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 .
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 claimed “gripping head movably along…a third axis” along with “gripping head movably mounted thereto so as to be moveable along at least three axes” 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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 11-12, 14, 17, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. For example, amended claim 1 is now referring to the gripping head to be movable along “a third axis”, also claim 21 as amended is now referring to the gripping head to be movable along “three axes”; those limitations are not sufficiently supported by the filed specification.
As applicant indicated in the filed remarks and pointed out to the filed specification, paragraph 0089 as supporting the filed amendments, it is noted that the pointed out to paragraph 0089 of the filed specification only referring to the frame 30 as “provided with multiple axes” along with “move the gripping head 6, in multiple degrees of movement”; nowhere in the filed specification is referring to the movement of the gripping head in three different axes. Also, the pointed out to Figs. 6-7 of the filed application to support the filed amendments are only showing two axes of movement to the gripper head 6.
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 1-2, 11-12, 14, 17, and 21-23 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.
The latest amended claims 1 & 21 are referring to the gripping head to be movably in “a third axis” and “in three axes”; is causing a confusion and making the claims indefinite and vague. It is not clear how the gripping head will be functioning in a third axes and for what purpose!
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-2, 11-12, 14, 17, and 21-23 the best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aganovic et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,433,634) in view of Dieter (DE 10 2012 008 817).
Regarding claims 1 & 21: Aganovic discloses a device for shaping containers (Figs. 3 & 4; via device 208) by folding cardboard sheets (via sheet 10), comprising at least the following: a folding station (Fig. 8; via 208) for folding cardboard sheets (10), said folding station being provided with at least one die (via passage 259 & the surrounding arms/plates to accommodate the pushing mandrel 250); a handling station (Fig. 4; via suction cups 222 and rollers “not shown”) for handling said sheets (10) from a store (via hopper assembly 210) to said folding station (via 208), said handling station comprising a frame (via the shown device frames) and at least one gripping head (via head holding suctions cups 222) mounted so as to be able to move relative to said frame between said store (via hopper 210) and the die (via passage 259 & surrounding arms/plates) of said folding station; said gripping head comprising a means (via suction cups 222) for grasping and holding said sheet (10), said gripping head comprising at least one punch (via the holding rod) with a complementary shape for interacting with the inside of said die (“Vacuum suction cups 222 are positioned beneath hopper assembly 210 and rollers (not shown) transport a single blank 10 from hopper assembly 210 to compression assembly 208”), said punch comprising a bearing surface for bearing against the bottom of said grasped sheet, see for example (Figs. 8 & 12; via 250).
Aganovic does not show the grasping means movably mounted to move relative to said punch and free to move in at least one plane parallel to said bearing surface of said punch. However, Dieter discloses similar device with the use of grasping means mounted to move relative to punch, see for example (Figs. 1-5; the best understood, via the relationship between 8 and 6; forming and/or grasping mechanism).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified Aganovic’s forming/punching mechanism, by another one having the grasping means movably mounted to move relative to the punch, as suggested by Dieter, in order to securely form and position the container and its flaps.
Regarding the latest filed amendments to claims 1 & 21 on 12/10/2024; Dieter discloses the claimed gripping head to be movable in first, second, and third axes to be able to move between a store position to reach stacked blanks to a folding position, see for example (Figs. 1-5; via gripping heads 6 moving along with and/or in respect to punching frame 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified Aganovic’s forming/punching mechanism, to be movable in three different axes, as suggested by Dieter, in order to gain more flexibility and more adjustability in position the container and its flaps.
Further, it is noted that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284.
Regarding claims 2 & 22: Aganovic discloses that the grasping means (via 222) is mounted so as to be able to move in at least two degrees of freedom of movement parallel or substantially parallel to said bearing surface (Fig. 4; via movement of 222 in respect to 208; inherently cups 222 moves vertically to pick up blanks 10, the horizontally toward presser 208).
Regarding claims 11 & 23: Dieter discloses that the grasping means is incorporated into said punch, which is provided as partially hollow, see for example (Figs. 1-5; via the relationship between 8 and 6; forming and/or grasping mechanism).
Regarding claim 12: Dieter discloses that the grasping means is mounted at the end of a rod mounted in the manner of a ball-jointed connection with respect to the gripping head (via the shown mounting mechanism of 6/8).
Regarding claim 14: Aganovic further comprising a lock (Figs. 4 & 8; via “rollers (not shown)”; mechanically responsible of controlling of the movements and stopping of cups 222; equivalent to the claimed “lock”) for locking said grasping means (via 222) with respect to said punch (via the rollers mechanism is holding 222 in place or stopping it in respect to punch 250 to pick up and release blank 10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 11-12, 14, 17, and 21-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection modified to address the newly added limitations.
In respect to applicant’s argument that the applied art does not show the amended claims referring to the gripping head to be movable in three different axes, as set forth above. It is noted that Dieter ‘817 appears to suggest similar mechanism of having the gripping heads (via 6) to be movable along and/or with respect to the punching frame (via 8) in three different axes to move the blanks from the store position to the folding position, see for example (Figs. 1-5; via 6 & 8 mechanisms and their movements).
Conclusion
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached on 571-270-1926. 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