by a lower surface of the shelf”, and the locking member bears against the lower surface of the shelf in use [Claim 3, “the passage has…a fourth side formed by a lower surface of the shelf…the locking member…bears against the fourth side of the passage”].
Regarding Claim(s) 3, ‘096 teaches the locking member comprises a tapered section that is configured to be received in the passage and operatively engage the mounting formation and the shelf to clamp the chute liner to the shelf as it is displaced into the passage [Claim 2, “the locking member has a tapered section that is complementary to the passage in the mounting formation, and operatively engages the mounting formation and the shelf”].
Regarding Claim(s) 4, ‘096 teaches the tapered section has a surface that bears against the lower surface of the shelf, and said surface extends parallel to a longitudinal axis of the locking member and does not taper [Claim 3, “the locking member has one side that extends parallel to its longitudinal axis and bears against the fourth side of the passage”].
Regarding Claim(s) 5 and 6, ‘096 teaches the tapered section is substantially wedge shaped, and the tapered section is made of a resilient material for frictionally engaging the mounting formation and the shelf [Claim 4, “the tapered section of the locking member is wedge shaped and is made of a resilient material”]. The language “for frictionally engaging the mounting formation and the shelf” does not limit the structure of the claim as the language recites the intended use of the resilient material.
Regarding Claim(s) 7, ‘096 teaches the chute liner further comprises a base engagement formation for engaging a shelf retainer on the shelf to lock the chute liner down on the shelf during use of the chute [Claim 6, “the chute liner further comprises a base engagement formation for engagement with a shelf retainer on the shelf to lock the chute liner down on the shelf during use of the chute”].
Regarding Claim(s) 8, ‘096 teaches a linked further mounting formation aligned with the or each mounting formation on the base, and forming a locking member aperture for receiving said locking member therethrough in use [Claim 8, “a linked further mounting formation closely spaced from and aligned with the or each mounting formation on the base, and having a locking member aperture formed therein receiving said locking member therethrough in use”].
Regarding Claim(s) 9, ‘096 teaches the locking member comprises a block forming the tapered section that passes through the passage in use [Claim 9, “the locking member comprises…a separate block”] [Claim 10, “the block is passed though the passage in the mounting formation”] [Claim 12, “the block is configured in the form of a wedge”].
Regarding Claim(s) 10, ‘096 teaches the locking member further comprises a fastener [Claim 9, “the locking member further comprises a fastener”] that is passed through the locking member aperture [Claim 10, “the fastener is passed through the locking member aperture”] and is releasably coupled to the block, and the block and fastener can be axially displaced relative to each other to advance the block into the passage [Claim 10, “the block and fastener are releasably coupled to each other in a way that enables the block to be axially displaced relative to the fastener”][Claim 12, “rotation of the fastener draws the block into the passage”].
Regarding Claim(s) 11, ‘096 teaches the fastener comprises a head that is retained by the locking member aperture on the linked further mounting formation and a shank having an external screw thread formed thereon [Claim 11, “the fastener has a head that is retained by the locking member aperture on the linked further mounting formation and a shank having a screw thread formed thereon”], and the block defines an internal bore having an internal screw thread that receives the external screw thread [Claim 11, “the block defines an internal bore having an internal screw thread that receives the screw thread”] such that rotation of the fastener draws the block into the passage to engage the mounting formation and the shelf to clamp the chute liner to the shelf [Claim 12, “rotation of the fastener draws the block into the passage in the mounting formation to tightly engage the mounting formation and lock the chute liner to the shelf”].
Instant Application (Claim 12)
A shelf and liner arrangement for a chute with shelves, the shelf and liner arrangement comprising
(Claim 14), “A shelf and liner arrangement for a chute with shelves, the shelf and liner arrangement comprising:”
a shelf having an inner end mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall
(Claim 14), “a shelf having an inner end mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall,”
the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein
(Claim 14), “the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein;”
and a chute liner mounted on the shelf, comprising
(Claim 14), “and a chute liner mounted on the shelf, comprising:”
a base mounted on the shelf and an arm extending away from the base to a free end
(Claim 14), “a base mounted on the shelf and an arm extending away from the base to a free end”
the base having an operatively lower surface and an opposed operatively upper surface that contacts material passing through the chute
(Claim 14), “the base having an operatively lower surface and an opposed operatively upper surface that contacts material passing through the chute”
the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon during operation of the chute
(Claim 14), “the base and the arm being configured to retain a portion of material passing through the chute thereon during operation of the chute”
at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf
(Claim 14), “at least one mounting formation depending from the operatively lower surface of the base that is in use passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf”
wherein the mounting formation forms a part of a passage extending therethrough below the shelf
(Claim 14), “wherein the mounting formation forms a passage extending therethrough below the shelf”
and a locking member received in the passage and operatively engaging the mounting formation and the shelf to lock the chute liner to the shelf.
(Claim 14), “and a locking member received in the passage and operatively engaging the mounting formation to lock the chute liner to the shelf.”
Regarding Claim(s) 13, ‘096 teaches the shelf has a lower surface that forms a part of the passage [Claim 14, “one side of the passage being formed by a lower surface of the shelf”, and the locking member bears against the lower surface of the shelf in use [Claim 16, “the passage has…a fourth side formed by a lower surface of the shelf…the locking member…bears against the fourth side of the passage”].
Regarding Claim(s) 14, ‘096 teaches the locking member comprises a tapered section that is configured to be received in the passage and operatively engage the mounting formation and the shelf to clamp the chute liner to the shelf as it is displaced into the passage [Claim 15, “the locking member has a tapered section that is complementary to the passage in the mounting formation, and operatively engages the mounting formation and the shelf”].
Regarding Claim(s) 15, ‘096 teaches the tapered section has a surface that bears against the lower surface of the shelf, and said surface extends parallel to a longitudinal axis of the locking member [Claim 16, “the locking member has one side that extends parallel to its longitudinal axis and bears against the fourth side of the passage”].
Regarding Claim(s) 16, ‘096 teaches the tapered section is substantially wedge shaped, and the tapered section is made of a resilient material for frictionally engaging the mounting formation and the shelf [Claim 17, “the tapered section of the locking member is wedge shaped and is made of a resilient material”]. The language “for frictionally engaging the mounting formation and the shelf” does not limit the structure of the claim as the language recites the intended use of the resilient material.
Regarding Claim(s) 17, ‘096 teaches the locking member has a head at one end and a smaller opposite end that is sized to be received in the passage with clearance [Claim 4, “the locking member has a head at one end, and a smaller opposite end that is sized to be received in the passage with clearance”], and the locking member further comprises a retaining arrangement towards its opposite end for retaining the locking member in the passage [Claim 5, “the locking member includes a retaining arrangement towards its opposite end that is passed through the locking member for retaining the locking member within the passage of the mounting formation”].
Regarding Claim(s) 18, see claim 18 of the ‘096 patent.
Regarding Claim(s) 19, see claim 19 of the ‘096 patent.
Regarding Claim(s) 20, see claim 20 of the ‘096 patent.
Regarding Claim(s) 21, ‘096 teaches the locking member comprises a block forming the tapered section that is displaced into the passage to clamp the chute liner to the shelf [Claim 21, “the locking member comprises…a separate block that is releasably coupled to the fastener to mechanically lock the mounting formation to the shelf”] [Claim 12, “the block is configured in the form of a wedge”].
Regarding Claim(s) 22, ‘096 teaches the locking member further comprises a fastener [Claim 21, “locking member comprises a fastener”] that is passed through the locking member aperture [Claim 22, “the fastener is passed through the locking member aperture”] and is releasably coupled to the block, and the block and fastener can be axially displaced relative to each other to displace the block into the passage [Claim 22, “the block and fastener are releasably coupled to each other such that the block can be axially displaced relative to the fastener”].
Regarding Claim(s) 23, ‘096 teaches the fastener comprises a head that is configured so that it is retained by the locking member aperture on the linked further mounting formation and a shank having an external screw thread formed thereon, and the block defines an internal bore having an internal screw thread that receives the external screw thread such that rotation of the fastener draws the block into the passage to engage the mounting formation and the shelf [Claim 11, “the fastener has a head that is retained by the locking member aperture on the linked further mounting formation and a shank having a screw thread formed thereon, and the block defines an internal bore having an internal screw thread that receives the screw thread on the fastener to enable axial displacement of the block relative to the fastener”].
Instant Application (Claim 26)
A shelf for a chute with shelves
(Claim 14), “A shelf…for a chute with shelves”
the shelf being configured to have a chute liner secured thereto,
(Claim 14), “a chute liner mounted on the shelf,”
said shelf comprising an inner end configured to be mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall
(Claim 14), “a shelf having an inner end mounted on a chute wall and a free outer end spaced away from the chute wall”
the shelf having: at least one locking formation aperture formed therein for receipt therethrough of a mounting formation of a chute liner
(Claim 14), “the shelf having at least one locking formation aperture formed therein”, “at least one mounting formation…that is in use passed through the locking formation aperture in the shelf”
and a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end,
(Claim 18), “a liner retainer spaced from its free outer end”
the liner retainer being configured to engage an engagement formation on a base of a chute liner
(Claim 18), “the base engagement formation being engaged by the liner retainer”
to thereby hold down the base on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner on the shelf
(Claim 18), “the base engagement formation being engaged by the liner retainer and held down on the shelf to assist in locking the chute liner on the shelf.”
Regarding Claim(s) 27, see claim 19 of the ‘096 patent.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPN 4191113 discloses mounting formations having passages and locking members placed in the passages to secure elements together.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM RAY HARP whose telephone number is (571)270-5386. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-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, MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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.
/WILLIAM R HARP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights