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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 21 August 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-10 and 13-19 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 18 and 19 do not overcome the U.S.C. 103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 21 August 2026, with respect to the U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, 4, 6-10 and 13-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection has newly cited references teaching the amended claim.
Applicant Remarks
Applicant remarks that, under the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) standard, claim terms must be interpreted consistent with the specification as they would be understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA). See MPEP § 2111; Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2005). In the Office Action, the Examiner asserted that "impurities" encompasses "non- uniformities/defects in the film that manifest as measurable deviations in mechanical response during controlled stretching (e.g., localized stiffness/tension variations)." The Examiner then mapped Riemenschneider's bulk stiffness and force measurements to the claimed "measuring impurities" step. Applicant respectfully submits that this construction is technically and legally incorrect. A POSITA in polymer film manufacturing and testing clearly distinguishes between:
1. Bulk mechanical properties (e.g., stiffness, elasticity, average tension), which characterize the performance of the entire moving film web; and
2. Discrete, localized physical impurities (e.g., gels, voids, black specks, or foreign inclusions), which are localized structural defects.
Measuring a bulk mechanical response is not equivalent to measuring a discrete localized impurity. A film can experience variations in winding stiffness due to temperature, polymer density, or average thickness variations without any "impurities" being present.
To resolve this issue, independent Claims 1 and 9 have been amended to explicitly define the impurities as: "...discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions..." This amendment is fully supported by the Specification as filed (page 3, lines 15- 26) and directly incorporates the Examiner's own admission on page 4 of the Office Action.
Examiner Responses
Examiner agrees that "impurities" encompasses "non- uniformities/defects in the film that manifest as measurable deviations in mechanical response during controlled stretching (e.g., localized stiffness/tension variations)”. However, this does not limit impurities to being localized, but rather the term “impurities” simply includes localized impurities. “Impurities” by itself is a broad term, and the Applicant’s amendments do address this, overcoming the previous U.S.C. 103 rejections from the previous office action.
Examiner agrees that measuring a bulk mechanical response is not equivalent to measuring a discrete localized impurity, and the Applicant’s amendments do address this, overcoming the previous U.S.C. 103 rejections from the previous office action.
However, a new U.S.C. 112 issue arises with the claim amendments. The amendments do seem to further limit the term “impurities” to successfully overcome the previous U.S.C. 103 rejections from the previous office action. However, Examiner respectfully points out that the Specification does not appear to support the amendments of claims 1 and 9. Please see Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 below for more details.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 18 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 18 and 19 on line 1, “(previously presented)” should be corrected to say –(Currently Amended)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4, 6-10 and 13-19 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.
As to claims 1 and 9: Regarding the section Support for Claim Amendments and New Claims from the Applicant Remarks: Applicant remarks that Specification page 3 lines 15-26 and page 1 line 22 to page 2 line 2 contain support for the amendment “discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions”.
Examiner respectfully points out that the sections mentioned by the Applicant (from the Specification filed 3 August 2023) merely state, “Impurities in the raw material have a particularly significant influence on the stretchability of the film… the number and the type of impurities in the recycled plastic is variable” (page 1 line 22 to page 2 line 2) and “Because film is typically translucent, the line light can be placed behind the line camera so that impurities are outlined sharply in the camera. Tests have shown that this setup is optimal for detecting impurities in a film using a camera” (page 3 lines 15-26). Respectfully, Examiner remarks that, although the amendment “discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions” is not taught by Riemenschneider, it does not have support in the Specification.
These sections of the Specification cited by the Applicant support that the impurities can be in the raw material and influence film stretchability. The sections also support that the impurities can be in the recycled plastic and the number and the type of impurities can be variable. The sections also mention contaminants in the film that have higher opacity than the film itself, and it can be deduced that the impurities can be contaminants in the film. Thus, the sections support that the impurities are physical impurities.
However, the Specification does not support “discrete, localized physical impurities”. The cited sections do not mention that the impurities are specifically discrete nor localized. The Specification does not mention these terms –“discrete”, “localized”—anywhere. From Merriam-Webster: “Discrete” means “a separate entity or item” or “individually distinct”. From Merriam-Webster: “Localized” means “restricted to a specific or limited area”. The cited sections of the Specification do not necessarily limit impurities to being discrete or localized. Merely, the impurities can be in raw material, can be in recycled plastic, or can be contaminants – which all can be non-discrete and non-localized under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Further, the Specification does not support the “impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions”. The Specification does not mention these terms –“gel”, “void”, “thin-spot”, “inclusion”—anywhere.
Therefore, the limitation from claims 1 and 9 fails to comply with the written description requirement: “discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions”.
Claims 2, 4, 6-8, 10 and 13-19 are rejected in view of their dependencies.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1, 2, 8-10 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riemenschneider et al. (US 20170088301 A1), hereinafter Riemenschneider, in view of Kastner (US20180100848A1).
As to claims 1 and 9, Riemenschneider teaches a method and an apparatus for testing a stretch film (abstract; the method of wrapping a load with a stretch wrapping system utilizes a system for monitoring film properties and a module for analyzing the data or film properties), comprising:
- unwinding a roll of stretch film in an unwinding station ([0039]; fig. 8; the film 30 moves from the spindle 112 into the pre-stretch section 114, thus being unwound);
- successive throughfeeding through a first stretching station and a second stretching station for controlling respectively a first stretch and a second stretch ([0039]; fig. 8; the film 30 passes through a first prestretch roller 150 and a second prestretch roller 152, where the film can be stretched at different rates, i.e. a first stretch and a second stretch) according to a predetermined first and second stretch pattern ([0067]; The stretch patterns are described by Riemenschneider as the rates at which the stretch film is paid out from the rollers is in accordance with the tension amounts. There are implicitly a first and a second stretch pattern (tension amounts) because there are a first stretch and a second stretch (rates of stretching)) until a predetermined result is achieved ([0026]; The predetermined result is described by Riemenschneider as content of the result 104 specifically regarding potential qualities. The content of the result 104 may be reference data, scores, written descriptions, or any other information to describe the properties of the wrapping pattern's current, past, or potential qualities. [0034]; The controller 50 determines the film characteristics, such as film stiffness, and then assigns the settings for a particular wrap pattern based on the film characteristics. The sensors 60, 62 (equivalent to sensors 140, 142, 170 in fig. 8) monitor the wrapping to ensure that the determined wrapping pattern is accurately executed, and that the film properties are as expected at the current moment and over time. Thus, the predetermined result is described by Riemenschneider as the particular wrap pattern/ determined wrapping pattern).
Further, Riemenschneider teaches - measuring mechanical changes in the stretch film (claims 1-2; The method of applying a stretch film wrap to a load comprising receiving data about the stiffness of the film, which includes information about a dimensional change and a force. The impurities are taught by Riemenschneider as the data showing dimensional changes to the film, i.e. changes from its pure state prior to stretch);
and - correlating the measured mechanical changes to the predetermined result ([0034]; The controller 50 determines the film characteristics, such as film stiffness, and then assigns the settings for a particular wrap pattern based on the film characteristics. The sensors 60, 62 (equivalent to sensors 140, 142, 170 in fig. 8) monitor the wrapping to ensure that the determined wrapping pattern is accurately executed, and that the film properties are as expected at the current moment and over time. Thus, the measured impurities, i.e. the stiffness of the film including a dimensional change and a force, are correlated to the predetermined result, i.e. the result 104 specifically regarding potential qualities, which comprises the wrap pattern).
However, Riemenschneider does not explicitly disclose – measuring discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions in the stretch film, wherein the measuring of the discrete, localized physical impurities is performed by a line camera placed in one of the unwinding station, first stretching station, and second stretching station, and a line light placed opposite the line camera such that the stretch film runs between the line camera and the line light; and- correlating the measured discrete, localized physical impurities to the predetermined result.
Kastner, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches – measuring discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions in the stretch film (Kastner claim 1; “Device for in-line quality checking for plastics during the production process, comprising… measuring devices for detecting inclusions and gel particles and the like”),
wherein the measuring of the discrete, localized physical impurities is performed by a line camera (Kastner [0019]; “inclusions and gel particles are detected by means of a high-resolution area camera or line camera”) placed in one of the unwinding station, first stretching station, and second stretching station (Kastner [0030]-[0031]; “The torque required for the stretching is measured and an equivalent to the modulus of elasticity (E-modulus) is computed therefrom. The stretching can be executed in this case via two roller pairs, which run at different speeds, or via a combination of two roller pairs which run identically, and a stretching roller arranged in between, which changes the web path during a measurement”. Fig. 1; [0038]-[0040]; “a casting roller 5 into a flat film 6 and guided via deflection rollers to the first visual check by means of an area camera 7 [which can be a line camera] for recognizing inclusions and gel particles… The middle strip is stretched between two roller pairs 11, 12”. Thus, the camera 7, which can be a line camera, is placed in the housing 1 of the stretching station),
and a line light placed opposite the line camera such that the stretch film runs between the line camera and the line light (Kastner; [0021]; “The illumination of the film is expediently performed via a dome light and two ring lights arranged in parallel above and below the film to be able to measure both in the reflection mode and also in the transmission mode. However, line, bar, or area illumination units can also be used”. Thus, the line illumination unit must be opposite the line camera such that the stretch film runs between the line camera and the line illumination unit in order to illuminate the film);
and- correlating the measured discrete, localized physical impurities to the predetermined result (Kastner [0019]; “ inclusions and gel particles are… analysed on the basis of suitable analysis software, which recognizes the size, shape, and location of the inclusions and flaws and can assign them into classes. The recognition of the flaws takes place in this case via grey scale or colour changes of individual pixels of the recorded image”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider to incorporate the teachings of Kastner to include – measuring discrete, localized physical impurities comprising at least one of gels, voids, thin-spots, and foreign inclusions in the stretch film, wherein the measuring of the discrete, localized physical impurities is performed by a line camera placed in one of the unwinding station, first stretching station, and second stretching station, and a line light placed opposite the line camera such that the stretch film runs between the line camera and the line light; and- correlating the measured discrete, localized physical impurities to the predetermined result; for the advantage of analysis of localized properties during the production process to be able to engage in the production process in a timely manner for quality enhancement (Kastner [0004]).
PNG
media_image1.png
1449
1003
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Riemenschneider Fig. 8
PNG
media_image2.png
817
698
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kastner Fig. 1
As to claim 2, Riemenschneider teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined first and second stretch patterns ([0067]; The stretch patterns are described by Riemenschneider as the rates at which the stretch film is paid out from the rollers is in accordance with the tension amounts) are related to one of a tensile test ([0050]; The data signals can be sent to the controller 50 to determine a current tension of the stretch film 30. With this information, the actuator 160 can be operated to increase or decrease the film payout speed, i.e. the predetermined first and second stretch patterns) and a consistency test (fig. 8; [0005]-[0006]; [0049]; The force to the film between the prestretch rollers 150, 152 can be measured. [0019]; Measurements of the determined force can be utilized to determine the stiffness, relative stiffness, strength, or relative strength of the film being applied to the load. Thus, a consistency is tested. As known in the art, the force applied is related to the film payout speed, i.e. the first and second stretch patterns)
and the predetermined result relates to a force in the stretch film under a predetermined stretch or fracture (claims 1-2; The method of applying a stretch film wrap to a load comprising receiving data about the stiffness of the film, which includes information about a dimensional change and a force. [0005]-[0006]; fig. 4; Determining a wrapping pattern for the load is based at least in part on the stiffness of the film. The controller is configured to receive data about stiffness of the film and to determine a wrap pattern for the load based at least in part on the stiffness data. Thus, the result 104 specifically regarding potential qualities (i.e. the predetermined result) relates to the force in the film under the wrap pattern),
and wherein the method further comprises measuring the force in the stretch film under at least one of the first stretch and the second stretch ([0049]; fig. 8; The force of film passing over any roller can be measured. Thus, the force in the film under at least one of the first stretch and the second stretch is measured; i.e. at prestretch roller 150, 152).
PNG
media_image3.png
773
592
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Riemenschneider Fig. 4
As to claim 8, Riemenschneider teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising producing the stretch film and winding up the stretch film onto a spool ([0035]; [0040]; fig. 8; The stretch film 30 is produced in the system from the spindle 112 and film platform 28 (right hand side of fig. 8), then winded up onto the load 32 on the turntable 12 (left hand side of fig. 8, not pictured) following the non-powered roller 136),
wherein production impurities in the produced stretch film are measured before the winding up ([0040]; The first sensor 140 can take measurements of the film 30 passing over the first non-powered roller 120. The second sensor 142, can take measurement of the film 30 passing through the second non-powered roller 136. [0033]; The production impurities are described by Riemenschneider as the minimized load failure, load damage, and film failure. [0023]; The system collects this data and stores it in memory 54)
and wherein a quality label is assigned to the spool based on the correlation of the measuring impurities and the production impurities ([0026]; fig. 4; The result 104 is representative of a determination or calculation made by the program. The content of the result 104 may be reference data, scores, written descriptions, or any other information to describe the properties of the wrapping pattern's current, past, or potential qualities. Therefore, the quality label is described by Riemenschneider as the result 104 specifically regarding current qualities. [0034]; The correlation is described by Riemenschneider to be wherein the measured impurities, i.e. the stiffness of the film including a dimensional change and a force, are correlated to the predetermined result, i.e. the result 104 regarding potential qualities, which comprises the wrap pattern. [0033]; The production impurities are described by Riemenschneider as the minimized load failure, load damage, and film failure. Thus, the result 104 assigned to the load 32 is based on the content of the result 104 specifically regarding current qualities: the correlation and the production impurities).
However, Riemenschneider does not explicitly disclose the impurities are discrete, localized physical impurities.
Kastner, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches the impurities are discrete, localized physical impurities (Kastner [0019]; “inclusions and gel particles are detected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider to incorporate the teachings of Kastner to include the impurities are discrete, localized physical impurities; for the advantage of analysis of localized properties during the production process to be able to engage in the production process in a timely manner for quality enhancement (Kastner [0004]).
As to claim 10, Riemenschneider teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the second stretching station comprises a winding mechanism for winding up the stretch film which was fed through the apparatus ([0039]; fig. 8; the second prestretch roller 152 comprises a winding mechanism depicted in fig. 8 as the circular shape which rotates, i.e. winds, the film 30 being fed through the system).
As to claim 15, Riemenschneider teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the measuring device in the first stretching station is placed close to a first zone where the stretch film enters the first stretching station or close to a second zone where the stretch film exits the first stretching station ([0025]; [0056]; fig. 8; The sensors 140, 142, 170 can be configured to measure dimensional changes in the film 30. The sensors 140, 142, 170 are placed closer to the second zone, i.e. where the film 30 exits the prestretch roller 150, in comparison to the first zone, i.e. where the film 30 enters the prestretch roller 150).
As to claim 16, Riemenschneider teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the first stretching station and the second stretching station are provided with respectively a first force measuring device and a second force measuring device for measuring the force on the film in the relevant stretching station ([0034]; The controller 50 determines the film characteristics, such as film stiffness, including a dimensional change and a force, and then assigns the settings for a particular wrap pattern based on the film characteristics. The sensors 60, 62 (equivalent to sensors 140, 142, 170 in fig. 8) monitor the wrapping to ensure that the determined wrapping pattern is accurately executed, and that the film properties are as expected at the current moment and over time. [0039]; fig. 8; Thus, the sensors 60, 62 (equivalent to sensors 140, 142, 170 in fig. 8) measure the force on the film 30 in the stretching stations, including where the film 30 passes through a first prestretch roller 150 and a second prestretch roller 152).
As to claim 17, Riemenschneider teaches the apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the predetermined result is based on the force measured in the film (claims 1-2; The method of applying a stretch film wrap to a load comprising receiving data about the stiffness of the film, which includes information about a dimensional change and a force. [0005]-[0006]; fig. 4; Determining a wrapping pattern for the load is based at least in part on the stiffness of the film. The controller is configured to receive data about stiffness of the film and to determine a wrap pattern for the load based at least in part on the stiffness data. Thus, the result 104 specifically regarding potential qualities (i.e. the predetermined result) relates to the force in the film under the wrap pattern).
As to claims 18 and 19, Riemenschneider teaches the method according to claim 1 and the apparatus according to claim 9 for testing a stretch film wherein the step of measuring impurities in the stretch film includes measuring a number of the impurities in the stretch film ([0025]; for example, there are two dimensional changes measured: stretch and force) over a length and a width of the stretch film ([0027]; “The display 80 can include more or less inputs 108, or alternative inputs 108 such as, but not limited to, the three-dimensional representations of the load 32 such as length, width, and height, the stacking pattern, the shipping method, the phase of load, such as solid or liquid, the film stiffness, and the film force per layer”).
Further, Riemenschneider ([0038]–[0040], [0056], [0058], FIGS. 7–8) discloses sensors counting/measuring film length, rate, force and storing film performance characteristics. A person of ordinary skill would have readily employed known optical/vision or particle-detection sensors to quantify the number, size, and spatial distribution of impurities in a film web as part of routine inspection. Given Riemenschneider’s explicit encouragement of collecting and analyzing film performance/quality data and using that data in controller decision-making (Fig. 6; [0033]–[0036]), measuring number, size and distribution of impurities and correlating them to results would have been an obvious and predictable modification.
However, Riemenschneider does not explicitly disclose wherein the step of measuring the discrete, localized physical impurities in the stretch film includes measuring a size and a distribution of the discrete, localized physical impurities in the stretch film.
Kastner, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the step of measuring the discrete, localized physical impurities in the stretch film includes measuring a size and a distribution of the discrete, localized physical impurities in the stretch film (Kastner [0019]; the analysis software “recognizes the size, shape, and location of the inclusions and flaws and can assign them into classes”; i.e. the size and distribution).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider to incorporate the teachings of Kastner to include wherein the step of measuring the discrete, localized physical impurities in the stretch film includes measuring a size and a distribution of the discrete, localized physical impurities in the stretch film; for the advantage of analysis of localized properties during the production process to be able to engage in the production process in a timely manner for quality enhancement (Kastner [0004]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riemenschneider in view of Kastner, further in view of McCarty et al. (US11313879B2), hereinafter McCarty.
As to claim 4, Riemenschneider teaches the method according to claim 1.
However, Riemenschneider in view of Kastner does not explicitly disclose wherein an image recording frequency of the line camera is operatively coupled to one of the unwinding station, first stretching station and second stretching station, such that the image recording frequency is substantially directly proportional to a throughfeed speed of the stretch film in the relevant station.
McCarty, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein an image recording frequency of the line camera is operatively coupled to one of the unwinding station, first stretching station and second stretching station (McCarty fig. 7A-7B; high-speed video can be captured from above the clamp system 60, i.e. the stretching station, as it closes on the film sample, wherein the stretch is shown in the initial and final frames of the video in fig. 7A-7B), such that the image recording frequency is substantially directly proportional to a throughfeed speed of the stretch film in the relevant station (McCarty col. 7 lines 1-14; fig. 7A-7B; The video is captured starting before the clamp system 60 closes the film sample, and ending after the clamp system 60 closes the film sample. Thus, the image recording frequency is substantially directly proportional to the throughfeed speed of the stretch film. Specifically, the frequency of the video recording increases as the throughfeed speed of the stretching increases).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider in view of Kastner to incorporate the teachings of McCarty to include wherein an image recording frequency of the line camera is operatively coupled to one of the unwinding station, first stretching station and second stretching station, such that the image recording frequency is substantially directly proportional to a throughfeed speed of the stretch film in the relevant station; for the advantage of testing efficacy of the stretching system (McCarty col. 7 lines 1-5).
PNG
media_image4.png
1257
602
media_image4.png
Greyscale
McCarty Fig. 7A-7B
Claims 6, 7, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riemenschneider in view of Kastner and McCarty, further in view of Xue et al. (CN-110726633-A), hereinafter Xue.
As to claims 6 and 13, Riemenschneider in view of Kastner does not explicitly disclose wherein the line light is provided to generate light pulses of a predetermined length and intensity at a predetermined light pulse frequency, and wherein the predetermined light pulse frequency of the line light is operatively coupled to the one of the unwinding station, first stretching station and second stretching station, such that the predetermined light pulse frequency is substantially directly proportional to a throughfeed speed of the stretch film in the relevant station.
McCarty, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the light is operatively coupled to the one of the unwinding station, first stretching station and second stretching station (McCarty fig. 5; fig. 7A-7B; The light 18A enters the high-speed video camera 18B, where the video is captured from above the clamp system 60, i.e. the stretching station, as it closes on the film sample, wherein the stretch is shown in the initial and final frames of the video in fig. 7A-7B. Thus, the light is operatively coupled to the stretching station), such that the light is substantially directly proportional to a throughfeed speed of the stretch film in the relevant station (McCarty col. 7 lines 1-14; fig. 5; fig. 7A-7B; The light 18A enters the camera 18B. The camera captures the video starting before the clamp system 60 closes the film sample, and ending after the clamp system 60 closes the film sample. Thus, the light is substantially directly proportional to the throughfeed speed of the stretch film. Specifically, the light duration increases as the throughfeed speed of the stretching increases).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider in view of Kastner to incorporate the teachings of McCarty to include wherein the light is operatively coupled to the one of the unwinding station, first stretching station and second stretching station such that the light is substantially directly proportional to a throughfeed speed of the stretch film in the relevant station; for the advantage of testing efficacy of the stretching system (McCarty col. 7 lines 1-5).
Still lacking the limitation such as wherein the line light is provided to generate light pulses of a predetermined length and intensity at a predetermined light pulse frequency.
Xue, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the line light is provided to generate light pulses of a predetermined length and intensity at a predetermined light pulse frequency (Xue fig. 2; page 15 lines 13-19; The image capture system comprises the steps of setting the current pulse duration of the light source controller 10 to the LED lamp 9, and setting exposure duration T (i.e. length) and frequency F of the industrial camera 7. The line light is described by Xue as the pulse trigger signal, which generates the light pulses to the industrial camera 7 at a predetermined duration and frequency relative to a speed of rotation. LED lamps emit light at an intensity inherent to the light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider in view of Kastner and McCarty to incorporate the teachings of Xue to include wherein the line light is provided to generate light pulses of a predetermined length and intensity at a predetermined light pulse frequency; for the advantage of controlling when data is collected in a high-speed environment (Xue page 15 lines 3-9).
PNG
media_image5.png
1603
952
media_image5.png
Greyscale
McCarty Fig. 5
PNG
media_image6.png
667
668
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Xue Fig. 2
As to claims 7 and 14, Riemenschneider in view of McCarty does not explicitly disclose wherein the line light and the line camera are operatively coupled such that the image recording frequency is substantially synchronous to the light pulse frequency.
Xue, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the line light and the line camera are operatively coupled such that the image recording frequency is substantially synchronous to the light pulse frequency (Xue page 15 lines 3-4; If and only when the LED light 9 emits light, the photosensitive element of the industrial camera 7 receives 3 the light signal, converts the light signal into an image signal, and transmits it to the computer 13 through the data line. Thus, industrial camera 7 image recording frequency and the LED light 9 pulse frequency are in synch. Therefore, the line light and the line camera are operatively coupled such that the image recording frequency is substantially synchronous to the light pulse frequency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Riemenschneider in view of Kastner and McCarty to incorporate the teachings of Xue to include wherein the line light and the line camera are operatively coupled such that the image recording frequency is substantially synchronous to the light pulse frequency; for the advantage of increased control over the system (Xue page 15 lines 3-4).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEMAYA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 5:00pm ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. 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.
/KEMAYA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877 /TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
