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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 14, line 20, “Figure 6” should be changed to –Figure 5--.
On page 15, line 31, “bold” should be changed to –bolt--.
On page 15, lines 32 and 33, “Figure 6” should be changed to –Figure 7--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3, 7-13, 15-20 and 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Johns et al. (WO 2012/128918).
Johns et al. show a conveyor 18 for the controlled discharge of particles which may be stacked up in tube 16. Shown is a frame located near an outlet of tube 16, a plurality of feed elements 30, 32, 70 and 72 mounted to the frame, the feed elements are distributed around and along a feed path and one or more of the feed elements has a tensioning mechanism 40, 74 which adjusts a level of friction between the feed elements and components passing through the frame along the feed path.
Re claim 2, feed elements 30 and 32 are at a different level than feed elements 70 and 72.
Re claim 3, Figure 2 shows upper and lower feed elements.
Re claim 7, shown are a plurality of feed wheels.
Re claim 8, the wheels are driven so as to cause movement of components.
Re claim 9, bars 24 and 26 can be considered handles which cause movement of the wheels.
Re claim 10, at least one drive wheel is provided at each of two levels.
Re claim 11, shown are tensioning springs 42 and 76.
Re claim 12, shown are pre-compression mechanisms 44 and 74.
Re claim 13, see Figure 2 for how the conveyor is removable suspended below tube 16.
Re claim 15, disclosed is a tubular reactor which the conveyor 18 feeds.
Re claim 16, the conveyor 18 is suspended below a lower tube sheet 14.
Re claim 17, conveyor 18 is located in proximity to an outlet of tube 16, feed elements 30, 32, 70 and 72 are distributed around and along a feed path and they contact components and a friction level of the feed elements is adjustable.
Re claim 18, the conveyor is located in proximity to an outlet of tube 16.
Re claim 19, shown are a plurality of feed wheels.
Re claim 20, the feed wheels are driven and the level of friction may be adjusted.
Re claim 22, feed wheels are shown is Figure 2 as being at two levels.
Re claim 23, shown are tension springs.
Re claim 24, shown are pre-compression mechanisms 44 and 74.
Re claim 25, components are inserted into an inlet of tube 16 and discharged from the outlet of tube 16 in a controlled manner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 14 and 21 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES R BIDWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-6910. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 to 4.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gene Crawford, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-6911. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/JAMES R BIDWELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651 09/28/2026
