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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 06/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “an open position that permits insertion of wax cappings into the hollow structure” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 and 7 (as well as dependent claims 2-6 and 8-12 due to dependency) 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, “at least two sliders slidably received within the respective grooves of the structural frame, wherein the at least two sliders are configured to allow a user to be selectively translated between an open position that permits insertion of wax cappings into the hollow structure and a closed position that seals the hollow structure during centrifugal extraction”, which is vague and indefinite since it is unclear what is opening/closing via the sliders.
[0045] of the specification states, “the open position refers to a configuration in which at least one slider 114 is displaced outwardly along the corresponding groove 112 such that an access opening to the hollow structure 110 is exposed, thereby allowing insertion or removal of wax cappings.” However, the access opening is not shown in the drawings, nor is it clear how a user would access the interior of the hollow structure via the sliders.
Firstly, it is unclear how the device is intended to give a user access to the interior. Does the device function as a drawer, with one of the sidewalls of the hollow structure (110) sliding outwardly, or are the sliders locking mechanisms that lock and unlock the hollow structure (110) to give a user access via some kind of opening? The figures do not show the insertion of the wax cappings, or an open configuration of the device.
Secondly, in Fig. 1C the sliders are completely internal to the box structure (as shown in phantom lines), but in Fig. 1D it looks like a user would be able to access the sliders via the finger grip (115). How is a user able to open/close if the sliders are completely internal to the hollow structure?
Based on the 112b rejections above, the claims will be interpreted as best understood.
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) 1-12 is/are rejected, as best understood, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirley; Jeff (US 20190000047 A1), in view of (KR 20120002720 U; hereinafter ‘720).
Regarding claims 1 and 7 Shirley discloses a wax-capping honey separation device (title; abstract), comprising: a first frame assembly having a structural frame (112, 101, 102, 104); [0029], wherein the structural frame defines a hollow structure configured to receive wax cappings containing residual honey; at least two mesh members (105, 110); [0030] disposed on opposite sides of the structural frame, wherein the at least two mesh members are configured to permit honey to pass outwardly from the hollow structure during centrifugal extraction while retaining the wax cappings within the hollow structure [0030].
Shirley does not disclose at least two grooves formed along opposite sides of the structural frame, wherein each of the grooves defining a respective side track; and at least two sliders slidably received within the respective grooves of the structural frame, wherein the at least two sliders are configured to allow a user to be selectively translated between an open position that permits insertion of wax cappings into the hollow structure and a closed position that seals the hollow structure during centrifugal extraction, whereby, during centrifugal extraction, honey passes through the mesh members while the wax cappings remain retained within the hollow structure.
‘720 teaches at least two grooves (Fig. 1; 200) formed along opposite sides of the structural frame (10), wherein each of the grooves defining a respective side track; and at least two sliders (120, 121, 110); [0021] slidably received within the respective grooves of the structural frame, wherein the at least two sliders are configured to allow a user to be selectively translated between an open position [0022] that permits insertion of wax cappings into the hollow structure and a closed position [0022] that seals the hollow structure during centrifugal extraction, whereby, during centrifugal extraction, honey passes through the mesh members while the wax cappings remain retained within the hollow structure;
and for claim 7 wherein each of the sliders comprises at least two notches (corresponding to turned edges on either side of reference 120) configured to allow a user’s fingertip to selectively translate the sliders between the open position and the closed position (the structure is capable of receiving a fingertip to facilitate opening and closing the device), such that the wax-capping honey separation device separates honey from wax cappings during centrifugal extraction while maintaining the wax cappings retained within the hollow structure for subsequent removal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the hinged opening of Shirley with the grooves and sliders, including having one of the sidewalls of Shirley openable via the sliding action, as taught by ‘720, in order to support the opening and closing of the device, thus reducing labor effort [0022].
Regarding claims 2 and 11 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Shirley in view of ‘720 further discloses the at least two grooves extend longitudinally along opposing sides of the structural frame (‘720; Fig. 1), but does not explicitly disclose integrally formed grooves. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the grooves integral, in order to gain the advantages of a smoother finish, and since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detriot Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Regarding claim 3 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Shirley in view of ‘720 further discloses wherein the at least two sliders are positioned on opposite sides of the structural frame (‘720; Fig. 1) such that wax cappings are insertable into the hollow structure from either side of the structural frame (the structure is capable of performing the intended use of the device).
Regarding claim 4 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Shirley in view of ‘720 further discloses wherein each of the sliders comprises at least one notch (corresponding to turned edges on reference 120) configured to receive a user’s fingertip to facilitate manual translation of the sliders between the open position and the closed position (the structure is capable of receiving a fingertip to facilitate opening and closing the device).
Regarding claims 5 and 9 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Shirley further discloses wherein the at least two mesh members comprise at least one of stainless-steel mesh, food-grade polymer mesh, molded perforated screening, and perforated sheet material [0030].
Regarding claims 6 and 12 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Shirley in view of ‘720 further discloses wherein the sliders are removably received within the grooves such that the sliders are removable after centrifugal extraction to permit manual removal of wax cappings from the hollow structure (corresponding to the sliders of ‘720 which appear to be standard drawer sliders, which are removable).
However, should the applicant disagree, then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sliders of Shirley in view of ‘720 to be removable in order to allow for maintenance of the device, and in order to make the device separable, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 8 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 7. Shirley further discloses wherein the mesh members comprise molded perforations integrally formed within the structural frame (Fig. 1); [0031]; [0032].
Regarding claim 10 Shirley in view of ‘720, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 7. Shirley further discloses wherein each of the at least two mesh members is fixedly disposed within a corresponding opening of the structural frame (Fig. 1); [0031]; [0032].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art is considered pertinent because it relates to honey and wax extraction devices similar to the disclosed invention.
US 0471487 A
US 1791605 A
US 0305483 A
US 2413394 A
US 0335857 A
US 0486728 A
US 1792871 A
US 20210084870 A1
US 20160000050 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY LOWERY whose telephone number is (571)270-3228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am-4 pm MST.
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, Timothy Collins can be reached at 571-272-6886. 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.
/BRITTANY A LOWERY/Examiner, Art Unit 3644
/TIMOTHY D COLLINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3644
