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 .
Response to Amendment
This Final Rejection is in response to the Amendment dated February 5, 2026 filed in response to the Non-final Rejection dated November 20, 2025.
Cancelation of claims 2-3 and 12-13 is acknowledged.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection in the previous Office action is withdrawn in view of the claim amendment to claim 20 addressing the rejection.
The remaining pending claims continue to be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as explained below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues, starting on page 10 of the Amendment, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection in the previous Office action should be withdrawn in view of the amendment of claim 20. Examiner agrees. The rejection is withdrawn as stated above.
Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 merely incorporate the claimed subject matter of now-canceled dependent claims 2 and 3. Each of dependent claims 2 and 3 were previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as explained in numbered paragraph 33 on page 11 and numbered paragraph 17 on page 6, respectively, of the previous Office action. Therefore, the previous prior art reference combination rejection cited in rejecting claim 2 now applies to amended claim 1 as explained below.
Similarly, applicant’s amendments to claim 11 merely incorporate the claimed subject matter of now-canceled dependent claims 12 and 13. Each of dependent claims 12 and 13 were previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as explained in numbered paragraph 33 on page 11 and numbered paragraph 29 on page 10, respectively, of the previous Office action. Therefore, the previous prior art reference combination rejection cited in rejecting claim 12 now applies to amended claim 11 as explained below.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 10-11, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 11,389,805 B1 to Ebadian et al., hereinafter “Ebadian 805”, in view of U.S. Patent 10,071,382 B1 to Ebadian et al., hereinafter “Ebadian 382”, Chinese Patent Document No. CN 111822086 A by Zhang, hereinafter “Zhang”, and U.S. Patent No. 3,687,062 to Frank, hereinafter “Frank”.
Regarding claim 1, Ebadian 805 discloses an apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage (apparatus 10 in Fig. 1; col. 3, line 32-34) comprising:
a support frame (frame 13 in Fig. 6; col. 3, line 34) including a detachable frame (frame 124 in Fig. 6; col. 5, line 5-11) housing a first collection bin (bin 70 in Fig. 6; col. 4, line 6-8) and a second collection bin (bin 74 in Fig. 6; col. 4, line 24-27);
a first stage for inserting data storage devices into a first shredder mounted on said support frame (first stage 12 in Fig. 3; col. 3, line 38-42), said first shredder comprising intermeshing counter-rotating cutter stacks on respective shafts (Fig. 3 shows intermeshing counter-rotating cutter stacks on respective shafts 25 with knifes 14; col. 3, line 39-67), a first motor operatively coupled to a first gearbox and driving a first shaft in a first direction (Fig. 6 shows a first motor coupled to first gearbox 42 which drives one of the shafts 25 carrying one stack of knifes 14 in clockwise rotation; col. 3, line 42-55), and a second motor operatively coupled to a second gearbox and driving a second shaft in an opposite direction (Fig. 6 shows second motor 44 coupled to second gearbox 46 driving one of shafts 25 carrying a second stack of knifes 14 in counter-clockwise rotation; col. 3, line 55-59), said first shredder is constructed and arranged to grind data storage devices into particles no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm (col. 3, line 59-64);
a second stage for removing metal-containing particles passed through said first shredder configured to attract metal-containing particles and to discharge the attracted particles toward said first collection bin (second stage magnetized roller 60 in Figs. 3-5; col. 4, line 1-23);
a third stage mounted in said support frame for shearing non-metal particles comprising a second shredder constructed and arranged to shear non-metal particles to a size of no greater than 10 mm by 10 mm (col. 4, line 24-59 disclose a third stage shredder comprising upper shredder 79 and lower shredder 81 shown in Figs. 3 and 6);
wherein said first collection bin holds metal particles no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm (bin 70 in Fig. 6 holds metal particles shredded by the first stage shredder 12) and said second collection bin holds non-metal particles no greater than 10 mm by 10 mm (bin 74 in Fig. 6 hold non-metal particles shredded in the third stage by upper shredder 79 and lower shredder 81).
Ebadian 805 does not expressly disclose first stage shredder 12 grinds data storage devices into particles no greater than 20 mm by 20 mm. However, Ebadian 805 suggests shredding data storage devices in the first stage into particles less than 30 mm by 30 mm, which would include 20 mm by 20 mm, by using the limitation “no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm for the first stage.”
Ebadian 805’s third stage shredder is not disclosed as including a plurality of adjustable bar blades on a support base with a plurality of rotors rotated by an electric motor driver having cutting blades removably coupled thereto, where the cutting blades and the adjustable bar blades are constructed and arranged to shear non-metal particles to a size of less than 2 mm by 2 mm.
Ebadian 805 is silent regarding a screen allowing passage of shredded non-metal particles into second bin 74.
In the same field of shredding data devices, Ebadian 382 teaches a solid state drive disintegrator which uses the shredder shown in Fig. 15 comprising a plurality of adjustable bar blades 36 and 38 supported on a frame with a plurality of rotors 30 and 40 rotated by electric motor 44 shown in Fig. 5. Each of rotors 30 and 40 have blades 32 and 42 removably coupled thereto, respectively. Column 6, line 6-19 disclose blades 36 and 38 are adjustable in relation to the leading edges of blades 32 and 42 to facilitate a gap spacing of 0.8 mm which allows shredded material to pass through 2 mm apertures 22 in screen sidewall 11, reference numbered 13 in Fig. 15.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Ebadian 382’s shredder and screen assembly for Ebadian 805’s third stage shredder to achieve the predictable result of Ebadian 805’s disclosed apparatus which uses a third stage shredder and screen assembly as taught by Ebadian 382. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Ebadian 382 to the apparatus of Ebadian 805 would allow shredding of the particles in the third stage to a size of no greater than 2 mm by 2mm as Ebadian 382 teaches.
Ebadian 805’s second stage magnetic separator is not disclosed as including a continuous belt trained about at least an idler roller and a drive roller operatively coupled to a belt conveyor motor which conveys particles across the magnetized roller 60.
In the same field of shredding apparatus used to shred electronic components, Zhang teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a magnetized belt to separate metal particles from non-metal particles in crushed electronic component material. Fig. 1 shows magnetic belt 8 receives material crushed by crushing rollers 12 which is then separated into metal collection bin 23 by scrapper B or guided into plastic collection bin 3. Magnetic belt 8 is shown trained about three rollers with one of them being coupled to the output shaft of servo motor 25 shown in Fig. 2. See paragraph [0034].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Zhang’s magnetized conveyor belt for Ebadian 805’s magnetized roller 60. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Zhang to the apparatus disclosed by Ebadian 805 would improve feeding of shredded material by providing driven conveyance of the shredded material instead of relying up gravitational sliding.
Ebadian 805 does not disclose feed ramp 62 in Figs. 4 and 5 is a vibratory feed ramp configured to meter particles onto a continuous belt at an angle of about 35°.
In the field of comminution apparatus, Frank teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a vibrating feed ramp chute (52 in Fig. 1) after a crushing operation to convey crushed material to a magnetized conveyor belt (62 in Fig. 1) used to separate crushed metal materials. See col. 2, line 25-54. Fig. 1 illustrates chute 52 angled at about 35° from horizontal.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add vibratory action at about a 35° angle to Ebadian 805’s ramp 62 to further facilitate conveyance of shredded material over ramp 62 in the same way Frank teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Frank to Ebadian 805’s apparatus would yield the predictable result of Ebadian 805’s apparatus with a vibratory ramp angled at about 35° as Frank teaches.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 805 further discloses wherein said first stage (first stage 12 in Fig. 3) comprises counter-rotating intermeshing cutter stacks each including knives and toothed spacers on respective shafts driven by respective gearboxes and motors (first stage 12 in Fig. 3 is shown with counter-rotating intermeshing cutter stacks each including knives 14 as shown in Fig. 7A and toothed spacers 24 as shown in Fig. 8A), said first stage being configured to produce particles no greater than about 20 mm by 20 mm (the particle size of “no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm” may reasonably be interpreted as including “about 20 mm by 20 mm”).
Regarding claim 10, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 382 further teaches coupling a cyclone separator vacuum to outlet 26 of the shredder shown in Fig. 15 which reduces filter loading of HEPA filter 28. See column 4, line 18-30. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teaching of column 4, line 18-30 when substituting Ebadian 382’s shredder and screen assembly for Ebadian 805’s third stage shredder by also incorporating holding area 24, outlet 26, HEPA 28 and a cyclone separator vacuum as part of the substituted shredder.
Regarding claim 11, Ebadian 805 discloses an apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage (apparatus 10 in Fig. 1; col. 3, line 32-34) comprising:
a support frame (frame 13 in Fig. 6; col. 3, line 34) including a detachable frame (frame 124 in Fig. 6; col. 5, line 5-11) housing a first collection bin (bin 70 in Fig. 6; col. 4, line 6-8) and a second collection bin (bin 74 in Fig. 6; col. 4, line 24-27);
a first stage for inserting data storage devices into a first shredder mounted on said support frame (first stage 12 in Fig. 3; col. 3, line 38-42), said first shredder comprising intermeshing counter-rotating cutter stacks on respective shafts (Fig. 3 shows intermeshing counter-rotating cutter stacks on respective shafts 25 with knifes 14; col. 3, line 39-67), a first motor operatively coupled to a first gearbox and driving a first shaft in a first direction (Fig. 6 shows a first motor coupled to first gearbox 42 which drives one of the shafts 25 carrying one stack of knifes 14 in clockwise rotation; col. 3, line 42-55), and a second motor operatively coupled to a second gearbox and driving a second shaft in an opposite direction (Fig. 6 shows second motor 44 coupled to second gearbox 46 driving one of shafts 25 carrying a second stack of knifes 14 in counter-clockwise rotation; col. 3, line 55-59), said first shredder is constructed and arranged to grind data storage devices into particles no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm (col. 3, line 59-64);
a second stage for removing metal-containing particles passed through said first shredder configured to attract metal-containing particles and to discharge the attracted particles toward said first collection bin (second stage magnetized roller 60 in Figs. 3-5; col. 4, line 1-23);
a third stage mounted in said support frame for shearing non-metal particles comprising a second shredder constructed and arranged to shear non-metal particles to a size of no greater than 10 mm by 10 mm (col. 4, line 24-59 disclose a third stage shredder comprising upper shredder 79 and lower shredder 81 shown in Figs. 3 and 6);
wherein said first collection bin holds metal particles no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm (bin 70 in Fig. 6 holds metal particles shredded by the first stage shredder 12) and said second collection bin holds non-metal particles no greater than 10 mm by 10 mm (bin 74 in Fig. 6 hold non-metal particles shredded in the third stage by upper shredder 79 and lower shredder 81).
Ebadian 805 does not expressly disclose first stage shredder 12 grinds data storage devices into particles no greater than 20 mm by 20 mm. However, Ebadian 805 suggests shredding data storage devices in the first stage into particles less than 30 mm by 30 mm, which would include 20 mm by 20 mm, by using the limitation “no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm for the first stage.”
Ebadian 805’s third stage shredder is not disclosed as including a plurality of adjustable bar blades on a support base with a plurality of rotors rotated by an electric motor driver having cutting blades removably coupled thereto, where the cutting blades and the adjustable bar blades are constructed and arranged to shear non-metal particles to a size of less than 2 mm by 2 mm.
Ebadian 805 is silent regarding a screen allowing passage of shredded non-metal particles into second bin 74, and a cyclone separator fluidly coupled to an outlet of the third stage by gasketed clamps.
In the same field of shredding data devices, Ebadian 382 teaches a solid state drive disintegrator which uses the shredder shown in Fig. 15 comprising a plurality of adjustable bar blades 36 and 38 supported on a frame with a plurality of rotors 30 and 40 rotated by electric motor 44 shown in Fig. 5. Each of rotors 30 and 40 have blades 32 and 42 removably coupled thereto, respectively. Column 6, line 6-19 disclose blades 36 and 38 are adjustable in relation to the leading edges of blades 32 and 42 to facilitate a gap spacing of 0.8 mm which allows shredded material to pass through 2 mm apertures 22 in screen sidewall 11, reference numbered 13 in Fig. 15. Ebadian 382 further teaches coupling a cyclone separator vacuum to outlet 26 of the shredder shown in Fig. 15 which reduces filter loading of HEPA filter 28. See column 4, line 18-30.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Ebadian 382’s shredder and screen assembly for Ebadian 805’s third stage shredder to achieve the predictable result of Ebadian 805’s disclosed apparatus which uses a third stage shredder and screen assembly as taught by Ebadian 382. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Ebadian 382 to the apparatus of Ebadian 805 would allow shredding of the particles in the third stage to a size of no greater than 2 mm by 2mm as Ebadian 382 teaches.
Ebadian 805’s second stage magnetic separator is not disclosed as including a continuous belt trained about at least an idler roller and a drive roller operatively coupled to a belt conveyor motor which conveys particles across the magnetized roller 60.
In the same field of shredding apparatus used to shred electronic components, Zhang teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a magnetized belt to separate metal particles from non-metal particles in crushed electronic component material. Fig. 1 shows magnetic belt 8 receives material crushed by crushing rollers 12 which is then separated into metal collection bin 23 by scrapper B or guided into plastic collection bin 3. Magnetic belt 8 is shown trained about three rollers with one of them being coupled to the output shaft of servo motor 25 shown in Fig. 2. See paragraph [0034].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Zhang’s magnetized conveyor belt for Ebadian 805’s magnetized roller 60. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Zhang to the apparatus disclosed by Ebadian 805 would improve feeding of shredded material by providing driven conveyance of the shredded material instead of relying up gravitational sliding.
Ebadian 805 does not disclose feed ramp 62 in Figs. 4 and 5 is a vibratory feed ramp configured to meter particles onto a continuous belt at an angle of about 35°.
In the field of comminution apparatus, Frank teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a vibrating feed ramp chute (52 in Fig. 1) after a crushing operation to convey crushed material to a magnetized conveyor belt (62 in Fig. 1) used to separate crushed metal materials. See col. 2, line 25-54. Fig. 1 illustrates chute 52 angled at about 35° from horizontal.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add vibratory action at about a 35° angle to Ebadian 805’s ramp 62 to further facilitate conveyance of shredded material over ramp 62 in the same way Frank teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Frank to Ebadian 805’s apparatus would yield the predictable result of Ebadian 805’s apparatus with a vibratory ramp angled at about 35° as Frank teaches.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claim 11 unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 805 further discloses wherein said first stage (first stage 12 in Fig. 3) comprises counter-rotating intermeshing cutter stacks each including knives and toothed spacers on respective shafts driven by respective gearboxes and motors (first stage 12 in Fig. 3 is shown with counter-rotating intermeshing cutter stacks each including knives 14 as shown in Fig. 7A and toothed spacers 24 as shown in Fig. 8A), said first stage being configured to produce particles no greater than about 20 mm by 20 mm (the particle size of “no greater than 30 mm by 30 mm” may reasonably be interpreted as including “about 20 mm by 20 mm”).
Regarding claim 20, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claim 11 unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 382 further teaches a HEPA filtration system at column 4, line 18-30.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank and further in view of Chinese Patent Document No. CN 113786893 A by applicant Yunnan Jianfeng Construction Co., hereinafter “Yunnan Co.”.
Regarding claims 4 and 14, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claims 1 and 11, respectively, unpatentable as explained above. Zhang further teaches use of a scraper to scrape belt 8. Detail B of Fig. 1 is shown in Fig. 5 where the scraper is given reference number 33. See paragraph [0041].
