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 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 1-18 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 the limitation “characterized in that.” The limitation does not comply with practice. It is unclear to what extent the limitations that follow limit the bounds of the claim, making the claim indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “said product.” Does the limitation refer back to only the grain product, or the grain product, powder or the like? Or a different product? The same rejection applies to additional instances of the limitation.
Regarding claim 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. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The remaining claims are rejected due to dependency from claim 1.
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) 1-14 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grun (US 3179379).
Regarding claim 1, Grun discloses an apparatus for the treatment of powder, grain, paste products or the like comprising
a treatment chamber (1);
a loading mouth (35) to feed at least one powder, grain product or the like into the treatment chamber (Column 4, lines 18-20);
a discharge mouth (4) with a tubular shape (Figure 2) to discharge at least said product outside the treatment chamber (The limitation is interpreted as a recitation of intended use, and therefore afforded limited patentable weight; The element is capable of performing the claimed function);
a closing cap (23, 28), which is movable between an opening position and a closing position opening and closing the discharge mouth (Column 2, lines 56-57, the cap is the member that includes the collecting cone and is secured to the container); and
a pneumatic unit (AR) to feed at least one compressed air flow along at least part of an inner surface of the discharge mouth and/or along at least part of an outer surface of the closing cap and to remove said product from the inner surface of the discharge mouth and/or from the outer surface of the closing cap (Column 2, line 65-Column 3, line 10); and characterized in that the pneumatic unit comprises at least one annular manifold (air ring), which is obtained in the discharge mouth or in the closing cap (Figure 2), is closed like a ring around a longitudinal axis of the discharge mouth and communicates with the outside through an outlet channel (8), which extends around said longitudinal axis and is configured to feed the compressed air flow flowing out of the manifold along the inner surface of the discharge mouth and/or along the outer surface of the closing cap (Column 2, line 65-Column 3, line 10).
Regarding claim 2, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each outlet channel (8) is obtained in an intermediate point of the inner surface of the discharge mouth and/or of the outer surface of the closing cap (Figure 2, outer surface of the closing cap).
Regarding claim 3, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each outlet channel, the inner surface of the discharge mouth and the outer surface of the closing cap are configured to allow the relative compressed air flow to follow the inner surface of the discharge mouth and the outer surface of the closing cap due to Coanda effect (Column 3, lines 1-14, The elements are capable of performing the claimed function due to the alignment of the nozzle and discharge pattern).
Regarding claim 4, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each outlet channel (8) is delimited by two annular side surfaces, which have a curved shape, face one another and further have respective concavities having the same orientation (Figure 2 depicts the elements of the nozzle structure with concavely facing side surfaces with the same orientation).
Regarding claim 5, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the side surfaces of each outlet channel are configured so that the outlet channel has a decreasing passage section from the inlet to the outlet of the outlet channel itself (Figures 1a, 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 6, Grun disclose the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the pneumatic unit comprises a first annular manifold obtained in the discharge mouth and communicating with the outside through a first annular outlet channel (Figure 2, the unit includes an annular manifold that encircles the cone and communicating with the outside and communicates through the channel in annular member 28) a second annular manifold obtained in the closing cap and communicating with the outside through a second annular outlet channel (The cap includes a second manifold that communicates through holes 26).
Regarding claim 7, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the first outlet channel is obtained downstream of the second outlet channel in a feeding direction of the product along the discharge mouth (Figures 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 8, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the first outlet channel converges towards the longitudinal axis so as to feed a first compressed air flow along the inner surface of the discharge mouth (Figure 2, the channel converges to the outlet point, and is capable of performing the claimed function).
Regarding claim 9, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the second outlet channel diverges from the longitudinal axis so as to feed a second compressed air flow along the outer surface of the closing cap (The second channel is aligned away from the longitudinal axis and is capable of performing the function of providing a second airflow after termination of the first airflow).
Regarding claim 10, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the closing cap (23, 28) is provided with an annular gasket (23), which is mounted on the outer surface of the closing cap (Figure 2) and has a lip (28) protruding from the outer surface of the closing cap so as to be hermetically coupled, in a fluid-tight manner, to the inner surface of the discharge mouth (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 11, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the gasket (23) is mounted downstream of the first outlet channel in said feeding direction (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 12, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the inner surface of the discharge mouth comprises a first portion (3) with the shape of a truncated cone diverging relative to said longitudinal axis in a feeding direction of the product along the discharge mouth (Figure 2), and a second portion (22) with a curved shape, which is obtained downstream of the first portion in the feeding direction and is separated from the first portion by the outlet channel (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 13, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the second portion comprises, in succession and in the following order in said feeding direction, a first segment (tubular portion), a second segment (narrowing portion) and a third segment (widening portion leading into outlet 4);
the second segment having a smaller passage section than a passage section of the first segment and then a passage section of the third segment (Figure 2, the tubular portion narrows to the second segment, and widens to the third segment, which leads into outlet 4).
Regarding claim 14, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the outer surface of the closing cap comprises a first portion (3) with the shape of a truncated cone diverging relative to said longitudinal axis in a feeding direction of the product through the discharge mouth (Figure 2); and a second portion with a curved shape, which is obtained downstream of the first portion in the feeding direction and is separated from the first portion by the outlet channel (The side surface of the cap is circular).
Regarding claim 17, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the treatment chamber is a mixing chamber (Column 2, line 65-Column 3, line 10), which is engaged, in a rotary manner, by a transmission shaft (13) provided with a plurality of mixing tools (19) distributed along the transmission shaft (Column 3, lines 28-31).
Regarding claim 18, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each outlet channel has the shape of a continuous ring closed around the longitudinal axis or comprises a plurality of elongated slots evenly distributed around the longitudinal axis (Elongated slots).
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) 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grun.
Regarding claim 15, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 14, but fails to disclose wherein the outer surface of the closing cap further comprises a third portion, in particular with the shape of a truncated cone diverging relative to said longitudinal axis in the feeding direction, obtained downstream of the second portion in the feeding direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a third portion with a truncated cone shape since it has been held that shape is a matter of choice which one of ordinary skill in the art would have found absent persuasive evidence that the shape is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 16, Grun discloses the apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the closing cap is provided with an annular gasket (23), and has a lip (The conical portion of 28) protruding from the outer surface of the closing cap so as to be hermetically coupled, in a fluid-tight manner, to the inner surface of the discharge mouth, but fails to disclose the gasket mounted between said second and third portions.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the gasket arranged as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R. DANDRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)270-1505. The examiner can normally be reached M-T 9am-7pm.
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, Arthur O. Hall can be reached at (571)270-1814. 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.
CHRISTOPHER R. DANDRIDGE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3752
/CHRISTOPHER R DANDRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights