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 .
Application Status
This action is responsive to the claims filed 20 August 2023
Claims 1-8 are currently pending and being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 9 February 2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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 a box, flap, curved portion, means for completing the tucking in of said opened flap and for supporting a box moved therealong, means for initiating the tucking in, transferring means, horizontal guide member, stop bar member, plate, means for apply glue, locking means, plurality of apertures, and box packaging system 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.
Examiner notes that this is not a conclusive list of all claimed subject matter not shown in the drawings, Applicant should thoroughly review the claims and drawings to ensure all claimed subject matter is shown.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 1: lines 4-5 recites “means for completing the tucking in of said opened flap and for supporting a box moved therealong”. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function.
Claim 1: lines 7-8 recites “means for initiating the tucking in of said opened flap by”. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function.
Claim 1: lines 9-10 recite “transferring means for transferring said open box from said entrance through said downstream portion”. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function. The specification does state “the transferring means comprises a horizontal guide member and stop bar member disposed parallel to the plate such that the distance between the horizontal guide member and the stop bar member is slightly bigger than the box width.” However, the specification fails to show how these two parts perform the action of transferring, they are merely two distinct members that are not even required to be part of the device.
Claim 1: lines 11-12 recite “engaging means (107) for subsequently tucking any partially tucked pair of flaps”. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function.
Claim 5: lines 2-3 recite “a means for applying glue to said opened flap disposed below said downstream portion”. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function.
Claim 6: line 2 recites “a locking means for locking the flaps of said tucked box”. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-8 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.
Claim 1, lines 2-3 recites “a drive track (101) having an entrance portion (103) for receiving and engaging an open flap of said box which merges through a gradually curved portion to a downstream portion”, it is unclear how the open flap of a box merges through something. Merge is defined as “to cause to combine, unite, or coalesce” (Merriam-Webster). The flap is not combined with something else, therefore it is unclear what is trying to be claimed.
Claim 1, line 3 recites “said box”, is this the same open box previously recited on line 1. Examiner will interpret as “said open box” for clarity.
Claim 1, lines 4-6 recites “means for completing the tucking in of said opened flap and for supporting a box moved therealong”, is this the same open box previously recited on line 1. Examiner will interpret as “said open box” for clarity. Also, “therealong” is not a word, Examiner is not sure how to interpret this limitation.
Claim 1, lines 7-8 recite “wherein said curved portion comprises means for initiating the tucking in of said opened flap by”, this is an incomplete statement because nothing follows by and it is unclear what the Applicant is trying to claim.
Claim 1, line 9 recites “said entrance”, which lacks antecedent basis. Examiner will interpret as “an entrance”.
Claim 1, lines 11-22 recite “engaging means (107) for subsequently tucking any partially tucked pair of flaps”, is unclear because lines 4-5 already claimed a means for completing the tucking in, therefore there should not be any partially tucked flaps. Therefore, Examiner is not sure how to interpret this limitation.
Claim 1, lines 11-12 recites “tucking any partially tucked pair of flaps”, the claim only refers to the box only having one singular open flap, it is unclear how there is now two pair of flaps. Referring to the applicant’s drawings there is only one drive track, so it is unclear how a single drive track can subsequentially tuck another flap if there are two.
Claim 2, lines 2, 3, and 4 recites “said plate”, “the distance”, and “said box width”, which lack antecedent basis. Examiner will interpret as “a plate”, “a distance”, and “a box width”.
Claim 2, lines 2-4 recites “comprises a horizontal guide member and stop bar member disposed parallel to said plate such that the distance between said horizontal guide member and said stop bar member is slightly bigger than said box width”, which is unclear because the specification and the drawings do not show these claim limitations. Therefore, Examiner is not sure how to interpret this limitation because they seem like independent members that are not part of the invention.
Claim 3, lines 1-2 recite “said transferring means prevents the unwanted movement of said box”, which is unclear because the specification and the drawings do not show these claim limitations and how they prevent unwanted movement. Also, “the unwanted movement” lacks antecedent basis, Examiner will interpret as “unwanted movement”.
Claim 7, line 2 recites “an open flap”, which lacks antecedent basis. Examiner will interpret as “the open flap”.
Claim limitation “means for completing the tucking in of said opened flap and for supporting a box moved therealong”, “means for initiating the tucking in of said opened flap by”, “transferring means for transferring said open box from said entrance through said downstream portion”, “engaging means (107) for subsequently tucking any partially tucked pair of flaps”, “a means for applying glue to said opened flap disposed below said downstream portion”, and “a locking means for locking the flaps of said tucked box”, invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim, the structure described in the specification does not perform the entire function in the claim, and/or no association between the structure and the function can be found in the specification. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Examiner notes that this is not a conclusive list of all possible 112(b) issues, Applicant should thoroughly review the claims for additional 112(b) issues, which include antecedent basis and clarity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carruth (US 2,270,264).
Carruth teaches:
Claim 1: A device (100) for closing an open box (Title: “Method and Apparatus for closing and sealing Paperboard boxes and Cartons”) comprising:
a drive track (101) (at least 95,96,67,99,98,100-fig.15A) having an entrance portion (103) (A-annotated fig.15A) for receiving and engaging an open flap (10,12-fig.15A) of said box (page 5, 1st column, line 43-page 5, 2nd column line 4) which merges through a gradually curved portion (B-annotated fig.15A) to a downstream portion (105) (C-annotated fig.15A) which comprises means for completing the tucking in of said opened flap (page 5, 1st column, line 43-page 5, 2nd column line 4) and for supporting a box moved along (see fig.15A showing the box being supported as it moves through 95);
wherein said curved portion comprises means for initiating the tucking in of said opened flap by (see annotated fig.15A showing the flap 10,12 being fed left to right from an opened position to a closed position pass through the curved portions B);
transferring means (at least 83,75-fig.9A) for transferring said open box from said entrance through said downstream portion (page 4, 2nd column, line70-page 5, 1st column, line 42; see fig. 9a showing the ox being transferred on belt 75 from opened to closed): and
engaging means (107) (98-fig.15A) for subsequently tucking any partially tucked pair of flaps (see fig.15A showing flap 10 and then flap 12 being folded).
Claim 2: The device as claimed in claim 1, wherein said transferring means comprises a horizontal guide member (83-fig.9) and stop bar member (left 84-fig.11A) disposed parallel to a plate (right 84-fig.11A) such that the distance between said horizontal guide member and said stop bar member is slightly bigger than said box width (see fig.11A showing the box (2) located between the left and right 84, therefore the distance is slightly bigger than the box width).
Claim 3: The device as claimed in claim 1, wherein said transferring means prevents the unwanted movement of said box (This limitation is intended use; therefore, the prior art merely needs to be capable of doing this action. As shown in fig. 11A the box is closely held between 84, thus preventing unwanted movement of the box).
Claim 4: The device as claimed in claim 2, wherein said box travels over said horizontal guide member (see fig.9 showing box 2 is traveling over a lower 83).
Claim 5: The device as claimed in claim 1 (Examiner notes that the use of “optionally” means anything after the word is not required by the claim).
Claim 6: The device as claimed in claim1 (Examiner notes that the use of “optionally” means anything after the word is not required by the claim).
Claim 8: The device as claimed in claim 1 (Examiner notes that the use of “can be” means anything after the word is not required by the claim).
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, 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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carruth (US 2,270,264) in view of Hinzmann (US 5,442,897).
Carruth teaches:
Claim 7: The device as claimed in claim 1.
Carruth does not expressly teach wherein said entrance portion for receiving and engaging an open flap of said box comprises a plurality of apertures for blowing compressed air; wherein said plurality of apertures reduce the damage to the open flaps of said box by reducing the friction.
However, Hinzmann teaches said entrance portion (left side of 18-figs.1 and 5) for receiving and engaging an open flap of a container (11-fig.1) comprises a plurality of apertures (62-fig.5) for blowing compressed air (11:40-44); wherein said plurality of apertures reduce the damage to the open flaps of said box by reducing the friction (This limitation is intended use; therefore, the prior art merely needs to be capable of doing this action. 6:8-19; 11:40-44; 13:42-52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Carruth, by adding compressed air holes to the folding device, as taught by Hinzmann, “in order to reduce friction” between a folding device/mandrel and a web/container. (Hinzmann 11:43).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATIE L GERTH whose telephone number is (303)297-4602. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-4pm (CT).
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, Shelley Self can be reached at (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.
/KATIE L GERTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731