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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species IV (Fig.13) in the reply filed on 11/26/2025 is acknowledged. Applicant further discussed that claims 1-15 read on the elected species.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/01/2023 is being considered by the examiner.
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: 2
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.
Claims 1, 2, 10, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Dubuit (US 2019/0105925).
Regarding claim 1, Dubuit teaches a pretreatment device (figs.1-3) pretreating at least one container (5) with a longitudinal axis (Δ) having an outer surface (7 of 5) to be subjected to ink jet digital printing (printheads 41), wherein the pretreatment device comprises one or more plasma emitters (15,17), a table (13) supporting at least one support spindle, the spindle (61A-61D) supporting said at least one container (5), wherein said table (13) has a rotation axis (Δ2), wherein said at least one spindle (61A-61D) has an axis (D1-D4) oriented radially with respect to said rotation axis (Δ2) of said table (13), wherein said table (13) is configured to carry and park said at least one spindle (61A-61D) at an exposure position (position under 15 and/or 17) in which said outer surface (7) of said at least one container (5) is exposed to plasma emitted from the one or more plasma emitters (15,17) (paragraphs 0022,0040,0046,0051,0059, 0062,0064,0075-0077).
Regarding claim 2, Dubuit further teaches wherein said exposure position (position under 15 and/or 17 figs.1-3) at said least one spindle (61A-61D) is rotatable around its axis for the progressive exposure to the plasma of said outer surface of said at least one container (paragraphs 0009,0040,0062,0078).
Regarding claim 10, Dubuit further teaches an ink jet digital printing machine (19 including 41 figs.1-3) for printing on said at least one container (5), comprising the pretreatment device according to claim 1 (figs.1-3).
Regarding claim 11, Dubuit further teaches further comprising at least one printing station (station under 41 figs.1-3) provided with at least one printing head (41), wherein said table (13) is configured to carry and park said at least one spindle (61A-61D) at said at least one printing station in which said at least one spindle (61A-61D) is rotatable around its axis, wherein said at least one spindle (61A-61D) parked at said at least one printing station has its axis parallel to the longitudinal axis of said at least one printing head (41), the ink jet digital printing machine (figs.1-3) further comprising a pretreatment station (station under 15 and/or 17) in which said pretreatment device (15 and/or 17) is positioned, and wherein said table (13) is configured to carry and park said at least one spindle (61A-61D) at said at least one pretreatment station (station under 15 and/or 17) before carrying and parking said at least one spindle at said at least one printing station (station under 41) (figs.1-3, paragraphs 0054,0074-0077).
Regarding claim 14, Dubuit further teaches wherein said table (13 figs.1-3) has a vertical rotation axis (figs.1-3).
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.
Claims 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubuit (US 2019/0105925) in view of Till (US 2016/0221328) and/or Lestrange et al.(US 2018/0304643) and/or Wilson, II et al. (US 2004/0091633).
Regarding claim 3, Dubuit further teaches plasma emitter (15 figs.1-3) whose position is configured to be adjustable relative to the surface of the container (5).
Dubuit does not explicitly teaches arranging plasma emitters comprising composable plasma emitting modules.
However, Till teaches pretreatment unit (3 figs.2,3;15 fig.6) configured to pretreat the outer surface of container (1), and wherein the pretreatment unit (3 figs.2,3;15 fig.6) includes plurality of plasma emitting modules (7).
Similarly, Lestrange et al teaches pretreatment unit (172 fig.1) configured to treat the outer surface of container (120), and wherein the pretreatment unit (172) includes plurality of treatment emitting modules (156,160,164) arranged around the container (120).
Similarly, Wilson, II et al teaches pretreatment unit (320,322,328 fig.4) configured to treat the outer surface of container (cup on 304), and wherein the pretreatment unit includes plurality of treatment emitting modules (320,322,328) arranged around the container (fig.4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include plurality of plasm emitting modules in Dubuit based on the teachings of Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al for instance to be able to uniform plasma treatment more quickly and with less movements of elements.
Regarding claim 4, Dubuit as modified by Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al further teaches wherein said plasma emitting modules (15 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 7 figs.2,3, 6 of Till; 156,160,164 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; 320,322,328 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) are arranged in succession in a direction of the axis of the spindle (61A-61D figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 23 figs.6 of Till; 116 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; spindle of 304 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) and consecutive modules in the direction of the axis of the spindle have a section of overlap in the direction of the axis of the spindle (figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above;figs.2,3, 6 of Till; fig.1 of Lestrange et al; fig.4 of Wilson, II et al).
Regarding claim 5, Dubuit as modified by Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al further teaches wherein first plasma emitting modules (15 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 7 figs.2,3, 6 of Till; 156,160,164 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; 320,322,328 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) of the plasma emitting modules are arranged at a first angular position around the axis of said spindle (D1-D4 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 23 figs.6 of Till; 116 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; spindle of 304 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) parked in said exposure position.
Regarding claim 6, Dubuit as modified by Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al further teaches further comprising a direction variation means (paragraph 0051, figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 24,25 figs.6 of Till; 168 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) for varying an emission direction of said first plasma emitting modules.
Regarding claim 7, Dubuit as modified by Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al further teaches further comprising a distance variation means (paragraph 0051, figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 24,25 figs.6 of Till; 168 in directions C-P and/or P in fig.1 of Lestrange et al; fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) for varying a radial distance of said first plasma emitting modules from the axis of said spindle parked in said exposure position.
Regarding claim 8, Dubuit as modified by Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al further teaches further comprising one or more second plasma emitting modules (second one of 15 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; second one of 7 figs.2,3, 6 of Till; second one of 156,160,164 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; second one of 320,322,328 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) arranged at a second angular position around the axis of said spindle (D1-D4 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 23 figs.6 of Till; 116 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; spindle of 304 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) parked in said exposure position.
Regarding claim 9, Dubuit as modified by Till and/or Lestrange et al and/or Wilson, II et al further teaches wherein said first emitting modules (15 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; 7 figs.2,3, 6 of Till; 156,160,164 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; 320,322,328 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) are in a position diametrically opposite of said one or more second modules (second one of 15 figs.1-3 of Dubuit as modified above; second one of 7 figs.2,3, 6 of Till; second one of 156,160,164 fig.1 of Lestrange et al; second one of 320,322,328 fig.4 of Wilson, II et al) with respect to the axis of said spindle (fig.4 of Wilson, II et al).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubuit (US 2019/0105925) in view of Mayer et al. (EP3678790) and/or Weber et al. (US 2023/0058773).
Regarding claim 15, Dubuit further teaches said pre-treatment station (station under 15 and/or 17 figs.1-3).
Dubuit does not explicitly teaches a container cooling station comprising at least one cooling module including a cooling compressed air emission pipe and a heated air suction pipe, in that said spindle can be parked at said cooling station with said axis of said spindle parallel to an axis of the emission pipe and to an axis of the suction pipe.
However, Mayer et al teaches a container cooling station (figs.1,2) comprising at least one cooling module including a cooling compressed air (11) emission pipe (12) and a heated air suction pipe (exhaust pipe attached to the suction device 15), the containers (2) are configured to be parked at said cooling station, in that the container carrier (3), the emission pipe (12) and the suction pipe (exhaust pipe attached to the suction device 15) extends in parallel to each other (figs.1,2).
Similarly, Weber et al teaches providing a container cooling station downstream of said pre-treatment station (3) (fig.1, paragraph 0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a cooling station in Dubuit based on the teaching of Mayer et al and/or Weber et al for instance to adjust the temperature of the containers to appropriate level in preparation for subsequent processes such as printing on the containers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12,13 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENOK D LEGESSE whose telephone number is (571)270-1615. The examiner can normally be reached General Schedule 9:00 am- 5:00 pm, IFP.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/HENOK D LEGESSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853