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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 13 that while in the instant claims the loading element and movement device are components of the measuring device, in Mengoli the movement device is the external conveyor.
Examiner notes that there is nothing in the claim construction that excludes a conveyor from being part of the measurement device. Turning to the drawings and the specification of the instant application, Applicant defines the measurement device as a collection of elements that need not be integral or connected since it includes the body, the loading element and the movement device while are all physically separate from one another. The specification does not even narrow the movement device down to limit it to any particular structure since it reads that “the movement device 7 can be a pneumatic, mechanical or electronic actuation device, capable of moving the loading element 6 and connected thereto” (¶ [0068]). Therefore, within broadest reasonable interpretation the movement device can be interpreted to be a conveyor and still fall within the metes and bounds of a “measurement device” as defined by the claim and consistent with the specification.
Applicant argues on pages 12-15 that it is not possible for Mengoli to disclose a movement device that is “configured to move back the loading element from the internal position to the external position to extract the product through the loading opening” because for various reasons Mengoli’s conveyor belt is only configured to move in the forward direction. It appears that Applicant is interpreting “move back” as necessarily changing directions. Examiner respectfully disagrees that a change in direction is required to meet the claim limitations. The claim construction explicitly defines “move back the loading element” as going from the “internal position to the external position”. It doesn’t define the movement as traveling two different directions along the same path or even returning to the same physical positions as Applicant apparently intends the language to be interpreted. Moving back to an external position from an internal position under broadest reasonable interpretation can simply be passing through the body of the measurement device as the products are cyclically inspected while being moved along the conveyor belt. Examiner also notes that several of the previously objected to claims also clearly and precisely define the directional movement of the loading device by way of the movement device that do not read on the prior art. For these reasons the rejections of claims 1 and 14 are maintained.
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 1, 4, 10, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mengoli et al. (WO 2020/058871; “Mengoli”) in view of Kraszewski et al. (USPN 5,554,935; “Kraszewski”).
Regarding claim 1, Mengoli discloses in at least figure 6 an electromagnetic measuring device (1) for measuring one or more extensive properties of a product (page 1, lines 1-3) the electromagnetic measuring device (1) comprising a body (8) including walls (801, 802, 803, 807, 808) and a hollow interior (page 11, lines 10-13)defining an internal cavity (805, 806) configured to receive the product (page 13, lines 5-8), a coupling component (4, 5), configured to create an electromagnetic field in the internal cavity (805, 806) and to receive said electromagnetic field disturbed by the product present in the internal cavity (805, 806) (page 8, lines 12-21), the body (8) further including a loading opening (2) made in one of said walls (807, 808) (page 11, lines 10-24), a loading element (no reference numeral, disclosed as “guide elements”) and a movement device (no reference numeral, disclosed as “belt conveyor”), wherein the movement device is capable of moving the loading element relative to the body (8) and is configured to insert the loading element into the body (8) through said loading opening from an external position, configured to receive the product, to an internal position, in which the product is in the internal cavity (805, 806) and is positioned in a measuring position (page 15, lines 1-21) and wherein the movement device (belt conveyor) is configured to move back the loading element (guide elements) from the internal position to the external position, so as to extract the product through the same loading opening (2) (page 15, lines 1-21).
Mengoli is silent to the walls being made of a conductive material.
However, the principle of operation of Mengoli’s device is as a microwave resonator (page 13, lines 2-4).
Kraszewski teaches a microwave resonator for use in determining extensive properties of a product (abstract) and that it is known to engineer the walls to be made of a conductive material (col. 1, lines 19-55).
It has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is within the purview of one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP §2144.07.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to form Mengoli’s walls out of a conductive material as taught by Kraszewski so that the walls can act as waveguides for the microwaves to create the resonant cavity rather than absorbing them and creating losses.
Regarding claim 4, Mengoli discloses the internal cavity (805, 806) includes a loading space (interior of gap 2), in communication with the loading opening (2), the loading element (guide elements) being movable in the loading space (interior of gap 2) (page 15, lines 1-21) and wherein the electromagnetic measuring device (1) comprises a dielectric component (9) made of a material in the solid state, which at least partly fills the internal cavity (805, 806), the loading space (interior of gap 2) being delimited by the dielectric component (9) (page 12, lines 21-27).
Regarding claim 10, Mengoli discloses the internal cavity (805, 806) includes a loading space (interior of gap 2), in communication with the loading opening (2) (page 15, lines 1-21), the loading element (guide elements) being movable in the loading space interior of gap 2) along a loading line (direction D) (page 8, lines 2-7), the coupling component (4, 5) being oriented and positioned in one of said walls (801, 802, 803, 807, 808) in such a way that the electromagnetic field created in the internal cavity (805, 806) has an electric field distribution lying in a plane perpendicular to the loading line (D) (see figure 8 and 9).
Regarding claim 14, Mengoli and Kraszewski disclose a method for measuring one or more extensive properties of a product, the method comprising providing an electromagnetic measuring device (1, disclosed in at least figure 6) for measuring one or more extensive properties of the product (page 1, lines 1-3) the electromagnetic measuring device (1) comprising a body (8) including walls (801, 802, 803, 807, 808) and a hollow interior (page 11, lines 10-13) to define an internal cavity (805, 806) configured to receive the product (page 13, lines 5-8), a coupling component (4, 5), configured to create an electromagnetic field in the internal cavity (805, 806) and to receive said electromagnetic field disturbed by the product present in the internal cavity (805, 806) (page 8, lines 12-21), the body (8) further including a loading opening (2) made in one of said walls (807, 808) (page 11, lines 10-24), a loading element (no reference numeral, disclosed as “guide elements”) and a movement device (no reference numeral, disclosed as “belt conveyor”), wherein the movement device is capable of moving the loading element relative to the body (8) and is configured to insert the loading element into the body (8) through said loading opening from an external position, configured to receive the product, to an internal position, in which the product is in the internal cavity (805, 806) and is positioned in a measuring position, (page 15, lines 1-21) and wherein the movement device (belt conveyor) is configured to move back the loading element (guide elements) from the internal position to the external position, so as to extract the product through the same loading opening (2) (page 15, lines 1-21), receiving the product on the loading element (guide elements), when the loading element (guide elements) is in the external position (page 15, lines 1-8), inserting the loading element (guide elements) into the body (8) through the loading opening (2) by moving the loading element (guide elements) from the external position to the internal position, to position the product in the internal cavity (805, 806) in the measuring position (page 15, lines 9-14), creating an electromagnetic field in the internal cavity (805, 806) and receiving said electromagnetic field disturbed by the product present in the internal cavity (805, 806) to measure the one or more extensive properties of the product (page 15, line 31 through page 16, line 6) and moving back the loading element from the internal position to the external position to extract the product through the loading opening (2) (page 15, lines 1-21).
Mengoli is silent to the walls being made of a conductive material.
However, the principle of operation of Mengoli’s device is as a microwave resonator (page 13, lines 2-4).
Kraszewski teaches a microwave resonator for use in determining extensive properties of a product (abstract) and that it is known to engineer the walls to be made of a conductive material (col. 1, lines 19-55).
It has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is within the purview of one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP §2144.07.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to form Mengoli’s walls out of a conductive material as taught by Kraszewski so that the walls can act as waveguides for the microwaves to create the resonant cavity rather than absorbing them and creating losses.
Regarding claim 20, Mengoli discloses orienting an electric field distribution such that the electric field distribution lies in a plane perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of a loading space (2) of the internal cavity (805, 806) in which the loading element (guide element) moves (see figures 8 and 9).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mengoli and Kraszewski as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cerati et al. (WO 2021/005518; “Cerati”).
Regarding claim 2, Mengoli as modified by Kraszewski discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Mengoli describes a movement device and a loading element in general (page 15, lines 1-21) but is silent to the claimed specifics.
In the same field of endeavor, Cerati discloses in figure 2 an electromagnetic measuring device (400) (page 3, lines 20-22), wherein the loading element (4) is shaped in such a way as to close the loading opening (440), when the loading element (4) is in the internal position, and comprises a supporting part (4a), made of a dielectric material, which is configured to receive the product (100) resting on it and at least partly delimits the internal cavity (410), when the loading element (4) is in the internal position (page 5, line 2 through page 6, line 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to engineer Mengoli’s measuring device as claimed as taught by Cerati for the purpose of measuring differently shaped objects for quality control. While Mengoli’s loading element is specifically for cigarettes, one having ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate and infer that the same principle can be used for any product including for example coffee pods, as taught by Cerati (see for example Cerati page 6, line 28 through page 7, line 4). This engineering design ensures the irregularly shaped object is located in the center of the electromagnetic field for the most accurate results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9, 11-13, 16-19, and 21 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.
Claim 22 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 5, none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses or renders obvious an electromagnetic measuring device as claimed the body being provided with at least one filling opening made in one of the walls and the internal cavity having a filling space, in communication with the filling opening; the filling space being configured to receive a nozzle suitable for filling the container with the flowing material, when the loading element is in the internal position and the container is in the measuring position in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
While Cerati generally teaches using the electromagnetic measuring device as a feedback mechanism to adjust dosing of powders seepage 7, line 29 through page 8, line 1), it does not provide for a mechanism to fill/doe while simultaneously measuring the weight/volume of the powder.
Claims 6-9, 11, and 12 would be allowable based on their dependence on claim 5.
Regarding claim 13, none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses or renders obvious an electromagnetic measuring device as claimed, wherein the coupling component is oriented and positioned in one of said walls to create an electromagnetic field having an electric field distribution having a maximum intensity in a position other than the measuring position in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
Regarding claim 16, none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses or renders obvious a measuring method as claimed comprising a step of filling the container with the flowing material, by means of a nozzle received in a filling space of the internal cavity in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
While Cerati generally teaches using the electromagnetic measuring device as a feedback mechanism to adjust dosing of powders seepage 7, line 29 through page 8, line 1), it does not provide for a mechanism to fill/doe while simultaneously measuring the weight/volume of the powder.
Claims 17-19 would be allowable based on their dependence on claim 16.
Regarding claim 21, none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses or renders obvious a measuring method as claimed comprising the step of orienting an electric field distribution in the internal cavity in such a way that it has a maximum intensity in a position other than the measuring position in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
Regarding claim 22, none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses or renders obvious an electromagnetic measuring device as claimed, wherein the coupling component is oriented and positioned in one of said walls to create an electromagnetic field having an electric field distribution having a maximum intensity in a position other than the measuring position in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art previously made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2023/228039 discloses an electromagnetic detector for product quality control.
DE 102013213936 discloses an electromagnetic detector for product quality control.
DE 102015105353 discloses an electromagnetic detector for product quality control.
USPN 7,337,074 discloses a microwave resonator mass determination device for powders.
USPN 8,008,928 discloses a microwave resonator mass determination device.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NATALIE HULS whose telephone number is (571)270-5914. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, John Breene can be reached at (571) 272-4107. 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.
/NATALIE HULS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights