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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, claims 25-46, 48, and 49 in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 47 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/11/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 25 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“device with” in line 4 should read “device comprising”.
“and comprises” in line 4 should read “having”.
“and with” in line 6 should read “and comprising”.
“substance,” in line 7 should read “substance;”.
“device,” in line 9 should read “device;”.
“filled,” in line 11 should read “filled;”.
“or at exactly one interface position,” in lines 12-13 should be omitted (because it is already covered in “at least one interface position” and is therefore redundant).
“first type of” in line 14 should read “first type from”.
“second type of” in line 14 should read “second type from”.
Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informality: “which is” in line 2 should read “is”.
Claim 29 is objected to because of the following informality: “apparatus is” in line 1 should read “transport device” (because it is apparent from Figure 1 of the instant application that the entire apparatus 10 is not arranged on frame 56 of the filling device 14).
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“of the feed units, the first feed unit or the second feed unit, are” in line 3 should read “of the first feed unit or the second feed unit are”.
“frames” in line 5 should read “frame and the second frame”.
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“the respectively other feed unit, the second feed unit or the first feed unit, are” in line 3 should read “the other of the first feed unit or the second feed unit are”.
“this other feed unit” in line 4 should read “the other of the first feed unit or the second feed unit”.
“frames” in line 5 should read “second and third frames”.
Claim 35 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“the distance” in line 4 should read “a distance”.
“receptacles” in line 5 should read “receptacles from one another”.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“station at” in line 2 should read “station arranged at”.
“elements;” in line 5 should read “elements; or”.
“the respective” in line 6 should read “each respective”.
Claim 37 is objected to because of the following informality: “the frame” in line 2 should read “the at least one frame”.
Claim 41 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“containers and a second” in line 2 should read “containers, a second”.
“or at exactly one further interface position and” in lines 12-13 should be omitted (because it is already covered in “at least one further interface position” and is therefore redundant).
Claim 43 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a fourth frame” in line 2 should read “a first frame” (because first, second, and third frames were not previously recited).
“of the removal units, the first removal unit or the second removal unit, are” in lines 3-4 should read “of the first removal unit or the second removal unit are”.
“the frames” in line 5 should read “the first and second frames”.
Claim 44 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a fifth frame” in line 2 should read “a third frame” (to be consistent with the changes proposed for claim 43).
“the fourth frame” in line 2 should read “the first frame” (to be consistent with the changes proposed for claim 43).
“the respective other removal unit, the second removal unit or the first removal unit, are” in lines 3-4 should read “the other of the first removal unit or the second removal unit are”.
“this further removal unit” in line 4 should read “the other of the first removal unit or the second removal unit”.
“the frames” in line 5 should read “the first and third frames”.
Claim 46 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“the respective” in line 3 should read “each respective”.
“a closing element” in line 3 should read “closing elements”.
“to the already” in line 3 should read “to already”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 39, 40, 43, 44, 48, and 49 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 39 recites the limitation "the frame" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a frame”.
Claim 40 recites the limitation "the frame" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a frame”.
Claim 43 recites the limitation "the frame" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a second frame” (see objections to claim 43 above).
Claim 48 recites the limitation "the carriers" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “the common carrier”.
Claim 49 recites the limitation "the removal direction" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a removal direction”.
Claim 49 recites the limitation "the distance of the containers" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a distance of the containers”.
Claim 49 recites the limitation "the distance of the container receptacles" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a distance between container receptacles of the transport device”.
Claim 49 recites the limitation "the distance from one another in a common carrier" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “a target distance of the containers from one another in a common carrier”.
Claim 44 is rejected as being indefinite because it depends from claim 43.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 27 fails to include all the limitations of claim 25 upon which it depends because it recites the limitation “the coupling element is or forms the interface element” in line 6 while claim 25 lists the “coupling element” and the “interface element” as two different structural elements. Thus, claim 27 fails to include the limitation of claim 25 that the “coupling element” and the “interface element” are two different structural elements since claim 27 states that they are the same structural element. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 42 fails to include all the limitations of claim 41 upon which it depends because it recites the limitation “the decoupling element is or forms the further interface element” in line 6 while claims 41 and 25 together list the “decoupling element” and the “further interface element” as two different structural elements. Thus, claim 42 fails to include the limitation of claim 41 that the “decoupling element” and the “further interface element” are two different structural elements since claims 41 and 25 together state that they are the same structural element. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 25-28, 30, 32, and 35-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trilli et al. (US 2018/0162572), hereinafter Trilli, in view of Poeschl et al. (US 2020/0346394), hereinafter Poeschl.
Regarding claim 25, Trilli discloses an apparatus (1 in Figures 1-5) for filling pharmaceutical containers (A in Figure 6) of different types (1 is suitable for this intended use), wherein the containers (A) comprise syringes (Paragraph 0037), the apparatus (1) comprising:
a filling device (2 in Figures 1-5) with a transport device (13, C, and E collectively in Figure 1) and comprises holding elements (C and E) for the containers (A) which are movable along a transport direction (horizontal left-to-right direction in Figure 1) from a coupling side (left side in Figure 1) to a decoupling side (right side in Figure 1) of the transport device (13) (Paragraph 0065, 0066, and 0039-0044), and with at least one processing station (7, 8, 15, and 16 in Figure 1) for the containers (A), which comprises a filling station (7 in Figure 1), arranged at the transport device (13), for filling the containers (A) with a pharmaceutical substance (the “substance” described in Paragraphs 0054-0056 and 0079) (0054-0056 and 0079); and
a coupling element (15 on the right side of Figure 1) for transferring the containers (A) to the transport device (13) and a decoupling element (14 in Figure 1) for receiving the containers (A) from the transport device (13) (Paragraph 0065).
However, Trilli does not disclose: a first feed unit for providing containers of a first type to be filled, and a second feed unit for feeding containers of a second type to be filled; and an interface element which is arranged or is arrangeable at at least one interface position, or at exactly one interface position, on a feed side with respect to the transport device, and via which the containers of the first type of the first feed unit or the containers of the second type of the second feed unit are selectively feedable directly or indirectly to the transport device.
Poeschl that it was known to provide an apparatus (1 in Figure 1) with: a first feed unit (120a, 124a, and the 122 and 12 connected to 120a and 124a in Figure 1, collectively) for providing containers (10) of a first type to be filled (Paragraphs 0075, 0007, 0014, and 0012), and a second feed unit (120b, 124b, and the 122 and 12 connected to 120b and 124b in Figure 1, collectively) for feeding containers (10) of a second type to be filled (Paragraphs 0075, 0007, 0014, and 0012); and an interface element (the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1) which is arranged at at least one interface position (the position of the conveying circle between 12 and 2) on a feed side with respect to a transport device (4 and/or one or more of the conveying circles shown between 4 and 18 in Figure 1) (apparent from Figure 1), and via which the containers (10) of the first type of the first feed unit or the containers (10) of the second type of the second feed unit are selectively feedable indirectly to the transport device (4 and/or one or more of the conveying circles shown between 4 and 18 in Figure 1) (clear from Figure 1), in order to allow the apparatus (1) to manufacture and treat different containers without elaborate changes of format (Paragraphs 0007, 0012, 0014, and 0015).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Trilli to incorporate the teachings of Poeschl by providing the apparatus of Trilli with: a first feed unit for providing containers of a first type to be filled, and a second feed unit for feeding containers of a second type to be filled; and an interface element which is arranged or is arrangeable at at least one interface position, or at exactly one interface position, on a feed side with respect to the transport device, and via which the containers of the first type of the first feed unit or the containers of the second type of the second feed unit are selectively feedable directly or indirectly to the transport device; because doing so would allow the apparatus to manufacture and treat different containers without elaborate changes of format.
Regarding claim 26, Trilli discloses that the transport device (13) is a linear transport device (apparent from Figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 27, Trilli in view of Poeschl teaches that the interface element (the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1 of Poeschl) is formed separately from the coupling element (15 on the right side of Figure 1 of Trilli) (because Poeschl teaches in Figure 1 that the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 is on a different frame than the frame of filling device 18, and thus teaches that the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1 is separate from the coupling element of the filling device), wherein the containers (A of Trilli) are transferable from the interface element (the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1 of Poeschl) indirectly via at least one further transport element (the conveying circles between the interface element and 18 shown in Figure 1 of Poeschl) to the coupling element (15 on the right side of Figure 1 of Trilli) (because Poeschl teaches in Figure 1 that containers 10 are transferable from the interface element [the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2] to filling device 18 [which comprises the coupling element] via the conveying circles between the interface element and 18 shown in Figure 1 of Poeschl).
Regarding claim 28, Trilli discloses that the apparatus (1) is arranged on a frame (5 in Figures 2-5) of the filling device (2) that is or is positionable on a set-down surface (the ground shown in Figures 2-5) (apparent from Figures 2-5, Paragraph 0052).
Regarding claim 30, Trilli in view of Poeschl teaches that on the feed side, the apparatus (1 of Trilli as modified in view of Poeschl) comprises a second frame (the rectangular frame on which 2, 4, 6, 12, 22, 24, and 62 are mounted in Figure 1 of Poeschl) which is adjacent to the frame (5 of Trilli) and on which the interface element (the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1 of Poeschl) and components (12 of Poeschl) of one of the first feed unit or the second feed unit are arranged (because Poeschl teaches in Figure 1 that the second frame is adjacent to the six-sided frame on which filling device 18 is mounted), wherein the containers (A of Trilli) are transferable via the interface element (the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1 of Poeschl) indirectly across a boundary between the frames to a transport element (one of the conveying circles upstream of or on 18 and mounted on the six-sided frame of 18 in Figure 1 of Poeschl) of the filling device (2 of Trilli) (clear from Figure 1 of Poeschl).
Regarding claim 32, Trilli in view of Poeschl teaches that the first feed unit (120a, 124a, and the 122 and 12 connected to 120a and 124a in Figure 1 of Poeschl, collectively) is designed for providing the containers of the first type as bulk goods (because they are provided in bulk from magazine 124a in Figure 1 of Poeschl) and comprises a storage element (124a in Figure 1 of Poeschl), from which the containers positioned thereon are able to be picked up (Paragraph 0075 of Poeschl).
Regarding claim 35, Trilli in view of Poeschl teaches that holding elements (C and E of Trilli) of the transport device (13 of Trilli) have container receptacles (B and D of Trilli) with a predetermined or predeterminable distance from one another (because the distance between B and D of Trilli can be adjusted by manually moving C and E of Trilli relative to each other), and wherein downstream of the interface element (the conveying circle shown immediately adjacent to and between 12 and 2 in Figure 1 of Poeschl) in the feed direction (conveying direction), the distance of the containers (A of Trilli) from one another is adjustable to the distance of the container receptacles (because the distance of the containers A of Trilli from one another on transport device 13 of Trilli is manually adjusted when the distance between the container receptacles B and D of Trilli is manually adjusted).
Regarding claim 36, Trilli discloses that the at least one processing station (7, 8, 15, and 16) at the transport device (13) comprises a first weighing station (15 in Figure 1) for weighing the containers (A) before filling (Paragraphs 0077 and 0079).
Regarding claim 37, Trilli discloses that the apparatus (1) comprises at least one isolator device (the double-doors shown at the front-right of Figure 5, collectively), which covers at least one frame (5 in Figures 2-5) with a cover element (the double-doors shown at the front-right of Figure 5) (apparent from Figure 5), for providing an atmosphere for at least one of protection and decontamination purposes between the cover element (the double-doors shown at the front-right of Figure 5) and the frame (5) (clear when Figures 2-5 are viewed in relation to one another).
Regarding claim 38, Trilli discloses that the filling device (2) comprises a separate isolator device (the double-doors shown at the front-right of Figure 5, collectively) (apparent from Figure 5).
Regarding claim 39, Trilli discloses that the decoupling element (14) is arranged on the frame (5) of the filling device (2) (apparent from Figures 2 and 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29, 31, 33, 34, 40-46, 48, and 49 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The patent documents listed on the PTO-892 form teach limitations of the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANZIM IMAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2216. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelley 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TANZIM IMAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights