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 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.
Claim 1 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “said conveyor body” in line 4 and 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-10, and 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Leo (US 20120186945).
Regarding claim-1, Leo discloses a conveyor pulley (Para. [0028], pulley 10 at Fig.1) configured to contact a conveyor belt (Para. [0036], "conveyor belt" not shown in figures) along an imaginary semicylindrical surface Sc (Para. [0040], "imaginary semicylindrical surface" delineated by the underside of said conveyor belt, not shown in figures), the conveyor pulley (pulley 10) comprising:
a body (Para. [0028], drum 14 at Fig. 1, 2) having a cylindrical exterior surface (Para. [0029], outer surface 17 is cylindrical at Fig. 2);
a plurality of wings (Para. [0028], plurality of wings 4, 8 at Fig. 1) supported by said conveyor body (plurality of wings 4, 8 are supported by drum 14 at Fig. 1) and disposed circumferentially about said conveyor body (plurality of wings 4, 8 are disposed circumferentially about by drum 14 at Fig. 1), each wing (wing 4, 8) comprising at least a first wing portion (Para. [0028], wings 4 at Fig. 1), wherein a lower portion (Para. [0030], lower end 22 at Fig. 3) of said first wing portion (wings 4) is curved so as to complement said exterior surface (lower end 22 of wings 4 is curved to complement outer surface 17 as shown at Fig. 3).
Regarding claim-2, Leo discloses wherein each wing (wings 4, 8) further comprises at least a second wing portion (Para. [0028], wings 8 at Fig. 1), wherein a lower portion (Para. [0030], lower end 22 of wings 8 at Fig. 3) of said second wing portion (wings 8) is curved so as to complement said exterior surface (lower end 22 of wings 8 is curved to complement outer surface 17 as shown at Fig. 3).
Regarding claim-3, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is angled with respect to a line intersecting an outer end ("outer end" defined as the outer terminating end of wings 4 as shown at Fig. 9) of said first wing portion ("line" not shown in figures, defined as a line intersecting said outer end of wings 4 and parallel to axis A at Fig. 9) and parallel to an axis of rotation (Para. [0031], axis A at Fig. 9) for the conveyor pulley (said line is parallel axis A at Fig. 9).
Regarding claim-4, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) and said second wing portion (wings 8) are angled with respect to a line intersecting an outer end ("outer end" defined as the outer terminating end of wings 4 as shown at Fig. 9) of the first wing portion ("line" not shown in figures, defined as a line intersecting said outer end of wings 4 and parallel to axis A at Fig. 9; wings 4 and wings 8 are angled with respect to said line at Fig. 9) and parallel to an axis of rotation (Para. [0031], axis A at Fig. 9) for the conveyor pulley (said line is parallel axis A at Fig. 9).
Regarding claim-5, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is disposed at a non-zero angle relative to said second wing portion (wings 4 are disposed at a non-zero angle relative to wings 8 as shown at Fig. 9).
Regarding claim-6, Leo discloses wherein an upper portion (Para. [0028], contact bars 3 of wings 4 at Fig. 1) of said first wing portion (wings 4) is curved so as to complement said surface Sc (contact bars 3 of wings 4 are curved as shown at Fig. 1, 3), and wherein an upper portion (Para. [0028], contact bars 3 of wings 8 at Fig. 1) of said second wing portion (wings 8) is curved so as to complement said surface Sc (contact bars 3 of wings 8 are curved as shown at Fig. 1, 3).
Regarding claim-7, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is connected to said second wing portion (wings 4 are connected to wings 8 via reinforcing disk 15 at Fig. 1, 2).
Regarding claim-8, Leo discloses the conveyor pulley of claim 2, wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is connected to said second wing portion (wings 8) by an intermediate structure (wings 4 are connected to wings 8 via reinforcing disk 15 at Fig. 1, 2).
Regarding claim-9, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is not connected to said second wing portion (wings 8; contact bars 3 of wings 4 and wings 8 are not connected to each other as shown at Fig. 1).
Regarding claim-10, Leo discloses wherein an upper portion (Para. [0028], contact bars 3 of wings 4 at Fig. 1) of said first wing portion (wings 4) is curved so as to complement said surface Sc (contact bars 3 of wings 4 are curved as shown at Fig. 1, 3).
Regarding claim-13, Leo discloses a conveyor pulley (Para. [0028], pulley 10 at Fig. 1) configured to contact a conveyor belt (Para. [0036], "conveyor belt" not shown in figures) along an imaginary semicylindrical surface Sc (Para. [0040], "imaginary semicylindrical surface" delineated by the underside of said conveyor belt, not shown in figures), the conveyor pulley (pulley 10) comprising:
a body (Para. [0028], drum 14 at Fig. 1, 2);
a plurality of wings (Para. [0028], plurality of wings 4, 8 at Fig. 1) supported by said body (plurality of wings 4, 8 are supported by drum 14 at Fig. 1) and disposed circumferentially about said body (plurality of wings 4, 8 are disposed circumferentially about by drum 14 at Fig. 1 ), each wing (wing 4, 8) comprising at least a first wing portion (Para. [0028], wings 4 at Fig. 1), wherein an upper portion (Para. [0028], contact bars 3 of wings 4 at Fig. 1) of said first wing portion is curved to complement said surface Sc (contact bars 3 of wings 4 are curved as shown at Fig. 1, 3).
Regarding claim-14, Leo discloses wherein each wing (wings 4, 8) further comprises at least a second wing portion (Para. [0028], wings 8 at Fig. 1), wherein a lower portion (Para. [0030], lower end 22 of wings 8 at Fig. 3) of said second wing portion (wings 8) is curved to complement an exterior surface of the body (lower end 22 of wings 8 is curved to complement outer surface 17 as shown at Fig. 3).
Regarding claim-15, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is angled with respect to a line intersecting an outer end ("outer end" defined as the outer terminating end of wings 4 as shown at Fig. 9) of said first wing portion ("line" not shown in figures, defined as a line intersecting said outer end of wings 4 and parallel to axis A at Fig. 9) and parallel to an axis of rotation (Para. [0031], axis A at Fig. 9) for the conveyor pulley (said line is parallel axis A at Fig. 9).
Regarding claim-16, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) and said second wing portion (wings 8) are angled with respect to a line intersecting an outer end ("outer end" defined as the outer terminating end of wings 4 as shown at Fig. 9) of the first wing portion ("line" not shown in figures, defined as a line intersecting said outer end of wings 4 and parallel to axis A at Fig. 9; wings 4 and wings 8 are angled with respect to said line at Fig. 9) and parallel to an axis of rotation (Para. [0031], axis A at Fig. 9) for the conveyor pulley (said line is parallel axis A at Fig. 9).
Regarding claim-17, Leo discloses wherein said first wing portion (wings 4) is disposed at a nonzero angle relative to said second wing portion (wings 4 are disposed at a non-zero angle relative to wings 8 as shown at Fig.9).
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.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leo (US 20120186945) in view of Brian (US 20130341162).
Regarding claim-11. Leo doesn’t explicit discloses wherein a weld seam connects a lower end of said first wing portion to said exterior surface.
Brian discloses wing pulley for use in conveyor (Abstract; Fig.1) and teaches wherein a weld seam (Para. [0037], "continuous weld" not shown in figures) connects a lower end (Para. [0038],
"lower edge" of wings 3 at Fig. 8) of a first wing portion (Para. [0037]; [0038], wings 3 at Fig. 1) to an exterior surface (Para. [0037], said lower end of wings 3 are connected to core 2 with said continuous weld, at Fig. 6, 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Leo’s pulley with weld seam as taught by Brian for purpose of creating a single subassembly.
Regarding claim-12. Leo doesn’t explicit discloses wherein said weld seam does not extend between a lower surface of said first wing portion and said exterior surface.
Brian teaches wherein said weld seam does not extend between a lower surface of said first wing portion (lower angled edge of portion of wings 3 that extend beyond the end of the core 2 in Fig. 6) and said exterior surface (weld seam does not extend between said lower angled edge of portion of wings 3 and the end of the core 2, Fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Leo’s pulley with the wings that extend beyond the weld seam as taught by Brian for purpose of accommodating larger conveyor webs.
Conclusion
Note: Examiner strongly suggests applicants to look at Notice of References Cited PTO-892 as there are other multiple prior arts or in combination that can be used to reject claims.
US 20210284458 A1, KR 101766215 B1, US 20140251761 A1, US 20110315517 A1, WO 2010136635 A1, US 20090107804 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD AWAIS whose telephone number is (571)272-4955. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4 pm (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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (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 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.
/MA/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
