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 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.
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 1-15 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, 4-5, 8-9, 14-15, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention and therefore the metes and bounds of the claims cannot be ascertained. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
With regard to claims 14-15, the claims do not recite any positive method steps. The metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained. Attempts to claim a process without setting forth any steps involved in the process generally raises an issue of indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C 112(b). See MPEP 2173.05(q).
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, 3-4, 6-8, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Callan et al. (2012/0039674).
With regard to claim 1, Callan discloses a device for producing a material column, in particular a vibrating tamping column, from a bulk material in the ground (para 0002; fig. 4), having an infeed pipe (30/70/110), which is designed to be driven into the ground and has at least one material outlet opening at a lower end (fig. 10), a vibrating drive (100), which is designed to cause the infeed pipe to vibrate and is arranged, in particular, on a lower region of the infeed pipe (fig. 10), a receiving bunker (20), which is designed to receive a quantity of bulk material and is arranged on an upper region of the infeed pipe (fig. 4), and a compressed air supply device (para 0016) for introducing compressed air into the inside of the infeed pipe (fig. 6),wherein a sensor device (45) is arranged, which is designed to detect a filling level of bulk material down to a lower region of the infeed pipe (para 0103), the receiving bunker is designed with a closed housing with a closable supply opening for supplying bulk material into the receiving bunker (fig. 6), wherein the supply opening can be closed in an airtight manner by means of a closing device (40), and a passage between the receiving bunker and the infeed pipe being arranged below is open when the bulk material is introduced into the ground, wherein the filling level of bulk material in the infeed pipe can be detected by the sensor device (fig. 6).
With regard to claim 3, Callan further discloses the compressed air supply device has a line arrangement having one or more supply openings which open into the receiving bunker and/or the infeed pipe (fig. 6).
With regard to claim 4, Callan further discloses the sensor device comprises a filling level sensor (para 0044), which is designed, in particular, as a radar sensor, an ultrasound sensor and/or a laser sensor.
With regard to claim 6, Callan further discloses a control unit (abstract) is arranged, which is connected to the sensor device (abstract), and the control unit is designed to control a movement of the infeed pipe and/or a discharge of bulk material into the ground via the at least one material outlet opening as a function of a filling level of the bulk material in the infeed pipe detected by the sensor device (para 0033).
With regard to claim 7, Callan further discloses the control unit is designed to determine when a lower and/or upper limit filling level of bulk material in the infeed pipe has been reached and to indicate this to a machine operator and/or to initiate or terminate filling of further bulk material into the receiving bunker (para 0044).
With regard to claim 8, Callan further discloses the control unit is designed to determine and, in particular, to store the current actual filling level of bulk material in the infeed pipe via a depth position of the infeed pipe in the ground (paras 0044,0124).
With regard to method claim 14, the claimed method of producing a vibrating tamping column would inherently be performed by the device to include Callan as taught above.
Claim(s) 9, 10, 12, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (CN 116516954 A).
With regard to claim 9, Zhang discloses a carrier device for a device (10) for producing a material column, in particular a vibrating tamping column, in particular according to claim 1, having a carrier vehicle (para 0003), a mast (2), which is arranged on the carrier vehicle and is arranged substantially vertically in operation to produce a vibrating tamping column (fig. 1), a mast carriage (6), which is mounted, so as to be movable along the mast and on which the device for producing a vibrating tamping column is arranged (fig. 2), and a filling device for filling bulk material into a receiving bunker (91) of the device for producing a vibrating tamping column, wherein the filling device has: a filling carriage (figs. 1-2, 8), which can be moved along the mast, a filling chamber formed on the filling carriage (fig. 8), which is designed to receive bulk material, a closing device (63) arranged on the filling carriage, which closes the filling chamber laterally or at the bottom (paras n0045, 0062), and can be adjusted between a closed movement position, in which the filling carriage can be moved along the mast, and an open discharge position, in which bulk material can be discharged from the filling chamber of the filling carriage into the receiving bunker (paras n0045, 0062), wherein a measuring device is arranged by which an actual filling quantity and/or a change in the actual filling quantity of bulk material in the filling chamber can be detected (para n0021-n0022), an actuator is arranged on the closing device, with which actuator the closing device can be opened and closed in a defined manner (fig. 8), and - a control unit is arranged, which is connected to the measuring device and the actuator and is designed for the controlled supply of a specific quantity of bulk material from the filling chamber of the filling device into the receiving bunker of the device for producing a vibrating tamping column (para n0020; 0067-n0049).
With regard to claim 10, Zhang a defined filling quantity can be preset by the control unit, which quantity of bulk material is to be discharged by the filling device to the receiving bunker, and the control unit opens the closing device and closes it again depending on a change in the actual filling quantity of bulk material in the filling chamber detected by the measuring device when the defined filling quantity of bulk material has been discharged (para n0049).
With regard to claim 12, Zhang further discloses the filling carriage is guided along a linear guide of the mast and can be moved on the mast by means of a hoisting cable (para n0004).
With regard to method claim 15, the claimed method of producing a vibrating tamping column would inherently be performed by the device to include Zhang as taught above.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Callan et al. (2012/0039674) in view of Berg et al. (EP 0903440 A2).
With regard to claim 2, Callan further discloses the closing device is on the receiving bunker, which can be adjusted by means of an adjustment drive between an opening position for feeding bulk material into the receiving bunker and a closing position, in which the receiving bunker is sealed in an airtight manner (fig. 6; para 0094).
Callan is silent regarding the closing device comprises an opening flap.
Berg discloses a device for producing a material column wherein a closing device comprises an opening flap (36; fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Callan and substitute the valve with a flap as taught by Berg. An artisan of ordinary skill could readily substitute one closing device for another, with a reasonable expectation of success, yielding the predictable result of a receiving bunker with a closable flap.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Callan et al. (2012/0039674) in view of Zhang et al. (CN 116516954 A).
With regard to claims 5, Callan discloses the invention substantially as claimed however fails to explicitly state at least one further filling level sensor is arranged in the receiving bunker for detecting a filling level in the receiving bunker, in particular a maximum filling level in the receiving bunker.
Zhang discloses a filling level sensor arrange in the receiving bunker (eg. para n0045).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Callan and utilize a filling level sensor in the receiving bunker, as taught in Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to monitor the level of fill material.
Claim(s) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (CN 116516954 A) in view of Newman (11,572,260).
With regard to claim 11 and 13, Zhang discloses the invention substantially as claimed as well as the hoisting cable is guided on the mast via a pulley (fig. 1) however is silent regarding the measuring device detects a weight force as a measure of the actual filling quantity.
Newman discloses utilizing a measuring device detects a weight force as a measure on the hoisting cable (col. 8, lines 7-22).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang and utilize a weight sensor, as taught in Newman, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to further monitor the weight on the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN F FIORELLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7012. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM EST.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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.
/BENJAMIN F FIORELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
BF
09/14/2026
Prosecution Insights