In the field of discharge devices for comminution apparatus, Yunnan Co. teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a brush to clean the surface of a magnetized conveyor belt arranged after a crushing operation. Fig. 2 shows conveyor belt B18 rotated by pulleys B17 below crushing rollers 13. Fig. 6 shows conveyor belt 18 has magnetic blocks 33 arranged on its outer side to attract crushed metal particles from the outlet of crushing rollers 13. Brush 19 brushes metal particles attracted to magnetic block 33 from belt 18 to remove the crushed metal particles to a non-illustrated storage bin via the chute illustrated below belt 18 in Fig. 2. See paragraph [n0031].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange a conveyor belt scraper and a conveyor belt brush adjacent the conveyor belt taught by Zhang to remove metal particles from the belt in the same way Zhang and Yunnan Co. teach. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Yunnan Co. to the apparatus of Ebadian 805 with Zhang’s conveyor belt would achieve the predictable result of providing means for removing metal particles from the conveyor for deposit into bin 70.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank and further in view of Chinese Patent publication Document No. CN 110813497 A by Xie, hereinafter “Xie”.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claims 1 and 11, respectively, unpatentable as explained above. Zhang does not disclose side leak-prevention panels flanking magnetized belt 8 and a separator guard inhibiting flyback and cross-contamination.
In the field of discharge devices for comminution apparatus, Xie teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enclose crushing apparatus discharge conveyors with a cover covering the sides and top of the conveyor. See Fig. 1 and paragraph [0028].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cover the sides and top of Zhang’s magnetized conveyor belt 8 with a cover in the same way Xie teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Xie to Zhang’s conveyor belt would isolate the conveyor incorporated into Ebadian 805’s apparatus from the interior of Ebadian 805’s apparatus to prevent shredded material conveyed on the conveyor belt from leaking to the interior.
Claims 7-9 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2016/0271620 A1 by Ebadian et al., hereinafter “Ebadian 620”.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claims 1 and 11, respectively, unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 382 teaches blade assembly 14 in Fig. 15 comprises two rotors 30 and 40 on a shredder shaft with each rotor carrying three circumferentially spaced cutting blades 32 and 42. Ebadian 382 does not teach four rotors as claimed in claim 7. However, duplicating the number of rotors from two to four has no patentable significance because increasing the number of rotors from two to four would not produce a new and unexpected result. See. M.P.E.P. 2144, VI,B.
Ebadian 382 does not disclose circumferentially spaced cutting blades 32 and 42 are set at about a 2° slope relative to an axis of rotation.
Ebadian 620 teaches a comminution apparatus shown in Fig. 1 with knife mill assembly 3 which is shown in cross-section in Fig. 3. See paragraph [0040]. The mill assembly uses rotatable rotor mill core 30 carrying three cutting blades 34 offset at an angle of about 2°. See paragraphs [0041] through at least paragraph [0043].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to offset Ebadian 382’s circumferentially spaced cutting blades at an angle of about 2° in the same way Ebadian 620 teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Ebadian 620 to Ebadian 382 would achieve the predictable result of offsetting Ebadian 382’s cutting blades at an angle of about 2°.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank and further in view of Ebadian 620 renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claims 7 and 17, respectively, unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 382 further teaches the shredder shown in Fig. 15 has rotors 30 and 40 mutually offset from one another. Fig. 15 further illustrates adjustable bar blades 36 and 38 positionable by threaded positioners to set shearing clearance. See “Threaded Positioner” annotation to Fig. 15 of Ebadian 382 reproduced below.
PNG
media_image1.png
851
1159
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the prior art reference combination of Ebadian 805 in view of Ebadian 382, Zhang and Frank renders the apparatus for destroying electronic data and providing selective storage of claims 1 and 11, respectively, unpatentable as explained above. Ebadian 382 is silent regarding how blades 32 and 42 are fastened to corresponding rotors 30 and 40 in Fig. 15.
Ebadian 620 teaches cutting blades 34 on rotor core 30 in Fig. 3 are removably fastened as shown in Fig. 5C.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use removable fasteners to fasten Ebadian 382’s cutting blades 32 and 42 to rotors 30 and 40 in the same way Ebadian 620 teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Ebadian 620 to Ebadian 382’s shredder would achieve the predictable result of using removable fasteners to fasten cutting blades 32 and 42 to rotors 30 and 40.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P.D.P./ Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725