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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-6, in the reply filed on 4/9/26 is acknowledged. Claims 7-13 have been withdrawn from consideration as being directed toward a non-elected invention as detailed in paper filed 2/23/26. Claims 1-6 remain in the application for prosecution thereof.
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.
Claims 1-6 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.
Regarding claims 1-3,5 and 6, the term “main flow of material (F)”, “group of flows of material (F2)” and “said material” lack antecedent basis as the supplying a group of “flowable” material (F1) should be recited for each of the flows (F), (F1) and (F2) as they all are comprised of “flowable” material.
Regarding claim 4, the term “said material” lacks antecedent basis and should recite “said material of said group of flows of flowable material” to be consistent with said material being a “group of flows of flowable material” as recited in claim 1.
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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) in combination with EP 1226763.
Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) teaches coating of food products with a particulate material. Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) depicts in Figs 1-4, feeding food products (2) in a traverse direction from left to right in a parallel direction of advance meeting reference axes (Yi). Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) teaches a conveyor (5) for feeding the food products (2) to a second belt (9) set downstream of the conveyor (5) and in a direction opposite to the travel direction of conveyor (5) which is located underneath said first conveyor (5) as shown in the Figs where part of the conveyor (9) is located underneath conveyor (5). Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) teaches supplying particulate material to the belt (9) and moves along (claimed gathered) in the direction to where the food product is applied thereto to coat the bottom of the food product whereby excess coating material travels on the belt (9) to a claimed position (P1) for coating the bottom of the food product when placed on the belt (9) which would meet flow (F1). Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) depicts the flow of the particulate material to be applied along either side of each product of the rows themselves (advancing conveyor run 10 prior to separation station 25). Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) teaches applying a further flow of particulate material to a second position (P2) the location of the particulate material located beneath the coating device (30) which is downstream of (P1) in the direction of flow of the food products (2) traveling from left to right to coat the upper sides of the product (2) as seen in the advancing conveyor run (10) which would meet flow (F2) (pg. 13 line 5 – pg. 17, line 35).
Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) fails to teach rows of products and not a single row as well as a “group of flows - F1 and F2”.
EP 1226763 teaches a similar process for coating food products with particulate coating material. EP 1226763 depicts in Fig. 5, 2 rows of products (18) on a conveyor (20) being coated on the bottom and top side by particulate material (16) as well as two flows one being from (96) to apply to the conveyor to form a bottom layer as well as nozzle (102) to form a top layer which would meet the claimed “group of flows – F1 and F2”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) particulate coating process to include rows of products to be coated as well as providing “a group of flows” for coating the bottom and top of the products as evidenced by EP 1226763 with the expectation of success for coating the entire product.
Regarding Claims 2, EP 1226763 depicts in Fig. 5, two flows one being from (96) to apply to the conveyor to form a bottom layer as well as nozzle (102) to form a top layer which would meet the claimed “group of flows – F1 and F2” and the product is coated on all sides and would meet the claimed “on either side of each flow of material.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 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.
Reasons for indicating allowable subject matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Meulendijks et al. (11,076,627) in combination with EP 1226763 fails to teach a barrier member (32) utilized to gather the flowable coating material to said first position (P1) (Fig. 1) (claim 3), using housings (34) on second conveyor that are defined by the barrier ember (32) (Fig. 4) (claim 4), deviating the flows of flowable material into said housing (34) by way of deviator elements (36)(Fig. 4) (claim 5) or using a chute (20) and supplying a part of the flowable material to passages (28) and another part of the flowable material is supplied to the outlets (26) (Fig. 4)(Claim 6).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN K TALBOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7-4PM.
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 CLEVELAND can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/BRIAN K TALBOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights