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
Newly submitted limitations directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
The newly added limitations to claim 14 referring to a “a printer” in combination of “a custom graphic” and “a digital image provided by a card purchaser for each respective preassembled greeting card blank” (apparatus) are distinct and different from the originally examined claim 14 referring only to a “greeting card blanks” (article).
It is noted that the article of the originally filed claims could be made by different apparatus, such as one without having the capability of customize the graphic of a digital image to be provided by a card purchaser for each respective preassembled greeting card blank. And/or the newly added apparatus limitations could be used to make another and different article, such as one with a customized graphic and digital printed images provided by a card purchaser.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, the newly added limitations to claim 14 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 14, 16, and 18-21 the best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Crowell (U.S. Patent No. 4,592,573).
Regarding claim 14: Crowell discloses a system comprising:
a plurality of “preassembled greeting card blanks” each of which comprises:
a front panel (Figs. 1 & 2; via panel 34) comprising a first outer card face, which comprises a front of the “preassembled greeting card blank” (via the outer face of panel 34), and comprising a first inner card face;
a back panel hingedly connected to the front panel along a first fold (via panel 36, along fold line 32) and comprising a second outer card face, which comprises a back of the “preassembled greeting card blank” (via the back surface of panel 36), and comprising a second inner card face; a protective panel hingedly connected to the front panel along a second fold (via panel 33, along fold line 31), the protective panel being movable, by hinging via the second fold, between a closed position and an open position, wherein, in the closed position, the protective panel overlays the front panel, and in the open position, the protective panel is splayed outward and apart from the front panel (via protective panel 33 in respect to the front panel 34); and
a 3D card element affixed to the “preassembled greeting card blank” (via segments 49 & 51), the 3D card element being contained between the front panel (via 34) and the protective panel (via 33) when the protective panel is in the closed position (Fig. 4);
an automated printing system “that receives a plurality of digital images from a plurality of computing devices and customizes” each of the “preassembled greeting cards blank” by (a) “selecting a respective one of the digital images” and (b) printing a graphic comprising a printed representation of the respective one of the digital images on the second inner card face of the “preassembled greeting card blank” while the protective panel is in the closed position with the 3D card element contained between the front panel and the protective panel, see for example (via “a foldable card or sheet which is conveniently inserted in and typed upon by a typewriter or computer printer”; inherently multiple cards will be operated upon in the “preassembled” blank 30).
Regarding claim 16: wherein the second fold is parallel to the first fold (via both folds 31 & 32 are parallel).
Regarding claim 18: wherein: the 3D card element is a pop-up structure affixed to at least one of the first inner card face or the protective panel; and the pop-up structure is collapsed when the protective panel is in the closed position, see for example (Figs. 1-4; via pop-up segments 49 & 51).
Regarding claim 19: wherein:
the plurality of “preassembled greeting card blanks” includes “a first preassembled greeting card blank” and “a second preassembled greeting card blank” that is identical to the first preassembled greeting card blank;
the plurality of digital images received from the plurality of “computing devices” includes “a first digital image” and “a second digital image” that is different from the first digital image;
the “first preassembled greeting card blank” is customized by (a) selecting the first digital image and (b) printing a first graphic comprising a printed representation of the first digital image on the second inner card face of the first preassembled greeting card blank while the protective panel is in the closed position with the 3D card element contained between the front panel and the protective panel; and
the “second preassembled greeting card blank” is customized by (a) selecting the second digital image and (b) printing a second graphic comprising a printed representation of the second digital image on the second inner card face of the second preassembled greeting card blank while the protective panel is in the closed position with the 3D card element contained between the front panel and the protective panel, see for example (Figs. 2-3; via each card is showing different customized segments “JUST A NOTE” or “ANNOUNCING” and/or the abilities of having different prints on whatever desired panel/side, “foldable card or sheet which is conveniently inserted in and typed upon by a typewriter or computer printer”; inherently the typing could be placed in any desired side and/or panel to print customized and different images).
Regarding claim 20: wherein the first digital image is received from “a first computing device” of a first card purchaser and the second digital image is received from “a second computing device” of a second card purchaser that is different from the first card purchaser, see for example (Figs. 2-3; via the shown different segments 37 and/or 49/51).
Regarding claim 21: wherein the front panel, the back panel, and the protective panel comprise an accordion fold structure, see for example (Figs. 14-17; via the shown fold structure appears to be “accordion” fold style).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 14, 16, and 18-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection modified to address the newly added limitations.
The newly added limitations filed on 06/05/2025 as set forth above are withdrawn as they are related to different invention than the one initially examined.
Per the conducted interview on 06/04/2025; it is noted that the originally filed claims (claim 14) on 06/07/2022 were broadly referring to “a card feeder” and “print head”, which are not the same as the latest filed amendment on 06/05/2025 referring to “print head automatedly printing…the custom graphic” and “a digital image provided by a card purchaser for each respective preassembled greeting card blank”.
As set forth above, the newly added limitations to claim 14 is completely referring to different invention (apparatus) in respect to the originally filed claim referring to article (the greeting card blanks). Therefore, those newly added limitations are withdrawn from any considerations and the previously filed art rejection on 04/04/2025 is maintained at latest in term of the arts rejection related to the claimed article.
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 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