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 .
Priority
Foreign priority papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or 35 U.S.C. § 365(a)-(c) are acknowledged.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/22/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-15 is/are pending in the application. Claim(s) 1 and 9 has/have been amended. Claim(s) 15 has/have been added.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim(s) 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor, or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In particular, the specification does not describe “a print head rigidly fixed to the frame”.
Dependent Claims Too
Dependent claim(s) 2-14 is/are rejected for the reasons presented above with respect to rejected claim(s) 1 and in view of the dependence thereon.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
1. Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20080117248 to Uptergrove (hereinafter “Uptergrove”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20220072876 to Barrett (hereinafter “Barrett”).
With respect to claim 1, Uptergrove discloses an installation for decorating a plurality of hollow objects of glass, metal or plastic material (ink droplet application system 40 FIG. 3), comprising: -, - a conveyor suitable for moving the objects successively along a trajectory with respect to the frame (conveyed [0017] [0020]), - at least one printing station and configured to digitally print at least a portion of a superficial image on a surface of each of the objects (printing subsystem 50 print heads 60 FIG. 3), wherein the conveyor is further suitable for moving each of the objects successively past the printing station during the digital printing (print heads 60 [0017] [0020] FIG. 3) and wherein said at least one printing station comprises a print head (printing subsystem 50, print heads 60 [0017] [0020] FIG. 3 and FIG. 4).
However, Uptergrove fails to specifically disclose the term:
A frame, at least one printing station attached onto the frame, and wherein said at least one printing station comprises a print head rigidly fixed to the frame.
Barrett discloses:
A frame, at least one printing station attached onto the frame, and wherein said at least one printing station comprises a print head rigidly fixed to the frame.
(FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 disclose frames. Barrett also discloses DTS printer 200 in FIG. 2 with a first carriage rail 212a, a second carriage rail 212b, a linear conveyer assembly 214, and inkjet print heads 218. Additionally, more frame pieces would have obviously been used. Frames were common practice at the time of the invention and often necessary for proper function.).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the frame as disclosed by Barrett. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly support the conveyor and printheads. ([0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 2, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses comprising a plurality of printing stations suitable for performing digital printings of portions of decoration on each of the objects, the conveyor being suitable for moving the objects past each of the printing stations during the digital printings (print heads 60 FIG. 3 [0017], [0020] of Uptergrove and 218 [0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 3, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses at least one presence detector suitable for detecting the objects, the conveyor being suitable for moving the objects successively past the presence detector before moving the objects past the printing station, the presence detector being suitable for generating a detection signal, and - a control system suitable for receiving the detection signal and for sending a synchronization signal to the printing station (device 80 FIG. 3 of Uptergrove and 200 [0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 4, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses comprising at least one pre-treatment station suitable for carrying out a pre-treatment of the objects, the conveyor being further suitable for moving the objects successively past the pre-treatment station before moving the objects past the printing station ([0025] of Uptergrove Additionally, 60 FIG. 6A of Jennel discloses pre-treatment).
With respect to claim 5, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses comprising at least one post-treatment station suitable for carrying out a final or intermediate curing of each of the objects, the conveyor being further suitable for successively moving the objects past the post-treatment station (100 FIG. 3 [0025]-[0029] of Uptergrove and 210 [0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 6, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the conveyor is configured to move each of the objects in rectilinear and uniform translation with respect to the frame, at least during the digital printing (FIG. 3 - FIG. 5 of Uptergrove and [0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 7, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the conveyor is configured so that each of the objects is at a distance from the printing station during the digital printing, the distance being comprised between 0.1 and 3.0 mm (standoff distance 1mm [0023]).
With respect to claim 8, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the distance is comprised between 0.5 and 1.5 mm (standoff distance 1mm [0023]).
With respect to claim 9, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the print head has one or a plurality of rows of nozzles having ejection ports located in a vertical plane, the row or rows being vertical (print heads 60 FIG. 3 - FIG. 5 of Uptergrove and 218 [0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 10, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the objects are perfume bottles or packaging (container 10 of Uptergrove and vessel 102 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 11, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses a method for decorating a plurality of hollow glass objects comprising: - obtaining an installation according to claim 1 (glass and glassware, [0003] and [0068] of Barrett, also, see claim 1), - moving the objects, by the conveyor, with respect to the frame, successively along the trajectory, and - digital printing, by the printing station, on each of the objects in order to obtain at least a portion of decoration on each of the objects, the conveyor successively moving each of the objects past the printing station during the digital printing (print heads 60 [0017] [0020] FIG. 3 of Uptergrove and 218 [0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
With respect to claim 12, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the hollow glass objects are perfume bottles (glass and glassware, [0003] and [0068] of Barrett)
With respect to claim 13, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the printing station is configured to deposit droplets of from 7-21 pl of ink on the surface of the objects (droplets 30 [0016]).
With respect to claim 14, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses wherein the printing station is configured to print ink on the surface of the objects at 600-1200 dots per inch (DPI) (droplets 30 [0016]).
With respect to claim 15, Uptergrove in view of Barrett discloses an installation for decorating a plurality of hollow objects of glass, metal or plastic material, comprising ((ink droplet application system 40 FIG. 3 of Uptergrove and FIG. 2 of Barrett): a conveyor configured to move the objects successively along a trajectory with respect to the frame (conveyed [0017] [0020] of Uptergrove), and at least one printing station and configured to digitally print at least a portion of a superficial image on a surface of each of the objects (printing subsystem 50 print heads 60 FIG. 3), wherein the conveyor is further configured to move each of the objects successively past the printing station during the digital printing (print heads 60 [0017] [0020] FIG. 3).
However, Uptergrove fails to specifically disclose the term:
A frame, wherein said surface of each of the objects is a lateral surface with respect to an axis of each of the objects, the axis being vertical in a position for storing the objects on a horizontal surface, wherein the conveyor comprises a horizontal conveyor belt on which the objects are placed, the axis being vertical.
Barrett discloses:
A frame, wherein said surface of each of the objects is a lateral surface with respect to an axis of each of the objects, the axis being vertical in a position for storing the objects on a horizontal surface, wherein the conveyor comprises a horizontal conveyor belt on which the objects are placed, the axis being vertical. (FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 disclose frames. Barrett also discloses DTS printer 200 in FIG. 2 with a first carriage rail 212a, a second carriage rail 212b, a linear conveyer assembly 214, and inkjet print heads 218. Additionally, more frame pieces would have obviously been used. Fames were common practice at the time of the invention and often necessary for proper function. Further, FIG. 2 of Barrett discloses objects with lateral surfaces and a horizontal conveyor 214.).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the frame and conveyor as disclosed by Barrett. The motivation for doing so would have been to properly support the conveyor and printheads and properly convey the objects. ([0079]-[0084], FIG. 1 and FIG. 2 of Barrett).
RESPONSE TO ARGUMENTS
1. Applicant's arguments filed 04/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in light of the above rejections. Additionally, frame pieces would have obviously been used. Frames were common practice at the time of the invention and often necessary for proper function.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, whether or not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 6135654 to Jennel discloses pre-treatment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bradley W Thies whose telephone number is (571)270-5667. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30 am -6:00 pm.
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, Alessandro Amari can be reached on (571) 272-2306. 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.
/BRADLEY W THIES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights