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 .
.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arrasmith (US 4,327,665) in view of Motev (US 4,578,880).
As for claim 1, Arrasmith discloses a can curing oven comprising: a housing assembly including a heating assembly comprising a plurality of infrared heating units (52, fig. 6, 6:29-30); and a transfer assembly including a transfer belt (14, fig. 2) and the transfer belt is structured to move said can bodies in a vertical orientation past said number of infrared heating units to cure a coating on said can bodies (14, fig. 2, and 52, fig. 6), wherein said infrared heating units are disposed laterally on both sides of said transfer belt (16, fig. 2 and 52, fig. 6, infrared lamps straddle the centerline of the seam such that they are disposed laterally on both the right side and left side of said transfer belt).
Arrasmith discloses the claimed invention except for a plurality of support pads disposed on the transfer belt, wherein said plurality of support pads are structured to support base portions of can bodies in a vertical orientation. Motev teaches a plurality of support pads disposed (see figs. 1 and 3 below) on the transfer belt (37, fig. 1), wherein said plurality of support pads are structured to support base portions of can bodies in a vertical orientation (support pads illustrated supporting the base portion of can bodies in a vertical orientation, but not identified by item number) in order to be able to cure the entire side of the can without the need of support on the area to be coated. Arrasmith would benefit equally from being able to cure the entire side of the can without the need of support on the area to be coated. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Arrasmith with a plurality of support pads disposed on the transfer belt, wherein said plurality of support pads are structured to support base portions of can bodies in a vertical orientation as taught by Motev in order to be able to cure the entire side of the can without the need of support on the area to be coated.
PNG
media_image1.png
601
538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
418
702
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As for claim 2, Arrasmith discloses said number of heating units are structured to generate a total effective amount of received heat (1:25-31).
As for claim 4, Arrasmith discloses each infrared heating unit is selected from the group consisting of electrical infrared heating units, gas infrared heating units, or oil infrared heating units (5:37-42, electrical).
As for claim 5, Arrasmith discloses said housing assembly includes an adjustable mounting assembly; and wherein said adjustable mounting assembly is structured to position each heating unit so as to be at an effective distance from a sidewall surface of a can body (80, fig. 2, 6:10-16).
As for claim 6, Arrasmith discloses said number of infrared heating units comprises a plurality of modular and linkable heating unit plates (16, fig. 1, abstract, fig. 1 illustrates the lamp modules linked together to form a continuous tunnel).
As for claim 7, Arrasmith discloses said modular and linkable heating unit plates are disposed in a single first row of opposed pairs (16, 52, fig. 6, 4:51-57, modular heating plates 16 are linkable with the lamps 52 disposed in opposed pairs).
As for claim 9, Arrasmith discloses said housing assembly is elongated and generally straight (16, fig. 1).
As for claim 10, Arrasmith discloses said elongated generally straight housing assembly has a length, a width, and a height; wherein the length is between about 1.0 m and 6.0 m (12, fig. 1, a can is slightly under 125 mm in length with the housing assembly illustrated over 10 times the length of the can as indicated by broken line and 4:51-57 which discloses modules to create any desired length); wherein the width is between about 80 mm and 300 mm (24, fig. 2, a typical can is about 66 mm in diameter disclosing a width of slightly less than 200 mm); and wherein the height is between about 200 mm and 500 mm (fig. 2, housing illustrated from 74 to 182 to be about four times the width of a can or about 250 mm).
As for claim 11, Arrasmith discloses said transfer belt includes a plurality of segments; and wherein said transfer belt is structured to move over a looped path which extends through said elongated generally straight housing assembly (20, 22, fig. 2).
As for claim 12, Arrasmith discloses the claimed invention except for each said support pad is one of a driven pad, a free pad or a fixed pad. Motev teaches each said support pad is one of a driven pad, a free pad or a fixed pad (see sketches of figs. 1 and 3 above, free pad capable of staying with the can when transported from the turntable to the conveyor 37) .
As for claim 16, Arrasmith discloses said plurality of infrared heating units are structured to become fully active in less than one second (54, 5:35-42, infrared lamps similar to infrared lamps disclosed by applicant in published paragraph [0079]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arrasmith in view of Motev as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Walker (US 5173046).
Arrasmith discloses the claimed invention except for each of said infrared heating units is structured to actuate when a sidewall surface of one of said can bodies is an effective distance away. Walker teaches each of said infrared heating units is structured to actuate when a sidewall surface of one of said can bodies is an effective distance away (1:39-42) in order to avoid wasting energy prior to a can being positioned for curing. Arrasmith would benefit equally from avoiding wasting energy prior to a can being positioned for curing. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Arrasmith with each of said infrared heating units is structured to actuate when a sidewall surface of one of said can bodies is an effective distance away as taught by Walker in order to avoid wasting energy prior to a can being positioned for curing.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arrasmith in view of Motev as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoshimura (US 5,271,164).
Arrasmith discloses the claimed invention except for each support pad includes a can coupling; and wherein each can coupling is selected from the group consisting of a magnetic coupling or a vacuum coupling. Yoshimura teaches each support pad includes a can coupling; and wherein each can coupling is selected from the group consisting of a magnetic coupling or a vacuum coupling (7:16-21) in order to secure the container to the conveyor. Arrasmith would benefit equally from securing the container to the conveyor. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by Arrasmith with each support pad includes a can coupling; and wherein each can coupling is selected from the group consisting of a magnetic coupling or a vacuum coupling as taught by Yoshimura in order to secure the container to the conveyor.
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, 2, 4-7, 9-12 and 15-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 as cited below. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as indicated below.
As for claim 1, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses a can curing oven comprising: a housing assembly including a heating assembly comprising a plurality of infrared heating units (claim 9, lines 2-3); and a transfer assembly including a transfer belt (claim 9, line 4) and a plurality of support pads disposed on the transfer belt, wherein said plurality of support pads are structured to support base portions of can bodies (claim 14, lines 1-3) in a vertical orientation (claim 1, line 5) and the transfer belt is structured to move said can bodies in a vertical orientation past said number of infrared heating units to cure a coating on said can bodies (claim 1, lines 4-6), wherein said infrared heating units are disposed laterally on both sides of said transfer belt (claim 1, lines 5-7).
As for claim 2, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said number of infrared heating units are structured to generate a total effective amount of received heat (claim 2, lines 1-2).
As for claim 4, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses each infrared heating unit is selected from the group consisting of electrical infrared heating units, gas infrared heating units, or oil infrared heating units (claim 6, lines 1-3).
As for claim 5, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said housing assembly includes an adjustable mounting assembly; and wherein said adjustable mounting assembly is structured to position each heating unit so as to be at an effective distance from a sidewall surface of a can body (claim 7, lines 2-4).
As for claim 6, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said number of infrared heating units comprises a plurality of modular and linkable heating unit plates (claim 9, lines 7-8).
As for claim 7, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said modular and linkable heating unit plates are disposed in a single first row of opposed pairs (claim 9, lines 9-10).
As for claim 9, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said housing assembly is elongated and generally straight (claim 11).
As for claim 10, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said elongated generally straight housing assembly has a length, a width, and a height; wherein the length is between about 1.0 m and 6.0 m; wherein the width is between about 80 mm and 300 mm; and wherein the height is between about 200 mm and 500 mm (claim 12).
As for claim 11, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said transfer belt includes a plurality of segments; and wherein said transfer belt is structured to move over a looped path which extends through said elongated generally straight housing assembly (claim 13).
As for claim 12, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses each said support pad is one of a driven pad, a free pad or a fixed pad (claim 15).
As for claim 15, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses each support pad includes a can coupling; and wherein each can coupling is selected from the group consisting of a magnetic coupling or a vacuum coupling (claim 18).
As for claim 16, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses said plurality of infrared heating units are structured to become fully active in less than one second (claim 20).
As for claim 17, U.S. Patent No. 11,874,058 discloses a can curing oven comprising: a housing assembly including a heating assembly comprising a number of heating units (claim 17, lines 1-3); and a transfer assembly including a transfer belt structured to move a number of can bodies past said number of heating units (claim 17, lines 4-6) and a plurality of driven support pads structured to support base portions of said can bodies and rotatably coupled to said transfer belt, wherein each driven support pad includes a body having a generally circular drive engagement surface (claim 17, lines 7-11), and wherein said housing assembly includes an elongated drive bar disposed adjacent said transfer belt and structured to operatively engage each drive engagement surface (claim 17, lines 12-14).
Claim 17, 19 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over below cited claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 in view of Masami (JP11240516A)
As for claim 17, U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 discloses a can curing oven comprising: a housing assembly including a heating assembly comprising a number of heating units (claim 12, line 8); and a transfer assembly including a transfer belt (claim 12, line 5) and a plurality of driven support pads structured to support base portions of said can bodies and rotatably coupled to said transfer belt (claim 12, lines 14-17), wherein each driven support pad includes a body having a generally circular drive engagement surface (claim 12, line 18), and wherein said housing assembly includes an elongated drive bar disposed adjacent said transfer belt and structured to operatively engage each drive engagement surface (claim 12, lines 19-21).
U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 discloses the claimed invention except for a transfer assembly including a transfer belt structured to move a number of can bodies past said number of heating units. Masami teaches a transfer assembly including a transfer belt structured to move a number of can bodies past said number of heating units (fig. 5) in order to . U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 would benefit equally from . It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dryer as disclosed by U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 with a transfer assembly including a transfer belt structured to move a number of can bodies past said number of heating units as taught by Masami in order to allow.
As for claim 19, U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 discloses said number of heating units are infrared heating units (claim 12, line 11).
As for claim 20, U.S. Patent No. 10,871,326 discloses each infrared heating unit is selected from the group consisting of electrical infrared heating units, gas infrared heating units, or oil infrared heating units (claim 8).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 13 and 14 are 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.
Claims 17-20 are allowable if the double patenting rejection is withdrawn.
Reasons for Allowance
Claim 8 include allowable subject matter because prior art could not be found to disclose said modular and linkable heating unit plates are disposed in a plurality of stacked rows of opposed pairs of modular and linkable heating unit plates with all of the limitations of 1, 6 and 7. The closest prior art found in Masami (JP11240516A) but the combination of Masami with Arrasmith would destroy the Arrasmith reference which relates to curing a single seam of a can. It would make no sense to stack the heating units of the Arrasmith reference as partially taught by Masami to seal a can seam
Claims 13 and 17 include allowable subject matter because prior art could not be found to disclose each driven pad is rotatably coupled to said transfer assembly transfer belt; and wherein said driven pad includes a body having a generally circular drive engagement surface with all of the limitations of claims 1, 12, 13 and 17. The closest prior art is found in Shank (US 3,894,630) which shows a driven pad coupled to the transfer assembly transfer belt, but not a support pad rotatably coupled to the transfer belt.
Claims 14 and 18-20 are allowable as depending from allowable claims 13 and 17 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN PATRICK MCCORMACK whose telephone number is (571)270-7472. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 1:30 PST.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/JOHN P MCCORMACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights