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 Group I: claim 1-22 in the reply filed on 04/01/2026 is acknowledged.
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 5-10 and 15-16 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.
Claims 5 and 6 recite the limitation “movable carousel". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear as to what is being claimed.
Claim 15 recite the limitation “output mechanism conveyor". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear as to what is being claimed.
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) 1-14, 19, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claude et al. (FR 2,506,733 – hereinafter Claude) in view of John Elliott New (US 3,717,236 – hereinafter New).
Re Claims 1, 4-10, 19, 21, and 22:
Claude discloses a destacking apparatus, comprising: an input mechanism (15) configured to advance a stack of products (5) in an axial direction (1) to a destacking mechanism (56) such that an end product of the stack (5) is presented to the destacking mechanism (56) (see Figs. 1 and 2); and an output mechanism (34) configured to output a separated product (5) from the destacking mechanism (56); where the destacking mechanism (56) comprises a movable engagement member (29) configured to selectively engage the end product of the stack (2) in a direction that is offset from the axial direction (1) to cause separation of the end product from the stack (5) (see Figs. 1-3), but fails to teach a movable carriage configured to receive the separated product from the engagement member and move the separated product to the output mechanism.
New teaches a movable carriage (5) configured to receive a separated product (2) from an engagement member (4) and move the separated product (2) to an output mechanism (6) (see Figs. 1-5). Re Claim 4: New teaches wherein the movable carriage (5) comprises a rotatable carousel (at 5) (see Figs. 1-5). Re Claim 5: New teaches wherein the movable carousel (at 5) comprises a flat face (see near 19 of Fig. 1 – flat face engaging with product) to receive the product (2) (see Figs. 1-5). Re Claims 6 and 7: New teaches wherein the movable carousel (at 5) comprises a plurality of faces disposed about respective sides (prism-like) of the carousel, each face rotatable to a position to receive the stack of products (2) (see Figs. 1-5). Re Claim 8: New teaches wherein one or more face (see near 19 of Fig. 1 – flat face engaging with product) comprises a flange or a lip (portion supporting product is a flange or lip of the entire member) to retain product (2) thereon. Re Claims 9 and 10: New teaches wherein the movable carousel (at 5) is movable to a first position where one end (inner face portion angled towards) of the flat face is aligned with an input mechanism (near 1), and a second position where a second end (outer face portion) of the flat face is aligned with the output mechanism (34) (see Fig. 1). Re Claim 19: New discloses wherein the movable engagement member (4) and the movable carriage (5) are synchronized and/or act in concert to destack and dispense the stack of products (see Figs. 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Claude with that of New to increase the separation of product from remaining product in order to assure that product is handle separately.
Further Re Claim 2:
Claude discloses wherein the movable engagement member (29) comprises a rotatable member (28) having a protrusion rotatable (29) into engagement with the end product of the stack (5) to provide separation thereof from the stack (5) (see Figs. 1-3).
Further Re Claim 3:
Claude discloses wherein the protrusion (29) comprises a plate or a blade (29) (see Figs. 1-3).
Further Re Claim 11:Claude discloses wherein the movable engagement member (29) is actuated in a direction that is tangential to the axial direction (1) and/or rotatable about an axis that is substantially perpendicular to the axial direction (1) (see Fig. 2).
Further Re Claim 12:
Claude discloses wherein the input mechanism (15) and/or output mechanism (34) comprises a conveyor (see Fig. 1).
Further Re Claim 13:
Claude discloses wherein the input mechanism (15) and/or output mechanism (34) comprise a divider (16) to divide the input mechanism (15) and/or output mechanism (34) into a plurality of lanes (see Fig. 1).
Further Re Claim 14:
Claude discloses wherein the input mechanism (15) extends in a substantially horizontal direction in use or where the input mechanism (15) is angled/inclined toward the destacking mechanism (56) to bias the stacked product (5) thereinto (see Figs. 1-3).
Claim(s) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claude in view of New and further in view of Robert Christian Rusticus (EP 3,812,321 – hereinafter Rusticus).
Re Claims 15 and 16:
Claude in view of new discloses the device of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein a part of an output mechanism conveyor extends into or through the movable carriage.
Rusticus further in view teaches wherein a part of an output mechanism conveyor (near 4 – see Figs. 1 and 3) extends into or through a movable carriage (see Figs. 1-6). Re Claim 16: Rusticus further in view teaches wherein the movable carriage comprises cut-outs (spaces between wheels – see Fig. 5) to receive a conveyor member of the output mechanism conveyor (see Figs. 1-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Claude in view of New with that of Rusticus to provide an alternative output mechanism arrangement for conveying product as known within the art.
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claude in view of New and further in view of Baker et al. (US 2017/0095112 A1 – hereinafter Baker).
Re Claims 17 and 18:
Claude in view of new discloses the device of claim 1, but fails to teach a cage or an enclosure configured to at least partially enclose the destacking mechanism, wherein the cage or the enclosure is openable/removable.
Baker further in view teaches a cage or an enclosure (12) configured to at least partially enclose a destacking (or separating/transporting) mechanism, wherein the cage or the enclosure is openable/removable (see paragraph [0068]). Re Claim 18: Rusticus further in view teaches a sensor to detect a presence of the cage or the enclosure (12), the destacking apparatus (or separating/transporting) configured to prevent operation thereof in an event the presence of the cage or the enclosure (12) is not detected (door open sensor, does not recognize door as closed). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Claude in view of New with that of Baker to provide protection for or against a handling product, assuring proper usage.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claude in view of New and further in view of Carignan et al. (US 2021/0087045 A1 – hereinafter Carignan).
Re Claim 20:
Claude in view of new discloses the device of claim 1, but fails to teach a sensor to detect a position or an orientation of the movable engagement member.
Carignan further in view teaches a sensor (230. 3240) to detect a position or an orientation of a movable (roller) (see paragraphs [0282-0283]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Claude in view of New with that of Carignan to provide an automatic control means for a rotary member.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELVIN L RANDALL, JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-5373. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 am-5 pm est.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at 571-272-6911. 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.
/K.L.R/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights