DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-10 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Frank et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,913,568), in view of Akama et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0179501).
Regarding claim 1: Frank discloses a method of handling a tubular carton blank, comprising:
gripping one side of an erected tubular carton blank with a gripper mounted to a pivot (Figs. 1 & 2; via 62 and/or 72), such that a fold line of a flap of said one side is aligned with an axis of rotation of said pivot (via fold line of the shown flaps F, aligned to pivots shown at 70, 52, 51, 55, 33, 40, etc.); pivoting said gripper (via 62 and/or 72), and thereby said erected tubular carton blank (Fig. 3; via erected box), about said pivot; bringing said flap into abutting relation with an abutment (Fig. 4; via means 9 folding of the flap);
Frank also discloses that a side of said erected tubular carton blank having a flap with opposed planar surfaces, with a facing planar surface of said opposed planar surfaces extending over at least part of said generally planar surface of stationary abutment, and in said first position of said gripper, said facing planar surface of said flap is oriented generally parallel to said planar surface of said abutment and is aligned with, and generally parallel to, said side of said erected tubular carton blank, see for example (Figs. 1-4; via the shown orientations of the erected carton and its flaps in respect to the abutting mechanism 9).
Frank does not disclose the amended claim filed on 12/03/2025 referring to a step of pivoting of the gripper relative to a stationary abutment, to pivot the side of the erected tubular blank while the pivoting urges the flap against the planar surface of the stationary abutment so that the flap is folded relative to the side of the tubular carton blank while the facing planar surface of the flap remains parallel to and extends over at least part of the surface of the abutment. However, Akama discloses similar method of handling tubular carton blank with the step of pivoting grippers to erect the blank relative to a stationary abutment (Fig. 7; via the shown pivoting grippers holding the body of the blank relative to the stationary abutment 4), so that the flap is folded relative to the side of the blank while the facing planar surface of the flap remains parallel to and extends over at least part of the surface of the abutment, see for example (Figs. 8-10; via the shown folded flaps being in parallel position in respect to the abutment 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to have modified Frank’s method by having the step of bringing said flap into abutting relation with an abutment during said pivoting, so that the flap is folded relative to the side of the blank while the facing planar surface of the flap remains parallel to and extends over at least part of the surface of the abutment, as suggested by Akama, in order to accommodate and assembling box materials of different sizes (paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 2: Frank discloses that the flap is a bottom flap of said side, said side further comprising a top flap, and wherein said bottom flap is adjacent said pivot and said top flap is remote from said pivot, see for example (Fig. 4; via 9, for folding the bottom flaps);
Regarding claim 3: Frank discloses that the side is a first side and said bottom flap is a first side bottom flap, said erected carton blank further comprising a second side opposed to said first side, said second side having a second side bottom flap, said method further comprising, after pivoting said erected carton blank with said gripper to fold said first side bottom flap, moving a plough relative to said erected carton blank in order to fold said second side bottom flap, see for example (Fig. 4; via sides W1 & W2 and flaps F, after pivoting the grippers to erect the blank, plough member of 9 moves to fold the bottom flaps);
Regarding claim 4: Frank further comprising moving rails to constrain said erected tubular carton blank prior to moving said plough relative to said erected tubular carton blank, (Figs. 1-4; via movement of rails 61/71, 54, or 50/51 prior to the movement of plough 9);
Regarding claim 5: Frank discloses that the plough (via 9) moves in a linear direction transverse to said axis of rotation of said pivot, see for example (Fig. 4; via linear movement of the pressure cylinder 91);
Regarding claim 6: Frank further comprising, prior to said gripping, erecting a flat tubular carton blank into said erected tubular carton blank, (Figs. 1-4);
Regarding claim 7: Frank discloses that the gripper comprises at least one suction cup (via suction cups 62/72);
Regarding claim 8: Frank discloses that the gripper is a first gripper and wherein said erecting comprises: gripping said second side of said flat tubular carton blank with a base gripper of a base of an erector; rotating a wing of said erector into abutment with a third side of said flat tubular carton blank, said third side being in abutment with said second side; gripping said third side of said flat tubular carton blank with a wing gripper of said wing; rotating said wing to draw said third side away from said second side to thereby erect said flat tubular carton blank, see for example (Figs. 1-4; via grippers 62/72 holding sides W1 & W2);
Regarding claim 9: Akama further comprising: after erecting said flat tubular carton blank into said erected tubular carton blank, moving said erector until said one side of said erected tubular carton blank abuts said first gripper prior to said gripping said one side with said first gripper; releasing said base gripper and said wing gripper and withdrawing said erector away from said first gripper prior to said pivoting said first gripper, see for example (Figs. 7-11; show steps of moving erected carton blank to other station/step and grippers);
Regarding claim 10: Frank discloses that the pivoting said gripper comprises pivoting said gripper from a first position through a right angle to a second position, see for example (Figs. 1-3; via the right-angled pivot of grippers 62/72).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely sole on the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s made arguments in respect to the amended claims referring to a step of pivoting of the gripper relative to a stationary abutment, to pivot the side of the erected tubular blank while the pivoting urges the flap against the planar surface of the stationary abutment so that the flap is folded relative to the side of the tubular carton blank while the facing planar surface of the flap remains parallel to and extends over at least part of the surface of the abutment, was suggested by the newly applied art of Akama ‘501. As set forth above it is clear that ‘501 shows the argued upon limitations, see for example Fig. 7; via the shown pivoting grippers holding the body of the blank relative to the stationary abutment 4 and Figs. 8-10; via the shown folded flaps being in parallel position in respect to the abutment 4.
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.
Also, Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 12/03/2025 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Shelle Self can be reached on 571-272-4524. 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731