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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference signs mentioned in the description: 187, 331, and 324. 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. 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.
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 21 and 25 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. The claims in question reference a “rear transfer conveyor”. To distinguish between “front” and “rear” and orient the drawing, the examiner referenced “upper back side”, 270 and “lower front side”, 275. The transfer/roller conveyor 130 is not in a position that could be considered to be the back end of the support surface, based on the orientations of 270 and 275. The specification nowhere includes a transfer/roller conveyor that would fit that description. Therefore, the claims are indefinite. Appropriate clarification and/or correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by BOSTONtec’s CUS-MH-C-001 Product Description (hereinafter MH-C-001).
Regarding claim 1, MH-C-001 discloses a height adjustable workstation comprising: a base frame (1); a sliding support assembly including a slider frame (2) slidably mounted on the base frame and an upper support surface (3) pivotably mounted to the slider frame; a lifting mechanism (4) located between the base frame and the slider frame, said lifting mechanism configured to move said slider frame relative to said base frame between a lower position to an upper position; and a tilting mechanism (5) located between the slider frame and the upper support surface, said tilting mechanism configured to tilt the upper support surface between horizonal dispensing position down to a tilted loading position.
Regarding claim 3, MH-C-001 discloses the workstation of claim 1, and a control panel (7). While Description does not explicitly disclose buttons, it does disclose that the tilt surface is controlled pneumatically (first bullet point), and that the height is electrically controlled (first paragraph). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the height and tilt are controlled via buttons on the control panel.
Regarding claim 4, MH-C-001 discloses the height adjustable workstation of claim 1, wherein the upper support surface is part of an upper support surface conveyor (6).
Regarding claims 6 and 22, MH-C-001 discloses the height adjustable workstation of claim 4. It also discloses a control panel (7) for actuating the lifting mechanism, the tilting mechanism, and actuating the surface conveyor.
Regarding claim 8, MC-H-001 discloses the height adjustable workstation of claim 6, additionally comprising a transfer conveyor located at one end of the upper support surface (8).
Regarding claim 12, MC-H-001 discloses a height-adjustable workstation comprising: a base frame (1); a sliding support assembly including a slider frame (2) slidably mounted on the base frame and an upper support surface (3) which is part of an upper support surface conveyor pivotably mounted to the slider frame; a tilting mechanism (5) located between the slider frame and the upper support surface, said tilting mechanism configured to tilt the upper support surface between a loading position and a transfer position; and a control panel (7) with a first control button or switch for actuating the lifting mechanism, a second control button or switch for actuating the tilting mechanism, and a third control button or switch for actuating the upper support surface conveyor.
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MH-C-001 in view of US Patent Publication US 20220194713-A1 (hereinafter Soundhararaj). MH-C-001 discloses the workstation of claim 4, but does not disclose that the surface conveyor is a conveyor belt. Soundhararaj discloses that conveyor belts and roller conveyors can be interchangeable (¶0048). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the workstation of MH-C-001 with the conveyor belt of Soundhararaj. The motivation would be that they are interchangeable in many circumstances.
Claims 9-11, 16, 19 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MH-C-001 in view of BOSTONtec’s CUS-A-S-002 Product Description (hereinafter A-S-002).
Regarding claim 9, MH-C-001 discloses the workstation of claim 8, but does not disclose a transfer conveyor with powered rollers. A-S-002 discloses pneumatically powered ball rollers (9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the workstation of MH-C-001 with the powered rollers of A-S-002. The motivation would be to provide assistance with taking heavy parcels off the conveyor to be worked on, and then easily put back on.
Regarding claim 10 and 11, MH-C-001 discloses the workstation of claim 8, but does not disclose that the height-adjustable workstation interfaces with the transfer conveyor in such a way so as to move the box onto the transfer conveyor when there is room for the box between other boxes coming down the transfer conveyor. A-S-002 discloses an interface of this sort (10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the workstation of MH-C-001 with the interface of A-S-002. The motivation would be to provide a smooth transition for the worker and the conveyed good(s). No physical lifting would be required by the worker and the good(s) would be minimally jostled.
Regarding claim 19, MH-C-001 and A-S-002 disclose the workstation of claim 9. Additionally, A-S-002 discloses an upper support surface conveyor is configured to move packages on the transfer conveyor (10). Items can be slid off the rollers if the table is at the same level as or above the transfer conveyor., therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the workstation of MH-C-001 with the surface conveyor of A-S-002. Further motivation would be to provide a more adaptable apparatus that can function in multiple configurations or orientations.
Regarding claims 24 and 26, MH-C-001 discloses the workstation of claim 22, but does not disclose that there is a transfer conveyor located at one end of the upper support surface or perpendicular to the upper support surface. A-S-002 discloses a transfer conveyor located at one end of the upper support surface and perpendicular to it (9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the workstation of MH-C-001 with the transfer conveyor at one end of A-S-002. The motivation would be to provide a way for easy transfer of heavy boxes onto the production line.
Claims 2, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MH-C-001 in view of SOCO Systems’ video “Pneumatically tiltable packaging table”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5djnGHzKaE (Hereinafter SOCO).
Regarding claim 2, MH-C-001 discloses the workstation of claim 1 with an actuator, but does not disclose that the actuator extends from the slider frame to the lower side of the upper support surface. SOCO discloses a tiltable packing table with a pneumatic actuator that extends from the frame to the lower side of the support surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the workstation of MH-C-001 with the actuator orientation of SOCO. The motivation would be to bring the front edge of the tilt table down to a more comfortable level, as opposed to pushing the back end upwards.
Regarding claim 14, MH-C-001 discloses a height adjustable work station, but does not disclose a method of use that comprises assembling a box or tilting the upper support, or loading the box. SOCO discloses assembling a box (0:14), tilting the upper support surface (0:19), and loading the box (0:25).
Regarding claim 15, MH-C-001 and SOCO disclose the method of claim 14. SOHO does not disclose a step of lifting the slider frame from a lower position to an upper position. However, since the workstation disclosed in MH-C-001 is electronically height adjustable and capable of handling heavy loads, it inherently discloses the step of lowering or raising the slider frame (first paragraph)
Regarding claim 16, MH-C-001 discloses a height adjustable work station with control buttons or a switch, but does not disclose the method step of tilting the upper support surface to a horizontal position by actuating a button or switch. SOCO discloses the method step of tilting the upper support surface to a horizontal position by actuating a button or switch (0:27).
Regarding claim 17, MH-C-001 discloses a height adjustable work station, but does not disclose method steps. SOCO discloses the method step of the upper support surface includes a top surface conveyor and further comprising actuating the top surface conveyor to move the box onto a transfer conveyor (0:28).
Regarding claim 18, MH-C-001 discloses a height adjustable work station, but does not disclose method steps. SOCO discloses the method step of tilting the upper support surface up to a horizontal transferring position and actuating the top surface conveyor to move the box onto a transfer conveyor by actuating a first control button or switch (0:29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the height adjustable workstation of MH-C-001 with the method laid out in SOCO. The motivation would be that the similar structures of both workstations would warrant similar operation, and therefore a similar method of use. A further motivation would be to have simple, user friendly methods that are easy to follow and safe for workers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 13, and 23 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMARI JADAN MEDDLING whose telephone number is (571)272-8178. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 5712726911. 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.
/AMARI J MEDDLING/ Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651