DETAILED ACTION
The Office acknowledges receipt of the Applicant’s response filed 6 January 2026.
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 .
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-9 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonneville (US 2017/0355479 A1) hereinafter referred to as Bonneville ‘479 in view of Bonneville (US 2017/0313457 A1) hereinafter referred to as Bonneville ‘457.
Regarding claim 1, Bonneville ‘479 discloses a packaging material producing machine (2; fig. 1), comprising a transport device (8; paragraph 0020 – “A web transport conveyor…; see incorporated patents listed in paragraphs 0004-0006) being configured to guide and move a web of packaging material (paragraph 0020 – “lower and upper webs of flexible packaging material”), and a processing system (4 – closing or sealing station), wherein the processing system comprises a functional unit (14) connected (figs. 2-4) to the at least one carrier (7) and a positioning arrangement (6 and 22, 23, 24 and 38, 42, 44) that comprises a fixed support (22, 23, 24) and a bar (44) that is arranged and linearly moveable in parallel with said fixed support (figs. 4-6, Fixed support 22, 23, 24 and bar 44 move together in the same plane and are therefore deemed to move in parallel. The fixed support and bar are also deemed to have linear movement as both the bar and the end of the fixed support proceed linearly along the line shown in fig. 6.), the at least one carrier comprising an attachment device (paragraph 0007 – “clamping devices”) being configured to selectively attach the at least one carrier to only one of said fixed support and said bar.
Wherein the Applicant may argue that an attachment device is not explicitly disclosed in sufficient detail, the Office alternatively points to Bonneville ‘457 which is referenced in paragraph 0007 of Bonneville ‘479.
Bonneville ‘457 teaches an attachment device (30) being configured to selectively attach (fig. 5; paragraph 0024) the at least one carrier to only one of said fixed support (seen but not labeled in fig. 8) and said bar.
As suggested by paragraph 0007 of Bonneville ‘479, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to incorporate the attachment device of Bonneville ‘457 with the invention of Bonneville ‘479. Doing so would allow a user to remove and secure the forming station die as desired to change it out or access it for repair.
Regarding claim 2, Bonneville ‘479 discloses wherein the positioning arrangement (6 and 22, 23, 24 and 38, 42, 44) further comprises a linear drive unit (42) connected to the bar (44).
Regarding claim 6, Bonneville ‘479 discloses wherein the bar (44) is arranged at a vertical distance from the fixed support (fig. 5; 44 is located a vertical distance from the fixed position, 31, of fixed support 22, 23, 24)
Regarding claim 7, Bonneville ‘479 discloses wherein each carrier (7) has a vertical extension (top and side walls of 7) covering (figs. 2-4) the fixed support (22, 23, 24) and the bar (44).
Regarding claim 8, Bonneville ‘479 as modified by Bonneville ‘457 discloses wherein the attachment device (Bonneville ‘479 - paragraph 0007 – “clamping devices”; Bonneville ‘457 - 30) of each carrier (Bonneville ‘479 - 7; Bonneville ‘457 - 20) comprises a support locking unit and a bar locking unit (Bonneville ‘479 – 22, 23, 24, 44; Bonneville ‘457 - fig. 5; paragraph 0024). The combination of Bonneville ‘479 as modified by Bonneville ‘457 results in each carrier having plurality of attachment devices (clamping devices) which both lock the support and bar in place and are therefore deemed to comprise a support locking unit and a bar locking unit.
Regarding claim 9, Bonneville ‘479 as modified by Bonneville ‘457 discloses wherein the support locking unit and the bar locking unit (Bonneville ‘479 – 22, 23, 24, 44; Bonneville ‘457 - fig. 5; paragraph 0024) are controlled by a common actuator (Bonneville ‘457 - 40; paragraph 0028 – “a pivot rod 40 coupled to and extending between the plurality of clamping devices 30 such that the plurality of clamping devices 30 simultaneously pivot into and between the locked position (FIG. 6) and the unlocked position (FIG. 7)”).
Regarding claim 12, Bonneville ‘479 discloses herein the functional unit is selected from the group comprising a laser unit, a cutting unit (paragraph 0032 – “the concepts of the present disclosure are not limited to the particular example shown in the drawings. For instance, a die box(es) can be positioned at the forming station 3 to form the food product package in the lower web and/or the cutting station to cut the upper and lower webs into separate food product packages”), a cleaning unit, or a camera unit, or a printing unit.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 10-11 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant’s arguments are directed toward the new limitation which requires that the bar is arranged and linearly moveable in parallel with said fixed support. The Applicant argues that the fixed support is pivotable and therefore does not read on the linearly moveable limitation. The Office notes that the support (22, 23, 24) of Bonneville ‘479 is pivotable, but that it also moves in a linear direction along with the bar due to their connection at the end of bar (44). Given that there is a linear component to the movement, Bonneville is still deemed to broadly read on the claimed invention as written.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANDREW M TECCO whose telephone number is (571)270-3694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11a-7p.
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 at (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.
/ANDREW M TECCO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731