DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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.
Claims 22, 29-42 and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackley, Jr. et al. (US 2004/0094050) in view of Boscolo et al. (EP 2650674).
With respect to claim 22, Ackley Jr. et al. teaches a system for inspecting and processing a pellet-shaped articles, the system comprising a conveyer mechanism (12) including a plurality of carrier bars (24) configured to transport pellet-shaped articles (Paragraphs 0057, 0059) along a conveyor path (Abstract, Paragraphs 0025, 0057, 0061), each of the carrier bars (24) having one or more pockets (34), and each of the pockets (34) being shaped and dimensioned to receive one pellet-shaped article (Paragraphs 0059, 0060);
one or more inspection apparatuses (Abstract, 10), the conveyor (12) being configured to transport the pellet-shaped articles past the inspection apparatus (Paragraphs 0063, 0064,0066), the inspection apparatus including:
a light source (62) configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with light while passing the inspection apparatus (Paragraph 0078),
a camera (48, 50) configured to capture an image of each of the pellet-shaped articles while passing the inspection apparatus (Paragraphs 0063, 0069, 0070 and note many instances throughout the prior art); and
a filter (Paragraph 0078);
one or more processing apparatuses configured to perform one or more processing operations on the pellet-shaped articles (Paragraph 0080); and
a controller (60) configured to receive images of the pellet-shaped articles captured by the camera and configured to instruct the one or more processing apparatuses to perform the one or more processing operations (Paragraphs 0063, 0078, 0080, 0082).
However, Ackley, Jr. et al. does not explicitly disclose the filter is configured to restrict transmission of light within a range of wavelengths, the range of wavelengths being centered approximately equal to a wavelength of the light from the light source, the filter being positioned between the pellet-shaped articles passing through the inspection apparatus and the camera such that light within the range of wavelengths is configured to restrict transmission of light within a range of wavelengths, the range of wavelengths being centered approximately equal to a wavelength of the light from the light source (Paragraph 0062), the filter being positioned between the substrate (250) passing through an inspection apparatus (200, Paragraph 0062) and the camera (121) such that light within the range of wavelengths is prevented from reaching the camera (121, Paragraph 0062).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the present invention was made to modify the filter taught by Ackley, Jr. et al. since it would require obvious substitution of a known filter with a filter that restricts transmission of light within a range of wavelengths, the range of wavelengths being centered approximately equal to a wavelength of the light from the light source as taught by Boscolo et al. for the purpose of reducing the amount of unwanted energy being received by the camera.
With respect to claim 29, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the controller (60) is configured to detect one or more characteristics of each of the pellet-shaped articles from each image received from the camera (Paragraphs 0063, 0078, 0080, 0082).
With respect to claim 30, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the pellet- shaped articles are softgel capsules and the characteristic is a seam each of the softgel capsules (Paragraphs 0008, 0064, 0067).
With respect to 31, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches wherein a hole (36) extends from each pocket through each of the carrier bars (Paragraph 0060, Figure 4).
With respect to 32, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches each of the carrier bars (24) includes a number of holes (36) equal to a number of pockets (34, Figures 1-7).
With respect to claim 33, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the hole (36) extends from a bottom surface of pocket (Figures 4 and 5).
With respect to claim 34, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches a vacuum generator pneumatically connected to a conveyer base to draw a vacuum through each hole in the carrier bars passing over the conveyer base (Paragraphs 0087-0089).
With respect to claim 35, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the claimed invention with the exception of the carrier bars comprise a base constructed from a first material and a pocket insert constructed from a second material that is different from the first material.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material and shape on the basis of suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing carrier bars comprise a base constructed from a first material and a pocket insert constructed from a second material that is different from the first material for the purpose of providing cost effective and durable materials.
With respect to claim 36, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the pockets are formed in the pocket insert (Figure 4).
With respect to claim 37, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the claimed invention with the exception of the first material is more rigid than the second material.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material and shape on the basis of suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing a first material is more rigid than the second material for the purpose of providing cost effective and durable materials.
With respect to claims 38 and 39, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the claimed invention with the exception of wherein the first material is metal, the second material is plastic and the metal is an aluminum.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material and shape on the basis of suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize wherein the first material is metal and the second material is plastic for the purpose of providing cost effective and durable materials.
With respect to claim 40, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches wherein the hole (36) extends through (Figure 4), however does not explicitly disclose a first material and a second material.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material and shape on the basis of suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize providing a first and second material for the purpose of providing cost effective and durable materials.
With respect to claim 41, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches the pocket insert is removable from the base (Figure 4).
With respect to claim 42, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches a first inspection apparatus (10, 48) and a second inspection apparatus (10, 50); and a first processing apparatus (Paragraph 0080) positioned downstream of the first inspection apparatus (10, 48) and upstream of the second inspection apparatus (10, 50) relative to the conveyer path and a second processing apparatus downstream of the second inspection apparatus relative to the conveyer path (Figure 9).
With respect to claim 47, Ackley, Jr. et al. teaches a processing unit (14) configured to apply a mark to each of the pellet-shaped articles.
3. Claims 23-27 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackley, Jr. et al. (US 2004/0094050) in view of Boscolo et al. (EP 2650674) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Blanc (WO2017/187076).
With respect to claim 23, Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, teaches the claimed invention with the exception of wherein light from the light source is UV light source. Blanc teaches wherein light from the light source is UV light source (Page 32, Lines 24-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the present invention was made to further modify the invention taught by Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, since it would require obvious substitution of a known light with a light source that is a UV light as taught by Blanc for the purpose of enhancing the inspection process thereby effectively detecting surface flaws and defects in a substrate.
With respect to claim 24, Blanc teaches wherein light from the light source has a wavelength centered at a wavelength in the range of approximately 300 nm to approximately 800 nm (Page 21, Lines 5-12).
With respect to claim 25, Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, teaches the claimed invention including a light from a light source has a wavelength as taught by Blanc however does not explicitly disclose light from the light source has a wavelength centered at approximately 365 nm.
However, it has been held that held that where general conditions are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105USPQ 233.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in that art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Ackley et al. in view of Blanc, to provide light from the light source has a wavelength centered at approximately 365 nm as claimed since such a modification would ensure a more visible image of the article.
With respect to claim 26, Blanc teaches the filter is configured to transmit only visible light (Page 32, Lines 24-30).
With respect to claim 27, Blanc teaches the filter is configured to transmit only light having a wavelength within a portion of the visible light spectrum (Page 32, Lines 24-30).
With respect to claim 48, Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, teaches the claimed invention including a camera (48, 50) and a UV light source as taught by Blanc (Page 32, Lines 24-30), however Ackley, Jr. et al. in view of Blanc does not explicitly disclose a second UV light source configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with UV light while passing the inspection apparatus, wherein the camera is positioned downstream of one of the UV light source and the second UV light source and upstream of the other of the UV light source and the second UV light source relative to the conveyer path.
However, it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art and has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Plarza, 274, 124 USPQ 378 (1960). Blanc does at least one uv light source (Page 32, Lines 24-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the present invention was made to provide an UV light thereby providing a second UV light since such a modification would provide additional uv light to provide the medium with greater visibility to ensure no defects in a medium.
Ackley, Jr. et al. in view of Blanc does not teach wherein the camera is positioned downstream of one of the UV light source and the second UV light source and upstream of the other of the UV light source and the second UV light source relative to the conveyer path. However, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 and In re Kuhle, 526, 188 USPQ 7(CCPA 1975).
One skilled in the art before the effective filing date would have recognized to provide a camera is positioned downstream of one of the UV light source and the second UV light source and upstream of the other of the UV light source and the second UV light source relative to the conveyer path for the purpose of providing multiple images along the conveyance path to ensure there are no defects in the substrate.
4. Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackley, Jr. et al. (US 2004/0094050) in view of Boscolo et al. (EP 2650674) and Blanc (WO2017/187076) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of RU 165186.
With respect to claim 28, Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, teaches the claimed invention with the exception of wherein the filter is an absorption filter.
RU165186 teaches an apparatus for conveying containers wherein a filter is an absorption filter (3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the present invention was made to modify the filter taught by Ackley, Jr. et al. since it would require obvious substitution of a known filter with an absorption filter as taught by RU 165186 for the purpose of providing a clear visual inspection of surface defects.
5. Claims 49-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackley, Jr. et al. (US 2004/0094050) in view of Boscolo et al. (EP 2650674) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Brown (US Patent 7,550,745).
With respect to claim 49, Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified teaches the claimed invention with the exception of the UV light source is configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with UV light at a wavelength that causes fluorescence of the pellet- shaped articles.
Brown teaches a UV light source is configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with UV light at a wavelength that causes fluorescence of the pellet- shaped articles (Column 3, Lines 43-55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the present invention was made to further modify the UV light taught by Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, since it would require obvious substitution of a known UV light at a wavelength that causes fluorescence as taught by Brown for the purpose of enhancing intensity and providing high visibility of a medium.
With respect to claim 50, Brown teaches the UV light source is configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles (note: pellet-shaped articles are not positively recited, however in this instance the fruit functions as pellet-shaped articles) with monochromatic UV light (Column 3, Lines 43-55), and the filter is configured to allow light to pass having a wavelength in the UV spectrum (Column 3, Lines 43-55).
With respect to claim 51, Brown teaches the UV light source is configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with monochromatic UV light, and the filter is configured to allow light to pass having a wavelength in the visible spectrum (Column 3, Lines 43-55).
6. Claim 52 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackley, Jr. et al. (US 2004/0094050) in view of Boscolo et al. (EP 2650674) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Wang (US Publication 2017/0041997).
With respect to claim 52, Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, teaches the claimed invention with the exception of the UV light source is configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with polychromatic UV light, and the filter is configured to allow light to pass having a wavelength in the visible spectrum.
Wang teaches UV light source is configured to illuminate the pellet-shaped articles with polychromatic UV light, and the filter is configured to allow light to pass having a wavelength in the visible spectrum (Paragraph 0054).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the present invention was made to further modify the UV light taught by Ackley, Jr. et al., as modified, since it would require obvious substitution of a known UV light with a polychromatic uv light as taught by Wang for the purpose of providing brightness and intensity to a substrate.
Reasons for Allowance
7. Claims 1-21 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 1, the prior art does not teach or render obvious an apparatus for processing pellet-shaped articles in combination with all the structure as recited and in particularly a plurality of article contacting devices positioned downstream of the inspection unit along the conveyer path and arranged in a row that is oriented perpendicularly to the direction of travel of the carrier bars, a number of article contacting devices being equal to a number of pockets in each of the carrier bars, and each of the article contacting devices being configured to contact a corresponding one of the pellet-shaped articles passing thereby along the conveyer path while being held in a corresponding pocket and a controller configured to be responsive to the determination, instruct the article contacting device whether to manipulate the pellet-shaped article.
Claims 43-46 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.
With respect to claim 43, the prior art does not teach or render obvious the processing apparatus comprises an article contacting device positioned above each row of pockets of the carrier bars, the article contacting device being configured to contact individual pellet-shaped articles in response to instructions from the controller to rotate individual pellet- shaped articles within respective pockets.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-47 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of the current rejection.
Conclusion
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 MARISSA LIANA FERGUSON SAMRETH whose telephone number is (571)272-2163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/Marissa Ferguson-Samreth/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852