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 .
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 18 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 16 and 17 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,214,568 B2 to Overstreet. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 18, Claim 16 (which depends from claim 1) of Overstreet teaches a self-contained compactor system (claim 1) comprising:
a packer (Claim 1) comprising:
a back wall (Claim 1);
a floor (Claim 1);
a first side wall (Claim 1); and
a second side wall (Claim 1);
wherein the back wall, the floor, and the first and second side walls define a space for receiving a trash load (Claim 1); and
wherein the first side wall defines a first pocket extending along the first side wall in a lengthwise direction and the second side wall defines a second pocket extending along the second side wall in the lengthwise direction (Claim 1);
a first hydraulic cylinder and a second hydraulic cylinder (Claim 1 recites “a first hydraulic cylinder disposed within a coupled to the first pocket and a second hydraulic cylinder disposed within and coupled to the second pocket”); and
a ram (Claim 1) comprising:
a ram body comprising a compacting face and a back portion positioned rearward of the compacting face, the back portion including a plurality of vertical panels (Claim 16); and
first and second arms (Claim 1), each of the first and second arms comprising an elongated body that extends outwardly from the ram body (Claim 1),
wherein the first and second arms of the ram are configured to be inserted within the first and second pockets of the packer and further configured to move along the first and second pockets in the lengthwise direction (Claim 1).
Regarding claim 31, Claim 17 (which depends from claims 1 and 16) of Overstreet teaches a self-contained compactor system (Claim 1) comprising:
a packer (Claim 1) comprising:
a back wall (Claim 1);
a floor (Claim 1);
a first side wall (Claim 1); and
a second side wall (Claim 1);
wherein the back wall, the floor, and the first and second side walls define a space for receiving a trash load (Claim 1); and
wherein the first side wall defines a first pocket extending along the first side wall in a lengthwise direction and the second side wall defines a second pocket extending along the second side wall in the lengthwise direction (Claim 1);
a first hydraulic cylinder and a second hydraulic cylinder (Claim 1 recites “a first hydraulic cylinder disposed within a coupled to the first pocket and a second hydraulic cylinder disposed within and coupled to the second pocket”); and
a ram comprising: a ram body comprising a one or more horizontal shelves intersecting a plurality of vertical panels (Claim 17); and
first and second arms, each of the first and second arms comprising an elongated body that extends outwardly from the ram body (Claim 1),
wherein the first and second arms of the ram are configured to be inserted within the first and second pockets of the packer and further configured to move along the first and second pockets in the lengthwise direction (Claim 1).
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 18, 19, 21, 29 and 31-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5,632,199 to Smith.
Regarding claim 18, Smith teaches a self-contained compactor system (Abstract, Figs. 1-2) comprising:
a packer (Figs. 1-2 show the packer system) comprising:
a back wall 9; a floor 15; a first side wall 18; and a second side wall 18 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; it is noted that the whether a wall is a floor or any other type of wall, e.g., side or top, depends on the orientation of the system relative to the user and the environment, and thus the wall 15 may be considered a floor when the system is oriented such that the wall 15 is facing towards or on the ground);
wherein the back wall 9, the floor 15, and the first 18 and second 18 side walls define a space for receiving a trash load (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; Fig. 1 shows the interior space for receiving a trash load, i.e., the area under plate 44 and bar 3); and
wherein the first side wall 18 defines a first pocket 12 extending along the first side wall 18 in a lengthwise direction and the second side wall 18 defines a second pocket 12 extending along the second side wall 18 in the lengthwise direction (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; the side channels 12 are pockets defined in the side walls 18, and the channels 12 extend along the lengthwise direction);
a first hydraulic cylinder 1 and a second hydraulic cylinder 1 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53); and
a ram 3, 7 (Figs. 1-3; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53) comprising:
a ram body 7 comprising a compacting face and a back portion positioned rearward of the compacting face (Figs. 1-3), the back portion including a plurality of vertical panels (Fig. 3 shows the ram body including the back portion which includes panels 46 arranged at different vertical locations on the ram body, i.e., vertical panels); and
first and second arms 3, each of the first and second arms 3 comprising an elongated body that extends outwardly from the ram body (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; bar 3 comprises first and second arms, i.e., the first arm is the portion of the bar 3 to the left of plate 7 in Fig. 1 and the second arm is the portion of the bar 3 to the right of the plate 7 in Fig. 1, and these arms extend in the height, width and lengthwise directions throughout the entire length of the arms),
wherein the first and second arms 3 of the ram are configured to be inserted within the first and second pockets 12 of the packer and further configured to move along the first and second pockets 12 in the lengthwise direction (Figs. 1-2; Col. 2, Lns. 10-43 and Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; Fig. 1 shows the ends of the arms 3 in the channels 12 and the hydraulic cylinders 1 are configured to move the arms along the channels 12 in the lengthwise direction).
Regarding claim 19, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the first hydraulic cylinder 1 is disposed within and coupled to the first pocket 12 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53), and wherein the second hydraulic cylinder 1 is disposed within and coupled to the second pocket 12 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53).
Regarding claim 21, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the ram body further comprises one or more horizontal shelves 46 intersecting the plurality of vertical panels (Fig. 3 shows the ram body includes shelves 46 which are oriented in a horizontal manner, i.e., horizontal shelves).
Regarding claim 29, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the first and second arms each comprise a top surface coplanar with a top surface of the ram body (Fig. 1 shows that the top surface of the arms 3 and the top surface of the ram body are coplanar for portions of the x and y planes, i.e., the planes extending horizontally and vertically , and it is noted that the claim does not limit which plane the surfaces may be coplanar in).
Regarding claim 31, Smith teaches a self-contained compactor system (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a packer (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a back wall 9; a floor 15; a first side wall 18; and a second side wall 18 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; it is noted that the whether a wall is a floor or any other type of wall, e.g., side or top, depends on the orientation of the system relative to the user and the environment, and thus the wall 15 may be considered a floor when the system is oriented such that the wall 15 is facing towards or on the ground);
wherein the back wall, the floor, and the first and second side walls define a space for receiving a trash load (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; Fig. 1 shows the interior space for receiving a trash load, i.e., the area under plate 44 and bar 3); and
wherein the first side wall defines a first pocket 12 extending along the first side wall in a lengthwise direction and the second side wall defines a second pocket 12 extending along the second side wall in the lengthwise direction (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; the side channels 12 are pockets defined in the side walls 18, and the channels 12 extend along the lengthwise direction);
a first hydraulic cylinder 1 and a second hydraulic cylinder 1 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53); and
a ram 3, 7 (Figs. 1-3; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53) comprising:
a ram body comprising a one or more horizontal shelves intersecting a plurality of vertical panels (Fig. 3 shows the ram body includes shelves 46 which are oriented in a horizontal manner, i.e., horizontal shelves, and these intersect a plurality of vertical panels, i.e., the vertical walls that define the central gap); and
first and second arms 3, each of the first and second arms comprising an elongated body that extends outwardly from the ram body (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; bar 3 comprises first and second arms, i.e., the first arm is the portion of the bar 3 to the left of plate 7 in Fig. 1 and the second arm is the portion of the bar 3 to the right of the plate 7 in Fig. 1, and these arms extend in the height, width and lengthwise directions throughout the entire length of the arms),
wherein the first and second arms 3 of the ram are configured to be inserted within the first and second pockets 12 of the packer and further configured to move along the first and second pockets in the lengthwise direction (Figs. 1-2; Col. 2, Lns. 10-43 and Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; Fig. 1 shows the ends of the arms 3 in the channels 12 and the hydraulic cylinders 1 are configured to move the arms along the channels 12 in the lengthwise direction).
Regarding claim 32, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 31 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the plurality of vertical panels are positioned rearward of a compacting face of the ram body (Fig. 2 shows the vertical panels, i.e., the vertical walls that define the gap in the center of the ram, are on the rearward side of the ram and behind the compacting face).
Regarding claim 33, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 31 (Figs. 1-3), wherein each of the first and second arms comprise a slot 5 and a tab 4 disposed along a longitudinal axis of the respective arm (Fig. 1; Col. 3, Lns. 24-27), the longitudinal axis extending in the lengthwise direction along an entire length of the respective arm (Fig. 1; it is noted that the lengthwise direction is defined as the direction in which the pockets extend, and the pockets extend in both the horizontal and vertical directions of Fig. 1, i.e., the lengthwise direction may be in the horizontal plane of Fig. 1 which is the direction in which the longitudinal axis of the arms extend), the slot 5 and tab 4 configured to interlock with each other (Fig. 1; Col. 3, Lns. 24-27).
Regarding claim 34, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 31 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the first and second arms each comprise a top surface coplanar with a top surface of the ram body (Fig. 1 shows that the top surface of the arms 3 and the top surface of the ram body are coplanar for portions of the x and y planes, i.e., the planes extending horizontally and vertically , and it is noted that the claim does not limit which plane the surfaces may be coplanar in).
Regarding claim 35, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 31 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the first hydraulic cylinder 1 is disposed within and coupled to the first pocket 12, and wherein the second hydraulic cylinder 1 is disposed within and coupled to the second pocket 12 (Figs. 1 shows the hydraulic cylinders are coupled to and disposed within the pockets 12).
Regarding claim 36, Smith teaches a self-contained compactor system comprising:
a packer (Figs. 1-2) comprising:
a back wall 9; a floor 15; a first side wall 18; and a second side wall 18 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; it is noted that the whether a wall is a floor or any other type of wall, e.g., side or top, depends on the orientation of the system relative to the user and the environment, and thus the wall 15 may be considered a floor when the system is oriented such that the wall 15 is facing towards or on the ground);
wherein the back wall, the floor, and the first and second side walls define a space for receiving a trash load (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; Fig. 1 shows the interior space for receiving a trash load, i.e., the area under plate 44 and bar 3); and
wherein the first side wall defines a first pocket 12 extending along the first side wall in a lengthwise direction and the second side wall defines a second pocket 12 extending along the second side wall in the lengthwise direction (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; the side channels 12 are pockets defined in the side walls 18, and the channels 12 extend along the lengthwise direction);
a first hydraulic cylinder 1 and a second hydraulic cylinder 1 (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53); and
a ram 3, 7 (Figs. 1-3; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53) comprising:
a ram body 7 (Figs. 1-3; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; plate 7 is the ram body used to compact the material in the receiving space);
first and second arms 3, each of the first and second arms 3 comprising an elongated body that extends outwardly from the ram body (Figs. 1-2; Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; bar 3 comprises first and second arms, i.e., the first arm is the portion of the bar 3 to the left of plate 7 in Fig. 1 and the second arm is the portion of the bar 3 to the right of the plate 7 in Fig. 1, and these arms extend in the height, width and lengthwise directions throughout the entire length of the arms); and
at least one tab 46 configured to interlock with another portion of the self-contained compactor system (Fig. 3),
wherein the first and second arms 3 of the ram are configured to be inserted within the first and second pockets 12 of the packer and further configured to move along the first and second pockets in the lengthwise direction (Figs. 1-2; Col. 2, Lns. 10-43 and Col. 3, Lns. 21-53; Fig. 1 shows the ends of the arms 3 in the channels 12 and the hydraulic cylinders 1 are configured to move the arms along the channels 12 in the lengthwise direction).
Regarding claim 37, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 36 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the at least one tab 46 is configured to interlock with a drag plate of the self-contained compactor system when the ram is being extended (Figs. 1-3; it is noted that the tab only needs to be configured, i.e., capable of interlocking with a drag plate, and the drag plate is not positively recited, i.e., the claim is written such that the tab only needs to be capable of interlocking with a drag plate if it were included in the system which the tab would be capable of doing so with the aperture in it).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 20 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of US 2012/0291639 to Blankenship.
Regarding claim 20, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly tach wherein each of the first and second arms have a longitudinal axis that extends outwardly from the ram body in the lengthwise direction along an entire length of the respective arm.
Blankenship teaches a self-contained compactor system (Fig. 1), comprising a ram 110 and first and second arms (Fig. 1) and the arms have a longitudinal axis that extends outwardly from the ram body in the lengthwise direction along an entire length of the respective arm (Fig. 1 shows the arms extend outwardly from the ram body in the lengthwise direction along the entire length of the arm and the longitudinal axis, i.e., the imaginary line extending through the center of the arms, would extend along the arms in the length direction as the arms extend further in the length direction than the transverse direction).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the arms in the compactor system of Smith with the arms of Blankenship as those components and their functions were well known in the art and a person of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted each of these known elements for another with the predictable result of providing arms to be moved by the hydraulic cylinders and a ram to be moved by the arms to compact material in the receiving space.
Regarding claim 27, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly teach each of the first arm and the second arm comprises an insertion end and an extension end; the insertion end is proximate to and offset from a back end of the ram body; the extension end is distal to a front end of the ram body; and the first arm is parallel to the second arm.
Blankenship teaches a self-contained compactor system (Fig. 1), comprising a ram 110 and first and second arms (Fig. 1) wherein each of the first arm and the second arm comprises an insertion end and an extension end (Fig. 1 shows that each arm 150 includes an insertion end at the ram body and an extension end forward of the ram body and engaging with the pocket in the side walls); the insertion end is proximate to and offset from a back end of the ram body (Fig. shows the insertion end is near, i.e., proximate, the back end of the ram body and offset from it); the extension end is distal to a front end of the ram body; and the first arm is parallel to the second arm (Fig. 1 shows the insertion end is distal to the front end of the ram body).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the arms in the compactor system of Smith with the arms of Blankenship as those components and their functions were well known in the art and a person of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted each of these known elements for another with the predictable result of providing arms to be moved by the hydraulic cylinders and a ram to be moved by the arms to compact material in the receiving space.
Claims 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of EP 0562487 A1 to Holzer.
Regarding claim 22, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly teach the system further comprising an abrasion-resistant liner disposed on a top surface of each of the first and second arms and a bottom surface of each of the first and second arms.
Holzer teaches a trash compactor system (Para. [0001]) in which an arm 24 is moved by a hydraulic cylinder 28 relative to a channel 17 (Figs. 11 and 12; Para. [0022]), and the arm 24 and the pocket 17 are provided with a low-friction sliding coating (Para. [0022]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith to provide a low-friction sliding coating on the moving arms, i.e., the ram arms, and the pocket as taught by Holzer so that the ram can move with as little resistance as possible while compacting thus reducing wear on the ram and container and maximizing the power provided to the compacting operation.
Regarding claim 23, modified Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 22 (Figs. 1-3), further comprising another abrasion-resistant liner disposed on a top surface of each of the first and second pockets and on a bottom surface of each of the first and second pockets (Holzer, Para. [0022]; it is noted that modified Smith includes the liner on both the arm moved by the cylinder and the pocket, and thus the liner is disposed on the surfaces of the pockets).
Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of US 4,184,424 to Yeager.
Regarding claim 24, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly teach the system further comprising: a first connector disposed perpendicularly, with respect to the first hydraulic cylinder, within the first pocket proximate the back wall of the packer, the first connector coupling the first hydraulic cylinder to the first pocket; and a second connector disposed perpendicularly, with respect to the second hydraulic cylinder, within the second pocket proximate the back wall of the packer, the second connector coupling the second hydraulic cylinder to the second pocket.
Yeager teaches a compactor system (Abstract) comprising a hydraulic cylinder 84 and a first connector 86 disposed perpendicularly, with respect to the first hydraulic cylinder 84 (Figs. 1-2 and 6; Col. 4, Lns. 2-20; the connector 86 connects the hydraulic cylinder 84 to an area proximate the back wall, as shown in Figs. 1-2, and has a back plate, i.e., the plate in the middle of the U, that is disposed perpendicularly to the cylinder 84).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the pin connection for each of the hydraulic cylinders at the back wall in the compactor system of Smith with the connector and pin assembly of Yeager as those components and their functions were well known in the art and a person of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted each of these known elements for another with the predictable result of connecting the stationary end of the hydraulic cylinder with an area proximate a back wall that can stabilize and properly orient the cylinder.
It is noted that modifying Smith to include the connector of Yeager to connect the stationary end of each of the hydraulic cylinders results in a first connector disposed perpendicularly, with respect to the first hydraulic cylinder, within the first pocket proximate the back wall of the packer, the first connector coupling the first hydraulic cylinder to the first pocket; and a second connector disposed perpendicularly, with respect to the second hydraulic cylinder, within the second pocket proximate the back wall of the packer, the second connector coupling the second hydraulic cylinder to the second pocket because the stationary end of each hydraulic cylinder in Smith is disposed in the pocket proximate the back wall of the packer.
Regarding claim 25, modified Smith teaches self-contained compactor system of claim 24 (Figs. 1-3), wherein the first connector 86 is received by a first hole through the first pocket, and wherein the second connector 86 is received by a second hole through the second pocket (Yeager, Figs. 1-2 and 5; it is noted that Smith includes the connector of Yeager at the stationary end of each hydraulic cylinder, and as shown in Figs. 1-2 and 5 of Yeager the pins of the connectors 86 are received by holes 88 and 90 in the walls proximate the connector).
Claims 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of US 4016908 to Heckenkamp.
Regarding claim 26, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly teach the system further comprising a plurality of removable plugs configured to retain a position of each of the first and the second hydraulic cylinders within the respective pocket of the first and second pockets.
Heckenkamp teaches a mechanism for coupling hydraulic components (Abstract) including a removable plug 1 configured to cover the coupling (Figs. 1-3; Col. 2, Lns. 9-49; the rubber plug 1 includes a retainer groove 17 that snaps into the hydraulic connection socket 37 to maintain the plug 1 in position, and thus the rubber plug 1 could be removed by pulling on loop 2 as no structure other than the groove 17 is maintaining the dust cover in the socket).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith to include the dust covers of Heckencamp at the coupling of the hydraulic component so that debris and other particles are not allowed to enter the hydraulic cylinder and harm the connection or pollute the hydraulic fluid. It is noted that providing the dust caps results in a plurality of removable plugs configured to retain the position of the hydraulic cylinders within the respective pockets because the plugs maintain the connection of the cylinders at pins 4 and 10 which keeps the cylinders in the pockets.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of US 6418841 B1 to Little.
Regarding claim 28, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly teach the system further comprising a cleanout system comprising: a first hole and a second hole, the first hole and second hole each extending from the back wall of the packer into the space for receiving the trash load; and a first cap and a second cap configured to cover the first and second holes.
Little teaches a compactor system (Abstract) comprising a cleanout system comprising: a first hole 182 (Figs. 1, 10, and 12; Col. 9, Lns. 46-57), the first hole 182 extending from the back wall of the packer into the space for receiving the trash load (Figs. 1, 10, and 12; Col. 9, Lns. 46-57); and a first cap 184 configured to cover the first hole 182 (Figs. 1, 10, and 12; Col. 9, Lns. 46-57).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith to include the hole in the wall of Little so that excess air and gas can be cleaned out of the compacting system, thus allowing the material to be compacted as much as possible (Little, Col. 14, Lns. 23-34).
Further, it would have been obvious to duplicate the hole having a cap in the back wall of the packer to provide additional ports for the excess air and gas to be removed from the compacting system in case the other holes become clogged or covered by the trash, thus providing a second hole and cap in the rear wall. It is noted that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result in produced (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)), and there is no new or unexpected result noted in the application from providing a second hole and cap in the rear wall.
Claims 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of US 3,734,006 to Hennells.
Regarding claim 30, Smith teaches the self-contained compactor system of claim 18 (Figs. 1-3).
Smith fails to explicitly teach the system further comprising removable covers covering an opening defined by a distal end of each of the first and second pockets, wherein the removable covers are configured to facilitate access to the first and second hydraulic cylinders.
Hennells teaches a self-contained compactor system (Abstract) comprising a removable cover 124 at the end of the pressing cylinder 91 (Figs. 1 and 3; Col. 9, Lns. 10-20).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Smith to include the removable cover of Hennells at the end of each of the pressing cylinders so that a user may access the cylinders and the components associated with the cylinders for maintenance to extend the lifespan of the compactor system if the cylinders need repair or upkeep. It is noted that providing a removable cover for each of the cylinders results in removable covers at the distal ends of each of the pockets because the hydraulic cylinders are located at the distal end of each pocket.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2015/0314548 A1 (Figs. 3-7) teaches a packer system in which the ram is attached to a drag plate positioned rearward of the ram body.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW STEPHENS whose telephone number is (571)272-6722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930-630.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at (571)270-1477. 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.
/MATTHEW STEPHENS/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/JARED O BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725 8 September 2026
Prosecution Insights