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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claim recites “a casing (1) that houses a piece (2)” in line 2, but it is unclear if the piece is a workpiece or a part of the device. Clarification is required.
The claim recites “characterized in that” in line 3, which is unconventional.
The claim recites “in which that the at least one retaining element (3)…” in line 5, which is grammatically improper.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claim recites “the sleeve (4) comprises a stem (9) housed inside it, which is movable inside said sleeve (4)” which is grammatically improper and unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 recites:
“a sleeve (4) movable between the retention position, wherein the at least one retaining element (3) is located inside at least one cavity (5) of the sleeve (4) to house the at least one retaining element (3), and the extraction position, wherein the at least one retaining element (3) is located outside the at least one cavity (5) of the sleeve (4)”
However this is exactly opposite what is described in the instant specification ¶¶ 28, 30 where:
“[0028] The retention position is shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. In this position, the retaining elements (3) are pressed against the piece (2), in particular against the shaft (10) of the piece (2), by the sleeve (4). This is because the retaining elements (3) are located outside the cavities (5) and in contact with the inner wall of the sleeve (4).”
“[0030] When the sleeve (4) moves, when the retaining elements (3) are in front of the cavities (5), they will enter them, so that they will no longer press against the shaft (10) of the piece (2), the stem (9) moves inside the sleeve (4), slightly pushing the shaft (10) of the piece (2), causing the piece (2) to come out of the casing and facilitating its removal manually, but without risk of accidentally falling.”
It is unclear how the retaining elements would function as claimed in contrast with the instant specification.
Claim 1 recites “retaining it” in line 5, but “it” is not clearly defined.
Claim 1 recites "a sleeve (4) movable between the retention position" in line 7 and “the extraction position” in lines 8-9. There is only antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim with respect to the retaining element not the sleeve as recited in the instant claim.
Claim 1 recites "the injection of air" in line 11; “the inlet” in line 11; “the displacement of the sleeve” in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the retention position" in line 2-3. Similar to claim 1 it is unclear which retention position is referred. The sleeve or the retaining element? There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites “a spring located between the sleeve and the body, which pushes the sleeve” in line 2. It is unclear if the spring or body pushes the sleeve.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jachimski (US 7,165,961 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Jachimski discloses a compression molding apparatus with quick change molds, e.g. a device for extracting pieces, comprising:
a coupler 50, equated with the claimed casing (1), that houses a stud 52, equated with the claimed piece (2) (FIG. 1; 2:45+);
characterized in that the device also comprises:
a plurality of hardened steel locking balls 74, equated with the claimed at least one retaining element (3), movable between a retention position, wherein the at least one retaining element (3) is pushed against the piece (2), retaining it, and an extraction position, in which that the at least one retaining element (3) is not pushed against the piece (2) (FIG. 1-2; 3:1+);
a cup-shaped piston 78, equated with the claimed sleeve (4), movable between the retention position, wherein the at least one retaining element (3) is located inside at least one groove or recess 81, equated with the claimed cavity (5) of the sleeve (4), to house the at least one retaining element (3), and the extraction position, wherein the at least one retaining element (3) is located outside the at least one cavity (5) of the sleeve (4) (FIG. 1-2; 3:1+);
wherein the casing (1) comprises center port 96 for pressurized air, equated with the claimed air inlet (6), the injection of air through the inlet (6) causing the displacement of the sleeve (4) (FIG. 1-2; 3:21+).
Regarding claim 2, Jachimski discloses cylinder 62, equated with the claimed body (7), in which the at least one retaining element (3) is housed (FIG. 1; 2:45+).
Regarding claim 3, Jachimski discloses as set of concentric compression springs 87 and 88, equated with the claimed spring (8), located between the sleeve (4) and the body (7), which pushes the sleeve (4) towards the retention position (FIG. 1-2; 3:16+).
Regarding claim 4, Jachimski discloses the at least one retaining element (3) are balls (FIG. 1-2; 3:1+).
Regarding claim 6, Jachimski discloses the casing (1) comprises an external thread (FIG. 1-2; 2:63+).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jachimski (US 7,165,961 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Mayrhofer (EP 3 093 117 A1).
Jachimski does not appear to expressly disclose that the sleeve includes a movable stem housed within.
However, Mayrhofer discloses a similar quick release device (title/abstract; FIG. 1+) wherein the coupling ring 19, equated with the claimed sleeve, includes a movable piston rod 33, equated with the claimed stem, housed within (FIG. 1+; ¶¶ 24+)
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Jachimski to include the stem of Mayrhofer, because such alternative configuration is known in the art and could be used with expected results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. NAVARRA PRUNA; Alberto (US 2026/0102954 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin A Schiffman whose telephone number is (571)270-7626. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-530p 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. 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 A SCHIFFMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights