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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 23, 2026 has been entered.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 12 - 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gertlowski (EP 34786185) in view of Fort et al (US 2010/0300599).
With regards to claim 1, Gertlowski discloses a method for the production of a labeling machine (Abstract) , which comprises a transport mean for continuously supplying containers (Figure 1 items 6, 7 and 18), at least one labeling assembly for transferring labels to the containers (Figure 1 item 17), and at least one glue reservoir unit for continuously supplying glue for fastening the labels to the containers (Figure 1 items 4 and 5), where a filling state of the at least one glue reservoir is continuously measured and a machine performance of the transport means and/or labeling assembly is continuously measured and, on this basis, at least one remaining running time is calculated and output, which indicates how long labeling can still be carried out, at the filling state, in the case of an assumed further course of machine performance (Figure 2 items 26 and 27, paragraphs 33 and paragraph 41), and where a specific glue consumption is calculated on the basis of a decrease in the fill level in the at least one glue reservoir unit measured over a sliding production period and the average machine performance averaged over the production period, and is continuously updated on the basis of the sliding measurement and averaging (paragraphs 41 – 43 and 54).
Gertlowski fails to explicitly disclose that the transport means is a container carousel.
Fort discloses a labeling apparatus and method for applying individual labels onto individual objects moving along a conveyor (Abstract), in the same field of endeavor as Gertlowski, where Fort discloses that the transport means are a container carousel (Figure 5 item 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a container carousel, as suggested by Fort, in Gertlowski method. The rationale being that one of ordinary skills in the art would appreciate that container carousels are well known in the art and used interchangeably to in-line conveyors (paragraph 43).
With regards to claim 5, the teachings of Gertlowski and Fort are presented above. Additionally, Gertlowski teaches that the output of at least the remaining running time takes place by its localized display on the labeling machine to a cross-machine monitoring system for the digital location-independent monitoring of machine states, including data transmission and display on mobile terminals (paragraphs 33 and 41).
With regards to claim 6, the teachings of Gertlowski and Fort are presented above. Additionally, Gertlowski teaches that, for determining the filling state of the at least one glue reservoir unit, the fill level of the glue in a glue tank which receives the glue in molten form and is permanently fastened is measured continuously via a capacitive sensor, or the fill level of the glue in a glue container which is inserted into the at least one glue reservoir unit for a continuous drawing-off of glue is continuously measured in a contactless manner by means of a distance sensor, and the filling state is continuously calculated on the basis of a stored cross-sectional profile of the glue reservoir unit and the fill level measured therein (paragraphs 41 – 43 and 54).
With regards to claim 8, the teachings of Gertlowski and Fort are presented above. Additionally, Gertlowski teaches that the at least the remaining running times for all labeling assemblies running on the labeling machine are displayed on a central touchscreen assigned to the container carousel or on another centrally assigned screen (paragraph 33).
With regards to claim 9, Gertlowski teaches a labeling machine for labeling containers (Abstract), comprising:
A transport means for continuously supplying the containers (Figure 1 items 6, 7 and 18)
At least one labeling assembly for applying labels to the containers (Figure 1 item 17)
At least one glue reservoir unit for continuously supplying glue for attaching the labels to the containers (Figure 1 items 4 and 5)
A monitoring system is designed for the ongoing measurement of the filing state of the at least one glue reservoir unit and for the ongoing measurement of the machine performance of the transport means and/or of the labeling assembly, and is programmed for calculating the outputting at least one associated remaining running time based thereon, in order to indicate how long labeling can still be carried out, at the filling state, in the case of an assumed further course of machine performance (Figure 2 items 26 and 27, paragraphs 33 and paragraph 41), and where a specific glue consumption is calculated on the basis of a decrease in the fill level in the at least one glue reservoir unit measured over a sliding production period and the average machine performance averaged over the production period, and is continuously updated on the basis of the sliding measurement and averaging (paragraphs 41 – 43 and 54).
Gertlowski fails to explicitly disclose that the transport means is a container carousel.
Fort discloses a labeling apparatus and method for applying individual labels onto individual objects moving along a conveyor (Abstract), in the same field of endeavor as Gertlowski, where Fort discloses that the transport means are a container carousel (Figure 5 item 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a container carousel, as suggested by Fort, in Gertlowski apparatus. The rationale being that one of ordinary skills in the art would appreciate that container carousels are well known in the art and used interchangeably to in-line conveyors (paragraph 43).
With regards to claim 12, the teachings of Gertlowski and Fort are presented above. Additionally, Gertlowski teaches that the labeling machine comprises at least one touchscreen for a localized display of at least the remaining running time, and/or the monitoring system is designed for data transmission of at least of the remaining running time to a cross-machine monitoring system for digital location-independent monitoring of machine states (paragraphs 33 and 41).
With regards to claims 13 and 14, the teachings of Gertlowski and Fort are presented above. Additionally, Gertlowski teaches that the at least one glue reservoir unit comprises a capacitive sensor or a distance sensor, which operates contactlessly by means of ultrasound or laser light, for measuring the fill level in a glue container which can be replaced for glue replenishment, and where the monitoring system is designed for storing and/or for retrieval of type-typical cross-sectional profiles of glue containers, in order to calculate the filling state on the basis of the cross-sectional profile of the glue container used and the fill level measured therein (paragraphs 41 – 43 and 54).
Claim(s) 2 - 4, 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gertlowski (EP 3486185) in view of Fort et al (US 2010/0300599) as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Kasarin et al (US 2018/0186497).
With regards to claims 2 and 10, the teachings of Gertlowski and Fort are presented above. Gertlowski and Fort fail to explicitly disclose that the method and machine comprises at least one label store for supplying the labels to the containers to be transferred to the container and measuring continuously the filling state of at least one label store for the continuous provision of the labels for the transfer thereof to the containers, and at least one associated remaining running time is calculated and output, which indicates how long labeling can still be carried out, at the filling state of the label store, in the case of an assumed further course of machine performance.
Kasarin discloses a method and device for processing containers (Abstract), in the same field of endeavor as Gertlowski, where Kasarin discloses that the method and device comprises at least one label store for supplying the labels to the container to be transferred to the containers (paragraph 80), where the monitoring system continuously measures a filling state of the label store and is programmed for calculating and outputting at least one associated remaining production duration based thereon, in order to indicate how long one can still label with the filling state of the label store at an assumed further course of machine performance (paragraphs 16, 57 and 77 – 80).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the filling state of at least one label store for the continuous provisions of the labels for the transfer thereof to the containers is continuously measured, and at least one associated remaining running time is calculated and output, which indicates how long labeling can still be carried out, at the filling state of the label store, in the case of an assumed further course of machine performance, as suggested by Kasarin, in Gertlowski’s method and machine as modified by Fort. The rationale being that, as stated by Kasarin, it reduces downtimes in a production changeover program on a line and the amount of scrap that is caused by a production program changeover (paragraph 14).
With regards to claims 3 and 11, the teachings of Gertlowski, Fort and Kasarin are presented above. Additionally, Gertlowski teaches that it is further calculated and output which of the label stores and glue reservoir unit has the shortest remaining time and/or must be refilled first (paragraphs 33, 41 and 57).
With regards to claim 4, the teachings of Gertlowski, Fort and Kasarin are presented above. Additionally, Kasarin teaches that a remaining quantity of containers, which is still to be labeled in a manner typical of type, is furthermore continuously determined, and on this basis a supply forecast is calculated and output, which indicates whether the filling state is sufficient for labeling the remaining quantity (paragraphs 19 and 20).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 23, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the rejection of claims 1 – 5 and 8 – 12 under nonstatutory double patenting, due to Applicant’s amendment, the rejection has been withdrawn.
With regards to the rejection of claims 1 – 6 and 8 – 14 under 35 USC 103, Applicant argues that the prior art of Gertlowski does not teach or suggest the limitation of calculating the specific glue consumption on the basis of a decrease in a fill level of the glue because the prior art the glue is pressed out of containers by compressing/deforming the same, therefore a level measurement is not possible. The Examiner respectfully disagrees since the height of the press in the prior art is the fill level. Additionally, the claim language only states that a calculation is performed on the basis of this level, which in the prior art is attached to the pressure applied by the press, but does not disclose how the calculation is performed. Finally, the prior art is very clear that the purpose is to measure and calculate the glue consumption and rate of consumption as stated in paragraphs 41 – 43.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHEL RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)270-7655. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12pm - 8pm.
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 Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/JOSHEL RIVERA/Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/MICHAEL N ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1746