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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[4]: “the duration, number of intervals, and amount of pressure applied to the smoking cone is adjustable” should be “the duration, number of intervals, and amount of pressure applied to the smoking cone are adjustable”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1:
In the preamble, “a device” is suggested to be “a compaction device” to match the preambles of the dependent claims.
In lines 3-4, “smoking cone” should be “the smoking cone”.
In lines 7-8, “the duration, number of intervals, and amount of pressure applied to the smoking cone is adjustable” should be “the duration, number of intervals, and amount of pressure applied to the smoking cone are adjustable”.
Claim 11: “gas bursts are controlled” should be “pressurized gas is controlled” to clearly point to the same pressurized gas recited in claim 1.
Claim 18: “a gas supply through lines” should be “a gas supply through line”.
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 5, 8, and 14-19 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 14-15: “improved compaction(s)” and “improves production cycle time” are relative and render the claim indefinite. In general, improvement requires a reference state upon which to improve, and no such reference state or standard is given. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitations “improved compaction(s)” and “improves production cycle time” are omitted to make the claims examinable.
Claim 8: both claim 1 and claim 8 recite a side plug mechanism, so confusion arises as to whether claim 8 defines a second side plug mechanism or refers to the same side plug mechanism recited in claim 1. The term “an interchangeable side plug mechanism” is interpreted as “the interchangeable side plug mechanism” to make the claim examinable.
Claims 16-18: “the nozzle assembly” and “the nozzle holder” lack proper antecedent basis and are interpreted as “a nozzle assembly” and “a nozzle holder”.
Claim 19: “consistent compaction” is relative and renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitation “consistent compaction” is omitted to make the claim examinable.
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.
Claims 1 and 6-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holderman (US 20190328033 A1) in view of Hicks (US 20070006888 A1).
Claim 1: Holderman teaches a compaction device (fig. 5D and [91-93]) for use with a smoking cone (cone), comprising:
a base (570), one or more vertical actuators (#542 raises and lowers #541) coupled to the base (570) and configured to deliver pressurized gas (pressurized gas flows through #542 and packs leaves into the cone) to the smoking cone (cone);
a side plug mechanism (fig. 5G-H and [89-90], a vacuum tube fills and plugs #568) coupled to (#568 is coupled to #570 via intermediate elements) the base (570);
a dial carriage (561 and 562) couplable to (#561 and #562 are coupled to #541, #542, and #568 via intermediate elements) the side plug mechanism (vacuum tube and #568) and the vertical actuators (541 and 542);
wherein the duration ([95], number of bursts), number of intervals (number of intervals between bursts), and amount of pressure (pressure) applied to the smoking cone (cone) are adjustable.
Holderman does not explicitly teach that the one or more vertical actuators are configured to be inserted into the smoking cone.
Hicks teaches a compaction device (fig. 7 and [71]) comprising actuators (230) configured to be inserted into a smoking receptacle (21) and deliver pressurized gas to a smoking receptacle ([20], the insertion mechanism is compressed air), such that the smoking receptacle fits over the actuators [71] in order to receive smoking precursor.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to extend Holderman’s actuator’s range of motion into the cone as taught by Hicks, because doing so would enable Holderman’s cone to fit over the actuator in order to receive smoking precursor.
Claim 6: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the dial carriage (fig. 5G and [89], #561 and #562) includes interchangeable nests (multiple instances of 561) for holding smoking cones during compaction.
Claim 7: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 6, wherein the nests (fig. 5G and [89], #561) are designed for specific cone sizes and shapes.
Claim 8: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the interchangeable side plug mechanism (fig. 5G-H and [89-90], a vacuum tube fills and plugs #568) comprises a side plug activator (the vacuum tube activates the vacuum) and a side plug assembly (568) for preventing blowouts (the vacuum tube and #568 pull leaves toward the cone and collect escaping leaves and thus prevent uncontrolled release of leaves) during compaction.
Claim 9: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1. See MPEP 2115: an article worked upon by an apparatus does not limit the apparatus. Limitations to the cone are not given patentable weight with respect to the compaction device.
Claim 10: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device (fig. 5B-D) is part of a smoking cone manufacturing system (fig. 5A and [87]) including various stations (520, 550, 570) for creating and producing smoking cones.
Claim 11: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the pressurized gas ([94], pressurized gas) is controlled by fixed settings (different bursts are fixed at different PSI).
Claim 12: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device (fig. 5D and [93]) is configured to be retractable (#542 retracts away from the cone) after completing the compaction sequence.
Claim 13: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device (fig. 5D and [93]) allows for custom formulas (series of bursts varying in number and pressure) based on controlled airflow and air pressure.
Claim 14: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device (fig. 5D) provides compactions near (the device compacts leaves into the entirety of a cone) the crutch (tip) of the smoking cone.
Claim 15: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device (fig. 5D) is configured to run on a production cycle [94] when manufacturing smoking cones.
Claim 16: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein a nozzle assembly (fig. 5D and [93], #540) is configured to supply pressurized gas (pressurized gas) through one or more lines connected to a gas source.
Claim 17: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein a nozzle assembly (fig. 5D and [93], #540) is interchangeable (#540 can be conical, flat, or rounded) to accommodate various sizes and shapes of smoking cones.
Claim 18: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device includes a gas supply through line ([93], the gas supply line which supplies pressurized gas through the device and toward #540) via a process tube connection (connection between the gas supply line and #540) into the rear of a nozzle holder (541).
Claim 19: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the compaction device (fig. 5D) is configured to manufacture smoking cones with compaction and smoking material uniformity [94].
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holderman (US 20190328033 A1) in view of Hicks (US 20070006888 A1) as applied to claim 1 in further view of Kaluza (US 5697488 A) as evidenced by “Encoder (position)” (Encoder).
Claim 2: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 1, wherein the vertical actuators (fig. 5D and [91-93], #541 and #542) include a closed-loop ([117], #542 uses feedback to form closed-loop control) linear actuator (542) for raising and lowering a nozzle assembly (540).
Modified Holderman does not explicitly teach that the actuator is an absolute encoder.
Kaluza teaches a packaging device (fig. 1 and col. 7, lines 6-11) comprising an actuator (92) that can be alternatives of an absolute encoder (the device ascertains absolute position of #92) and an incremental encoder (the device detects incremental signals of #92).
Encoder teaches that an encoder can only operate on absolute position or incremental position. See MPEP 2143(E).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use, as Holderman’s generic type of encoder, Kaluza’s specific absolute encoder, because doing so would be selecting an absolute encoder from a known and finite list of two encoder types.
Claims 3-4: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 2.
Modified Holderman does not explicitly teach that the nozzle assembly comprises two or more interchangeable nozzles held by nozzle holders,
wherein the interchangeable nozzles have openings for delivering compressed gas to the smoking cone during compaction.
Hicks teaches a compaction device (fig. 7 and [71]) comprising two or more nozzles (230) held by nozzle holders (structure of #641 from which #230s extend), wherein the interchangeable nozzles (230) have openings for delivering compressed gas to a smoking receptacle ([20], the insertion mechanism is compressed air), such that the device can compact multiple smoking receptacles at the same time [130].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to duplicate Holderman’s nozzle into two or more nozzles as taught by Hicks, because doing so would be enable Holderman’s device to compact multiple smoking receptacles at the same time.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holderman (US 20190328033 A1) in view of Hicks (US 20070006888 A1) and Kaluza (US 5697488 A) as evidenced by “Encoder (position)” (Encoder) and as applied to claim 4 in further view of Bjarne (US 3304012 A).
Claim 5: modified Holderman teaches the compaction device of claim 4.
Modified Holderman does not explicitly teach that the nozzle assembly further includes angled exit holes surrounding the openings for compaction of smoking material.
Bjarne teaches a nozzle assembly (fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 10-14) comprising angled exit holes (8) surrounding an opening (9) for delivering pressurized gas (compressed air), such that the angled exit holes rotate the compressed air (lines 10-14) in order to strike an area with great accuracy (col. 1, lines 29-32).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add Bjarne’s angled exit holes to Holderman’s nozzle opening, because doing so would enable Holderman’s nozzle to strike compressed air into the cone with great accuracy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tobey C. Le whose telephone number is (703)756-5516. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:30-18:30 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, Michael H. Wilson can be reached at 571-270-3882. 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.
/TOBEY C LE/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights