DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This Action is in response to the Response to Non-Final after RCE filed 07/31/2026.
The status of the Claims is as follows:
Claims 5 and 16 have been cancelled;
Claims 1, 6, 13-15, 17 and 18 have been amended;
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/13/2023. was filed after the mailing date of the Application on 12/13/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 8-10, 13-15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laghi (US 20190002138) in view of Burtturini (WO 2013050832A1).
Regarding Claim 1 Laghi discloses an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with a film comprising:
a guide carriage (2), comprising wheels (3) operable to move said guide carriage (2) around a load to be wrapped;
a column, (6) associated with said guide carriage (2) and capable of holding a reel (60) of said film (50), said reel (60) being rotatable to release, in operation, said film (50) around said load to be wrapped;
a plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) associated with said guide carriage (2) and/or with said column (6), said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) being configured to detect, instant by instant, data relating to the distance of said guide carriage (2) from the load to be wrapped (par 46-57); and
a control unit (20) configured to receive at every instant said data from said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) and to calculate responsive to the data received at each instant, a predetermined steering angle that said guide carriage (2) must follow, wherein said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) includes a first sensor and a second sensor wherein the first sensor(12) has a first detection direction (X), which is transverse to a vertical direction and is transverse to the advancing direction of the guide carriage (2), and the second sensor (11) has a second detection orientation along a second detection direction (Z), which is substantially orthogonal to said first direction (X), said second direction (Z) being substantially vertical. (par 35-43; 48-51, 57-59, 67)
However, Laghi does not expressly teach the control unit receives data from said plurality of sensors so that an advancing direction of the guide carriage can be adjusted by adjusting the steering angle.
BUTTURINI teaches a guide carriage (5) a column (6) a plurality of sensors (page 9 lines 19-25). Butturini further teaches a control unit that receives data from said plurality of sensor so that an advancing direction of the guide carriage can be adjusted by adjusting the steering angle providing in-situ adjustments for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus. (page 4 lines 23-25; page 5 lines 15-23; page 6 lines 1-7)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the control unit of Laghi to configure it to receives data from said plurality of sensor so that an advancing direction of the guide carriage can be adjusted by adjusting the steering angle.
Regarding Claim 8 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said plurality of sensors (12) is mounted at a side surface (Fig. 1) of said guide carriage (2) adapted to face, in operation, said load to be wrapped. (par 48-51)
Regarding Claim 9 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches a support device (Fig. 4) associated with a side surface (Fig. 4) of said guide carriage (2), capable of supporting said plurality of sensors (12). (par 48-51)
Regarding Claim 10 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches a steering assembly (par 32-33), connected to said wheels (3), said steering assembly (par 32-33) being controlled by said control unit based on said data transmitted by said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13).
Regarding Claim 13 Laghi discloses a method for automatically wrapping a load with a film comprising:
a. arranging, in a work environment in which there is at least one load to be wrapped, an apparatus for automatically wrapping said load with
a film the apparatus being equipped with plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13);
b. starting to wrap said film of around said load, (par 35) and, at the same time,
c. detecting with the plurality of sensors instant by instant data relating to a distance from the load to be wrapped, wherein said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) includes a first sensor and a second sensor wherein the first sensor(12) has a first detection direction (X), which is transverse to a vertical direction and is transverse to the advancing direction of the guide carriage (2), and the second sensor (11) has a second detection orientation along a second detection direction (Z), which is substantially orthogonal to said first direction (X), said second direction (Z) being substantially vertical. (par 35-43; 48-51, 57-59, 67); (par 35-36)
d. at every instant transmitting said data to a control unit; (par 39)
e. for each instant controlling, responsive to the data detected in said each instant by plurality of sensors the direction of movement of said apparatus around said load to be wrapped, by means of said control unit; f. repeating said steps c-e until a wrapping cycle is completed. (par 35-39; 46-47).
Regarding Claim 14 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said control unit is configured to command a predetermined steering angle that said apparatus must follow. (par 34-39)
Regarding Claim 15 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches the control unit is configured to control the trajectory of the apparatus within a region comprised between a predefined minimum distance value and a maximum distance value from the load to be wrapped (par 46, 50, 55, 57, 71)
Regarding Claim 18 Laghi teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with a film comprising:
a guide carriage (2), comprising wheels (3) to move said guide carriage (2) on a floor around a load to be wrapped;
a column (6), associated with said guide carriage (2) and capable of holding a reel (60) of said film (50), said reel (60) being rotatable to release, in operation, said film (50) around said load to be wrapped;
a plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13), configured to detect, instant by instant, data relating to a distance of said guide carriage from the load to be wrapped; (par 46-57) and
a control unit (20) configured to receive, at every instant, said data from said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13), and to calculate, responsive to the data received in each instant, a predetermined steering angle that said guide carriage (2) must follow, for maintaining the distance of said guide carriage (2) from said load to be wrapped within a predetermined extent range (par 34-43, 49, 57-59, 67) wherein said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) includes a first sensor and a second sensor wherein the first sensor(12) has a first detection direction (X), which is transverse to a vertical direction and is transverse to the advancing direction of the guide carriage (2), and the second sensor (11) has a second detection orientation along a second detection direction (Z), which is substantially orthogonal to said first direction (X), said second direction (Z) being substantially vertical and directed away from the floor. (par 35-43; 48-51, 57-59, 67)
However, Laghi does not expressly teach the control unit receives data from said plurality of sensors so that an advancing direction of the guide carriage can be adjusted by adjusting the steering angle.
BUTTURINI teaches a guide carriage (5) a column (6) a plurality of sensors (page 9 lines 19-25). Butturini further teaches a control unit that receives data from said plurality of sensor so that an advancing direction of the guide carriage can be adjusted by adjusting the steering angle providing in-situ adjustments for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus. (page 4 lines 23-25; page 5 lines 15-23; page 6 lines 1-7)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the control unit of Laghi to configure it to receives data from said plurality of sensor so that an advancing direction of the guide carriage can be adjusted by adjusting the steering angle.
Regarding Claim 20 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches at every instant, the control unit (20) is configured for maintaining the distance of said guide carriage (2) from said load to be wrapped within a predetermined extent range. (par 55)
Claims 2-4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laghi (US 20190002138) in view of Burtturini (WO 2013050832A1) as described above and further, in view of Saylor (US 20180162660).
Regarding Claim 2 Laghi in view of Saylor teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches wherein said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) is configured to detect data relating to the distance of said guide carriage (2) from said obstacle at least along a first direction (X), which is transverse to said guide carriage (2), and said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) comprises at least a first sensor (11) having a visual field oriented along said first direction (X), towards said load to be wrapped. (par 48; Fig. 1)
Laghi teaches sensor means are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claim 3 Laghi in view of Saylor teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) configured to detect data relating to the distance of said guide carriage (2) from said obstacle along a first direction (X), transversal to said guide carriage (2), comprises at least a first and a second radar sensor (11, 11) arranged side by side and oriented towards said load to be wrapped. (par 48; Fig. 1)
Laghi teaches sensor means are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claim 4 Laghi in view of Saylor teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said first and second radar sensors (11, 11) placed side by side and oriented towards said load to be wrapped are arranged at such a height as to detect at least an upper part of a device for supporting the load to be wrapped and/or a lower part of the same load to be wrapped placed on said support device. (par 48; Fig. 1)
Laghi teaches sensor means are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claim 6 Laghi in view of Saylor teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) comprises at least a first ultrasonic sensor (11) having a field of view oriented along said first direction (X), towards said load to be wrapped, and at least a second ultrasonic sensor (12) having a visual field oriented upwards along said second direction (Z). (par 48-51)
Laghi teaches sensor means are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claim 7 Laghi in view of Saylor teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) is configured to detect data relating to the distance of said guide carriage (2) from said obstacle at least along a third direction (Y), said third direction (Y) being substantially orthogonal to said first direction (X) and to said second direction (Z), and said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13) comprises at least a third radar sensor (13) having a field of view oriented along said third direction (Y). (par 48-51)
Laghi teaches sensor means are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claim 19 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13)
Laghi teaches said plurality are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claims 11 and 12 Laghi in view of Saylor teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13)
Laghi teaches sensor means are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136). Where a continuous wave radar sensor of the FMCW (Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave) type and/or a pulse radar sensor and/or a doppler radar sensor and or 60 GHz pulse type are known types of radar sensors.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Regarding Claim 17 Laghi teaches the invention as described above. Laghi further teaches said plurality of sensors (11, 12, 13)
Laghi teaches said plurality are ultrasonic sensor however Laghi does not expressly teach sensor means are radar sensor means.
Saylor teaches an apparatus for automatically wrapping a load with film. (par 150-151) Saylor further teaches that ultrasonic sensors are considered art equivalent sensor to radar sensor (par 136).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ultrasonic sensors of Laghi with the radar sensors of Saylor since par 136 of Saylor suggests that such a modification is an art equivalent and it would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to use radar sensors.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Argument: Laghi does not teach or suggests at least wherein sensors do not have a second detection orientation along a second detection direction which is substantially vertical and directed away from the floor.
Examiner’s Response: Laghi discloses at Fig. 3 first and second sensors where first sensor (12) has a detection direction that is transverse to the advancement direction and transverse to the vertical. Further Laghi discloses a second sensor (11) that has a second detection direction which is vertical and directed away from the floor.
PNG
media_image1.png
640
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kudia US 20150101281 (measuring sensors)
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 CHINYERE J RUSHING-TUCKER whose telephone number is (571)270-5944. The examiner can normally be reached 4 pm - 11:59 pm Monday - Friday.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached on 571-270-1926. 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.
/CHINYERE J RUSHING-TUCKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
