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 .
This is the First Office action on the Merits from the examiner in charge of this application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 3/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Grouping, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/26/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations in claim 2, lines 4-5 of “wherein the separating ribs have in particular a lower height than the height of the longitudinal-edge strips” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the separating “ribs" in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 1, line 1, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 1, lines 11 and 17, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 2, line 5, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 5, line 3, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 6, line 3, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by USP 5868080 to Wyler et al (hereinafter Wyler).
Wyler discloses (Claim 1). A product carrier 12 for transporting food products, and in particular chocolate products, in a transport device, the transport device in a plant for producing food products, wherein the product carrier 12 has an upper side for loading and/or inserting products and an underside opposite the upper side, the product carrier 12 has a rectangular basic shape with longitudinal sides (Fig. 1, X-axis) which have a length in a longitudinal direction, and with width sides (Fig. 1, Y-axis) which have a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, wherein the product carrier 12 has, on the longitudinal sides, mutually-opposing longitudinal-edge strips (not numbered), each of which has a drive aperture 18, wherein the drive apertures 18 of the two longitudinal-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side, have a longitudinal extent of greater than 50%, and preferably greater than 80%, of the length of the product carrier 12, and have stop edges in and counter to the longitudinal direction, and, on the width sides, the product carrier 12 has mutually-opposing width-edge strips (defined by side walls 44) which each have at least one guide aperture 54, wherein the guide apertures 54 of the width-edge strips 44 are open in a direction extending away from the upper side, and have a width extent of less than 10%, and preferably less than 5%, of the width of the product carrier; (Claim 2). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein at least one separating rib (middle runner shown in Fig. 1) which extends perpendicularly to the longitudinal direction, is arranged on the underside of the product carrier and forms at least two channels (such as shown in Fig. 4) which are open in a direction pointing away from the upper side and along which air can be conducted, wherein the separating ribs have in particular a lower height than the height of the width-edge strips 44; (Claim 3). The product carrier according to claim 2, wherein the height of the separating rib is smaller than the height of the width-edge strips 44 on the guide apertures 54; (Claim 4). The product carrier according to claim 2, wherein reinforcing ribs (such as shown in Figs. 8A-9B) which extend in the longitudinal direction and which in particular have a lower height than the separating rib are attached in the channels; (Claim 6). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein the product carrier 12 comprises support bars (see below annotated copy) which are each arranged parallel to the width-edge strips 44 which preferably have just as many apertures as the width-edge strips 44;
PNG
media_image1.png
764
1030
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Claim 7). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein one or a plurality of alveoli 24,26 is arranged on the upper side of the product carrier 12; (Claim 9). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein each of the width-edge strips 44 has one to eight guide apertures.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0041706 Whetstone.
Whetstone discloses (Claim 1). A product carrier 30 for transporting food products, and in particular chocolate products, in a transport device, the transport device in a plant for producing food products, wherein the product carrier 30 has an upper side 31 for loading and/or inserting products and an underside opposite the upper side, the product carrier 30 has a rectangular basic shape with longitudinal sides which have a length in a longitudinal direction, and with width sides which have a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, wherein the product carrier 30 has, on the longitudinal sides, mutually-opposing longitudinal-edge strips, each of which has a drive aperture (defined as between sidewalls 42,43), wherein the drive apertures of the two longitudinal-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side, have a longitudinal extent of greater than 50%, and preferably greater than 80%, of the length of the product carrier 30, and have stop edges in and counter to the longitudinal direction, and, on the width sides, the product carrier has mutually-opposing width-edge strips (defined the outer surface of sidewalls 42, 43) which each have at least one guide aperture 45a,45b (Fig. 4), wherein the guide apertures of the width-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side 31, and have a width extent of less than 10%, and preferably less than 5%, of the width of the product carrier 30; (Claim 2). (Previously Presented): The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein at least one separating rib (see below annotated copy) which extends perpendicularly to the longitudinal direction, is arranged on the underside of the product carrier 30 and forms at least two channels which are open in a direction pointing away from the upper side and along which air can be conducted, wherein the separating ribs have in particular a lower height than the width-edge strips;
PNG
media_image2.png
726
1010
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Claim 3). The product carrier according to claim 2, wherein the height of the separating rib is smaller than or equal to the height of the width-edge strips on the guide apertures; (Claim 6). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein the product carrier 30 comprises support bars (see below annotated copy) which are each arranged parallel to the width-edge strips which preferably have just as many apertures as the width-edge strips;
PNG
media_image3.png
694
992
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Claim 7). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein one or a plurality of alveoli 32 (Fig. 2) is arranged on the upper side of the product carrier 30; (Claim 9). The product carrier according to claim 1, wherein each of the width-edge strips has one to eight guide apertures 45a,45b.
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 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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whetstone in view of USP 10737832 to Apps et al (hereinafter Apps).
Whetstone discloses all the elements as discussed above the limitations in claim 5.
However, Apps discloses a product carrier 10 comprising an upper side for loading products and an underside opposite the upper side, the product carrier 10 has a rectangular basic shape with longitudinal sides which have a length in a longitudinal direction, and with width sides which have a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, wherein the product carrier 10 has, on the longitudinal sides, mutually-opposing longitudinal-edge strips, each of which has a drive aperture, wherein the drive apertures of the two longitudinal-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side, have a longitudinal extent of greater than 50%, and preferably greater than 80%, of the length of the product carrier 10, and have stop edges in and counter to the longitudinal direction, and, on the width sides, the product carrier has mutually-opposing width-edge strips (defined as the outer surface of each support 14); wherein the longitudinal-edge strips and/or the width-edge strips are beveled towards the upper side of the product carrier, and preferably along the entire length and/or width (such as shown in Figs. 1, and 3-4).
PNG
media_image4.png
860
1070
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Apps, to modify Whetstone to include the limitations in claim 5 of wherein the longitudinal- edge strips and/or the width-edge strips are beveled towards the upper side of the product carrier, and preferably along the entire length and/or width a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent potential snagging of the product carrier.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wyler in view of USP 12409973 to Glaser et al.
Wyler discloses all the elements as discussed above the limitations in claim 5.
However, Glaser discloses a product carrier 10 comprising an upper side for loading products and an underside opposite the upper side, the product carrier 10 has a rectangular basic shape with longitudinal sides which have a length in a longitudinal direction, and with width sides which have a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, wherein the product carrier 10 has, on the longitudinal sides, mutually-opposing longitudinal-edge strips, each of which has a drive aperture, wherein the drive apertures of the two longitudinal-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side, have a longitudinal extent of greater than 50%, and preferably greater than 80%, of the length of the product carrier 10, and have stop edges in and counter to the longitudinal direction, and, on the width sides, the product carrier has mutually-opposing width-edge strips (defined as the outer surface of each block 12); wherein the length is shorter than the width (such as shown in Figs. 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Glaser, to modify Wyler to include the limitations in claim 8 of wherein the length is shorter than the width with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the product carrier.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whetstone in view of USP 10815028 to Turner et al (hereinafter Turner).
Whetstone discloses all the elements as discussed above except for the limitations in claim 10.
However, Turner discloses a product carrier 5 comprising an upper side for loading products and an underside opposite the upper side, the product carrier 5 has a rectangular basic shape with longitudinal sides which have a length in a longitudinal direction, and with width sides which have a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, wherein the product carrier 5 has, on the longitudinal sides, mutually-opposing longitudinal-edge strips, each of which has a drive aperture, wherein the drive apertures of the two longitudinal-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side, have a longitudinal extent of greater than 50%, and preferably greater than 80%, of the length of the product carrier 10, and have stop edges in and counter to the longitudinal direction, and, on the width sides, the product carrier has mutually-opposing width-edge strips (defined as the outer surface of each riser 300) which have at least one guide aperture (Fig. 5: defined between end sections 308 and middle section 310), wherein the guide apertures of the width-edge strips are open in a direction extending away from the upper side; wherein the part of the contour of the guide aperture which abuts the edge, facing away from the upper side, of the width- edge strips encloses an angle α of 85°-95° with the edge, facing away from the upper side, of the width-edge strips Figs. 6 & 23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Turner, to modify Whetstone to include the limitations in claim 10 of wherein the part of the contour of the guide aperture which abuts the edge, facing away from the upper side, of the width- edge strips encloses an angle a of 85°-95° with the edge, facing away from the upper side, of the width-edge strips with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the product carrier.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and all show structures similar to various elements of applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANH VAN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6868. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, DANIEL TROY can be reached at (571)270-3742. 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.
HVT
June 15, 2026
/HANH V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights