DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the AIA first to file provisions. 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 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.
Application Status
This office action is in response to the claims filed 2/5/2026.
Claims 1, 3-16, and 18-22 are currently pending and being examined.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 3-16, and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda (U.S. Patent No. 3,908,836) in view of May (U.S. Patent No. 8,246,290) and Andre et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3,908,836).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Ikeda discloses a blank supply unit (10) for providing flat blanks (23) for production of dimensionally stable outer packaging, the blank supply unit (10) comprising: an input magazine (18) for receiving a stack of blanks (23; as seen in Figure 1), a buffer magazine (61) arranged downstream of the input magazine (18) for receiving stacked blanks (23), a transfilling unit (13) arranged between the input magazine (18) and the buffer magazine (61), the transfilling unit (13) is configured for automatic, batch-wise refilling of the buffer magazine (61) with blanks from the input magazine (see Column 3, line 22-34), and a transfilling conveyor belt (45), and downstream (42) and upstream (44) deflection rollers associated with the transfilling conveyor belt, the downstream deflection roller is positioned or positionable in such a way that the transfilling conveyor belt can deposit a stack of blanks transported thereon in the buffer magazine (see FIG. 1).
Ikeda does not teach a discharge unit for withdrawing a blank from the stacked blanks in the buffer magazine and transporting the blank on to a next processing station for the blank.
May discloses (see Figure 4a and 4c) a blanking supplying unit (11) for providing flat blanks (41) for production of dimensionally stable outer packaging (see Column 5, line 47-57), a discharge unit (22) for withdrawing a blank (41) from the stacked blanks in the buffer magazine (40) and transporting the blank (41) on to a next processing station for the blank (see Column 6, line 33-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the applicant's claimed invention, to have modified Ikeda to incorporate the disclosure of May to include a discharge unit for withdrawing a blank from the stacked blanks in the buffer magazine and transporting the blank on to a next processing station for the blank. Doing so would enable reliable high speed selections of carton blanks during packaging operations.
Ikeda and May do not teach the upstream deflection roller is displaceable between a pick-up position in which the transfilling conveyor belt is in contact with a side surface of the stack in the input magazine and a non-contacting rest position in which the upstream deflection roller and the transfilling conveyor belt are spaced apart from the stack in the input magazine.
In a related device and method, Andre teaches an alternative de-stacking approach wherein an upstream deflection roller is displaceable between a pick-up position in which the transfilling conveyor belt (3) is in contact with a side surface of the stack in the input magazine and a non-contacting rest position in which the upstream deflection roller and the transfilling conveyor belt are spaced apart from the stack in the input magazine (see FIG. 3E).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device and method of Ikeda and May, with an upstream deflection roller displaceable between a pick-up position in which the transfilling conveyor belt is in contact with a side surface of the stack in the input magazine and a non-contacting rest position in which the upstream deflection roller and the transfilling conveyor belt are spaced apart from the stack in the input magazine, as taught by Andre, since this would ensure “there is no longer any risk of undergoing deformation causing the break-up of the batch E that has been created” (Andre, col. 8, lines 35-37).
Regarding claim 3, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the transfilling unit (13) comprises a pusher (12) configured to push a partial stack of blanks (23a) in the input magazine (18) lying above a height of an upper run of the transfilling conveyor belt (45) onto the transfilling conveyor belt (45).
Regarding claim 4, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein at least the upstream deflection roller (42) of the transfilling conveyor belt (45) is controllably height-adjustable (see Column 3, line 53-59).
Regarding claim 5, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the input magazine (18) has a rear side or longitudinal side which is different from a front side facing the transfilling unit (13) and which is open or openable for filling the input magazine (18).
Regarding claim 6, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the input magazine (18) has a floor that is inclined or inclinable towards the transfilling unit (see Column 9, line 58-61).
Regarding claim 7, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the input magazine (18) or the transfilling unit (13) is displacable in a transverse direction relative to a transfilling direction (as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 8, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the input magazine (18) has at least one interchangeable input box (24) which can be filled with a stack of blanks (23).
Regarding claim 9, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the blank supply unit (10) comprises a removal device (13) for removing an intermediate sheet in the stack of blanks (23) of the input magazine (see Column 3, line 34-39)
Regarding claim 10, May discloses (see Figure 4a and Figure 4c) wherein the discharge unit (22) is designed so that it can withdraw a bottom blank (41) from the stacked blanks (41) in the buffer magazine (as seen in Figure 4a and 4d).
Regarding claim 11, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the blank supply unit (10) comprises an additional buffer magazine (61) and the transfilling unit (13) is configured to refill the additional buffer magazine (61) from the input magazine (18).
Regarding claim 12, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 3 and Figure 6) further comprising a hold-down device (54) which can be moved up and down in a controlled manner relative to the transfilling unit (13) and is arranged such that the hold-down device (54) can be moved towards an upper side of the downstream end of the transfilling unit (13) in the transfilling direction (see Column 3, line 65-68 and Column 4, line 01-09).
Regarding claim 13, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1 and Figure 2) a packaging machine for inserting a packaging articles in a dimensionally stable outer packaging (see Column 5, line 48-56), the packaging machine comprising a carton erector for producing a carton from a flat blank of carton material (see Column 5, line 48-56), a plurality of robots along a transfer line for transferring articles into cartons, and the blank supply unit (see Column 5, line 48-56 and Column 9, 62-66)
Regarding claim 15, May discloses (see Figure 4a and Figure 4c) wherein the single blank withdrawn from the buffer magazine is a bottom blank (41) of a stack of blanks (41) in the buffer magazine (as seen in Figure 4a and 4d).
Regarding claim 16, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein a capacity of the buffer magazine (61) is chosen to be large enough so that the input magazine (18) can be refilled by the packaging machine (10) during a time it takes to use up a supply of blanks (23) in the buffer magazine (61).
Regarding claim 18, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) wherein the transfilling unit (13) comprises a pusher (30) configured to push a partial stack of blanks in the input magazine (18) lying above an upper edge of a rear side of the buffer magazine (61) into the buffer magazine (61, as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 19, Ikeda discloses (see Figure 1) a lifting device (11) configured to adjust height of the input magazine (see Column 3, line 27-42).
Regarding claim 20, May discloses (see Figure 4a and Figure 4c) wherein the discharge unit (22) comprises a robot (21) including a suction cup (22) configured to engage on an underside of the bottom blank (41), and the robot (21) is configured to withdraw the bottom blank (41) from the stacked blanks (40) in the buffer magazine (see Column 9, line 58-61).
Regarding claim 21, Andre discloses wherein the transfilling conveyor belt is height adjustable (col. 7, lines 4-13).
Regarding claim 22, Ikeda discloses wherein the deflector element comprises a support plate (27).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks have been carefully considered but are moot due to the new grounds of rejection made in this action, necessitated by amendment.
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 extension fee 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 DARIUSH SEIF whose telephone number is (408)918-7542. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM-6:00 PM PST.
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 at 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.
/DARIUSH SEIF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights