DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejections.
Applicant Argues:
As outlined above, Applicant has amended Claim 1 to include the requirement that the knob is operably connected to the selector and the lifter carriage. Applicant urges that such a relationship is supported in the specification and that a "cable" as required in Claim 5 is simply illustrative of various ways to operably connect the components of Claim 1. In light of the above Amendment and comments, this rejection is believed overcome and therefore Applicant respectfully requests it be withdrawn.
Examiner’s Response:
Applicant has provided no description within the specification or disclosure which the describes the cable as not needed or simply illustrative.
Examiner finds that the cable is essential to the function of the invention as supported by paragraphs [0040], [0042], and [0044]. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to understand or produce the results of the invention without the cable.
For these reasons, the claims stand rejected.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-13, 15, 16, and 18-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,896,146. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they include the same subject matter as obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Application 18/440,496
US 11896146
1. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having a forward viewing window and a lower output; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a selector for moving an indicator laterally between the two or more trays; a knob, distinct from the selector, the knob activating the motor to move the products forward and drop a product into the output, wherein the knob is configured to actuate a lifter carriage to engage a respective tray to dispense the product, wherein the knob is operably connected with respect to the selector and the lifter carriage.
1. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having lockable access, a forward viewing window and a lower output tray; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a selector for moving an indicator laterally between the two or more trays; a knob spaced apart from the selector, the knob activating the motor to move the products forward and drop a single product into the output tray, wherein the selector and the knob are arranged along a cable wherein, once the knob is actuated, the cable tightens and actuates a lifter carriage to engage a respective tray to dispense the single product.
2. The product dispensing system of Claim 1 comprising two or more levels of products wherein two or more trays are arranged along each of the two or more levels of products.
2. The product dispensing system of claim 1 comprising two or more levels of products wherein two or more trays are arranged along each of the two or more levels of products.
3. The product dispensing system of Claim 2 wherein each level includes a dedicated selector and knob for dispensing product on the output tray.
3. The product dispensing system of claim 2 wherein each level includes a dedicated selector and knob for dispensing product on the output tray.
4. The product dispensing system of Claim 2 comprising an upper level and a lower level wherein product on the upper level hangs from a peghook and product on the lower level rests on a tray.
4. The product dispensing system of claim 2 comprising an upper level and a lower level wherein product on the upper level hangs from a peghook and product on the lower level rests on a tray.
5. The product dispensing system of Claim 1 wherein the selector and knob are connected to a cable configured to actuate the lifter carriage.
1. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having lockable access, a forward viewing window and a lower output tray; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a selector for moving an indicator laterally between the two or more trays; a knob spaced apart from the selector, the knob activating the motor to move the products forward and drop a single product into the output tray, wherein the selector and the knob are arranged along a cable wherein, once the knob is actuated, the cable tightens and actuates a lifter carriage to engage a respective tray to dispense the single product.
6. The product dispensing system of Claim 5 wherein the knob is configured to rotate and thereby tighten the cable to actuate the respective tray.
6. The product dispensing system of claim 1 wherein the knob is configured to rotate and thereby tighten the cable to actuate the respective tray.
7. The product dispensing system of Claim 6 wherein the knob includes integrated stops to limit rotation in both directions.
7. The product dispensing system of claim 6 wherein the knob includes integrated stops to limit rotation in both directions.
8. The product dispensing system of Claim 5 wherein the knob is configured to pull and thereby tighten the cable to actuate the respective tray.
8. The product dispensing system of claim 1 wherein the knob is configured to pull and thereby tighten the cable to actuate the respective tray.
9. The product dispensing system of Claim 8 wherein the knob includes an integrated stop to limit outward travel.
9. The product dispensing system of claim 8 wherein the knob includes an integrated stop to limit outward travel.
10. The product dispensing system of Claim 1 wherein the motor comprises a spring wound motor that is operatively connected to a pusher on a respective tray wherein an action of restocking product in the tray moves the pusher and winds the motor.
10. The product dispensing system of claim 1 wherein the motor comprises a spring wound motor that is operatively connected to a pusher on a respective tray wherein an action of restocking product in the tray moves the pusher and winds the motor.
11. The product dispensing system of Claim 10 wherein each tray includes a drive wheel and a track operatively connected between the motor and the tray.
11. The product dispensing system of claim 10 wherein each tray includes a drive wheel and a track operatively connected between the motor and the tray.
12. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having a forward viewing window and a lower output; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a selector for moving an indicator laterally between the two or more trays, wherein the selector is rotatable to move the indicator along a cable and position a lifter carriage in front of a desired tray; and a knob spaced apart from the selector, the knob activating the motor to move the products forward and drop product into the output.
13. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having lockable access, a forward viewing window and a lower output tray; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a selector for moving an indicator laterally between the two or more trays, wherein the selector is rotatable to move the indicator along a cable and position a lifter carriage in front of a desired tray; and a knob spaced apart from the selector, the knob activating the motor to move the products forward and drop a single product into the output tray.
13. The product dispensing system of Claim 12 wherein the selector and the knob are arranged along a cable wherein, once the knob is actuated, the cable tightens and actuates a lifter carriage to engage a respective tray to dispense the single product.
17. The product dispensing system of claim 13 wherein the selector and the knob are arranged along a cable wherein, once the knob is actuated, the cable tightens and actuates a lifter carriage to engage a respective tray to dispense the single product.
14. The product dispensing system of Claim 12 wherein the lower output comprises a drawer.
N/A
15. The product dispensing system of Claim 12 further comprising an audible and/or visual alarm connected with respect to one of the selector, the knob, and the lifter carriage.
15. The product dispensing system of claim 1 further comprising an audible and/or visual alarm connected with respect to one of the selector, the knob, and the lifter carriage.
16. The product dispensing system of Claim 15 wherein the alarm is transmitted directly to a store employee.
16. The product dispensing system of claim 15 wherein the alarm is transmitted directly to a store employee.
17. The product dispensing system of Claim 12 wherein the actuation of the motor produces audible and/or visual feedback.
N/A
18. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having a forward viewing window; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a frame positioned along a base of the housing; a selector connected to the frame for moving an indicator between the two or more trays; a knob connected to the frame separate from the selector; and a cable threaded between the selector and the knob, the knob rotatable to tighten the cable and activate the motor to move the products forward and release a product for consumer access.
18. A product dispensing system comprising: a housing having lockable access, a forward viewing window and a lower output tray; two or more trays positioned within the housing, each tray of the trays accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a frame positioned along a base of the housing; a selector connected to the frame for moving an indicator laterally between the two or more trays; a knob connected to the frame and spaced apart from the selector; and a cable threaded between the selector and the knob, the knob rotatable to tighten the cable and activate the motor to move the products forward and drop a single product into the output tray.
19. The product dispensing system of Claim 18 further comprising a cable wheel and a mechanical stop connected with respect to the knob wherein the cable is threaded through the cable wheel.
19. The product dispensing system of claim 18 further comprising a cable wheel and a mechanical stop connected with respect to the knob wherein the cable is threaded through the cable wheel.
20. The product dispensing system of Claim 19 further comprising a selector pulley and a tensioner connected with respect to the selector wherein the cable is threaded through the tensioner and the selector pulley.
20. The product dispensing system of claim 19 further comprising a selector pulley and a tensioner connected with respect to the selector wherein the cable is threaded through the tensioner and the selector pulley.
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 1-11 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: the cable which is the link between the knob and the lifter carriage. Without the cable it is not clear as to how the device functions, as it would appear to read on automatic embodiments which are not a part of the invention.
Paragraph [0040] describes “ the knob 40 may include a groove through which the cable 50 passes such that when the knob 40 is rotated, the cable 50 is tightened thereby engaging the lifter carriage 55 with the tray 20.”
Paragraph [0042] describes “Fig. 12 shows an arrangement wherein the knob 40 is used to position the lifter carriage 55 and, once in place, the selector 30 is depressed to engage the pull plate 45 and thus tighten the cable 50. Once tightened, the cable 50 lifts the lifter carriage 55 to engage the motor 70 on the respective selected tray 20, either directly or indirectly.”
Paragraph [0044] describes “Alternatively, the knob 40 is configured to pull and thereby tighten the cable 50 to actuate the respective tray.”
As shown above, it appears that the cable is an essential element to the invention for the invention to operate as 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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McGee et al. (5,337,876 – hereinafter McGee) in view of Antonio Vardaro (US 2011/0015781 – hereinafter Vardaro), Toru Arai (US 6,499,627 B2 – hereinafter Arai), and William C. Jones (US 4,488,466 – hereinafter Jones).
Re Claims 1 and 2:
McGee discloses a product dispensing system (10) comprising: a housing (12) having a forward viewing window (80, 82) and a lower output (16, 18); two or more trays (46, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58) positioned within the housing (12), each tray of the trays (46, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58) accommodating a plurality of products, wherein each tray (46, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58) is configured to move the products responsive to a user action; a selector (72, 74) for moving an indicator (94, 96) laterally between the two or more trays (46, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58), a knob (68, 70) spaced apart from the selector (72, 74) , the knob (68, 70), distinct from the selector (72, 74), the knob (68,70) activating the (drive means) to move the products forward and drop a product into the output, (see Figs. 1-14), but fails to teach wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action, wherein the knob is configured to actuate a lifting carriage to engage a respective tray to dispense the product, wherein the knob is operatively connected with respect to the selector and the lifter carriage.
Vardaro teaches wherein each tray includes a self-contained motor (34) and track configured to move the products responsive to a user action (at 54) (see Figs. 1-25). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to combine the teachings of McGee with that of Vardaro to have a manual operation be automatic as known by one of ordinary skill in the art, for the replacement of a manual operation with an automatic operation is a design consideration within the skill of the art.
Arai teaches wherein a (control) is configured to actuate a lifting carriage (56) to engage a respective tray to dispense a product (see Figs. 10A and 10B). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of McGee with that of Vardar and Arai, to allow for an alternative translation technique of a gear mechanism to engage with a driven gear as known within the art. Examiner notes that using a knob to cause the actuation would be obvious, for manual to automatic relationships is an obvious design skill for one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 120 USPQ 192 (CCPA 1955).
Jones teaches wherein a knob is operatively connected with respect to a selector and (a motor driven dispensing mechanism) (see col. 5 line 65 to col. 6 line 27). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of McGee with that of Vardar, Arai, and Jones to have a manual operation be automatic as known by one of ordinary skill in the art, for the replacement of a manual operation with an automatic operation is a design consideration within the skill of the art. Examiner notes the combination would be capable of being operatively connected to the lifter carriage, for such, would be a form of activating (a motor driven dispensing mechanism) as known within the art, and in view of the combination as obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Further Re Claim 3:
McGee discloses wherein each level includes a dedicated selector (72, 74) and knob (68, 70) for dispensing product on the output tray (see Figs. 1-14).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones and further in view of Sherretts et al. (US 2011/0220597 – hereinafter Sherretts) and Richardson et al. (US 2011/0036789 – hereinafter Richardson).
Re Claim 4:
McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones discloses the device of claim 2 including product on the lower level rests on a tray (see McGee Figs. 1-14), but fails to teach an upper level and a lower level wherein product on the upper level hangs from a peghook.
Sherretts further in view teaches an upper level and a lower level wherein product on the upper level hangs from a peghook (see Figs. 2, 5, 13, 19) (see Figs. 1-24) (see paragraph [0052]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to combine the teachings of McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones with that of Sherretts to allow for a device to accommodate products which must be supported from a top portion.
Richardson teaches a peghook (see paragraph [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to combine the teachings of McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones with that of Sherretts and Richardson to allow for a device to accommodate products which must be supported from a top portion.
Claim(s) 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones and further in view of Collins et al. (4,200,201 – hereinafter Collins)
Re Claims 10 and 11:
McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones discloses the device of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the motor comprises a spring wound motor that is operatively connected to a pusher on a respective tray wherein an action of restocking product in the tray moves the pusher and winds the motor. (However, Examiner does note that McGee shows a member which could be considered a spring wound motor).
Collins further in view teaches wherein a motor comprises a spring wound motor that is operatively connected to a pusher on a respective tray wherein an action of restocking product in the tray moves the pusher and winds the motor (see col. 6 lines 45-68). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to combine the teachings of McGee in view of Vardaro, Arai, and Jones with that of Collins to provide an alternative pusher to motor member which allows for easy reloading and operation of a dispenser.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9 and 12-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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