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 .
- Applicant has not submitted any claim amendments in the latest filing. Therefore, Claims 1-16 remain pending in the application.
- Receipt of Applicant’s Arguments, filed 5 February 2026, traversing the rejections of the previous Office Action (Non-Final) is acknowledged.
- Receipt of Applicant’s Certified Copy of Foreign Priority Application, filed 12 February 2026, is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2-5, filed 9 January 2026, with respect to the previous rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 -16, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered in light of the amendments made to the claims, and are unpersuasive.
Applicant argues the Office erred in the prior art combination of Weiss (US 5,727,606) and Franceschini (US 2021/0380386) to teach the Claim 1 limitations of “a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids…wherein the valve assembly further comprises: a first electric motor kinematically connected to said tubular control stem to move the shutter between the closing position and said one or more opening positions, and a second electric motor kinematically connected to said probe to move the probe with respect to said tubular control stem between said at least one extracted position and said retracted position, said first electric motor and said second electric motor being controllable independently from each other to respectively regulate: an axial position of the shutter along the valve axis with respect to an abutment seat so as to adjust an amplitude of the flow section during the filling of the container, and the position of the probe inside the container to be filled so as to adjust the filling level controllable by the probe.” Please see pgs 6-10 of the Non-Final Office Action dated 1 October 2025. In this combination, Weiss discloses actuation and insertion of the valve assembly and probe, via pneumatic cylinder 29, and Franceschini teaches a pneumatic actuator 46 controlled by an electromagnetic valve, and pneumatic actuator 58 connected to a solenoid valve.
Specifically, Applicant argues that the above combination fails to teach “a first electric motor” and “a second electric motor” as required in Claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons:
- The noun “motor” is defined by Webster dictionary as “one that imparts motion”, similar to the Collins dictionary definition of “anything that produces or imparts motion”. The valve actuation systems of both Weiss and Franceschini references meet this definition, as they impart motion to a valve assembly and probe as shown in the previous Office Action.
- As cited in the previous Office Action (see pg 7) Franceschini additionally teaches the use of electricity to facilitate movement of the valve assembly: the aforementioned pneumatic actuator 46 is controlled by an electromagnetic valve (therefore reading upon “a first electric motor”).
- As cited in the previous Office Action (see pg 7) Franceschini additionally teaches pneumatic actuator 58 connected to a solenoid valve (that facilitates valve movement via air inlets 581 per Franceschini at the referenced para 68). Since Franceschini explicitly defines a solenoid valve as “an electromagnetic valve” at para 49, “the pneumatic actuator 58 connected to a solenoid valve” as taught at para 68 and cited in the previous Office Action also describes a “motor” that uses electricity (via the solenoid electromagnetic valve) to facilitate movement of the valve assembly. Therefore, Franceschini teaches “a second electric motor” as required by Applicant’s Claim 1.
Examiner further notes that Applicant’s disclosure simply states the use of first and second “electric motors” 50 and 60, and does not provide any further guidance on the specifics of said motors that could be used to distinguish the disclosure from the use of known electromechanical systems (such as solenoid valves that utilize an electromagnet to open and close), or any rationale/statement of unexpected results in using an electric-based system different from the system as taught by the combined Weiss and Franeschini references above.
Applicant’s arguments are therefore unpersuasive, and the rejections of the previous Office Action stand, along with the allowable subject matter as also detailed in the previous Office Action and reprinted below.
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 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 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 1-4 and, 7-9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weiss (US 5,727,606) in views of Franceschini (US 2021/0380386) and Clusserath '921 (US 2005/0198921)
Regarding Claim 1, Weiss discloses a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, the valve assembly (see Figure) being suitable to regulate a filling of a container (1) with a liquid contained in a tank (2) of the filling machine (Col 1, lines 50-65) and comprising:
- an adduction conduit (pipe tube 14) extending along a valve axis ('aligned with bore 11") and fluidically connectable to the tank (storage tank 2) of said filling machine to allow an inflow of said liquid from the tank to the container to be filled through a discharge mouth (centering bell 7);
- a shutter (interpreted by Examiner to be a "valve", anticipated by the combination of liquid valve 17, which includes valve body 16, and gas valve 22, which includes valve body 21. See at least Col 2, line 12- Col 3, line 15) suitable to regulate the inflow of said liquid in said container (Col 2, see at least lines 8-12),
- the shutter (specifically, item 16) being movably placed inside said adduction conduit (14) to be moved along the valve axis between (shown in the Figure)
- a closing position, in which the shutter (16) intercepts the adduction conduit closing a flow section towards the discharge mouth (Col 2, lines 16-18: " If the valve body 16 is lowered, as depicted on the left side of the drawing, then no liquid can get out of the discharge mouth 9"), and
- one or more opening positions, in which the shutter (16) does not intercept or only partially intercepts the adduction conduit leaving the flow section towards the discharge mouth open (Col 2, lines 18-25"If the valve body is raised...the liquid can flow undiminished to a large extent...into a bottle");
- a tubular control stem (valve body 21) of the shutter (again, the combination of liquid valve 17 and gas valve 21 as described above) internally defining a conduit axially extended along the valve axis and open at both ends (Col 2, lines 34-43: "The valve body 21 is basically pipe-like"),
- the tubular control stem (21) being intended to cross the tank (2) to protrude below the tank with a lower end inside the adduction conduit (14) and above the tank with an upper end (shown in the Figure),
- said shutter (16) being coaxially associated with the lower end of said tubular control stem (21);
- a probe (probe 31, introduced at Col 3, line 15) for detecting a filling level of the container (this is a statement of intended use, and given little patentable weight per MPEP 2114. Regardless, probe 31 is used by Weiss to control filling levels, as shown at Col 3, line 25, and Col 3, line 64 - Col 4 line 2),
- the probe being coaxially inserted inside the conduit defined by the tubular control stem (Col 3, lines 15-32: "The valve body 21 is permeated along its entire length by a rodlike probe 31") to be moved between
- at least one extracted position, in which the probe exits from said conduit so as to be inserted inside the container (Col 3, lines 29-32: " the probe 31 protrudes into the neck area, approximately up to the area of the desired filling level of one of the bottles 1"), and
- a retracted position, in which the probe does not exit from said conduit so as not to engage the container (Col 3, lines 29-32).
PNG
media_image1.png
864
594
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Further regarding Claim 1, Weiss teaches the claimed invention, to include actuation and insertion of the valve assembly and probe, via pneumatic cylinder 29 (see at least Col 3 lines 10-11, and 32-42). However, Weiss does not explicitly recite said pneumatic cylinder as being operated by a first and second electric motor, as claimed by Applicant.
Therefore, the Weiss reference is silent on a valve assembly further comprising “a first electric motor kinematically connected to said tubular control stem to move the shutter between the closing position and said one or more opening positions, and a second electric motor kinematically connected to said probe to move the probe with respect to said tubular control stem between said at least one extracted position and said retracted position, said first electric motor and said second electric motor being controllable independently from each other to respectively regulate: an axial position of the shutter along the valve axis with respect to an abutment seat so as to adjust an amplitude of the flow section during the filling of the container, and the position of the probe inside the container to be filled so as to adjust the filling level controllable by the probe.”
However, electric actuation of pneumatic cylinders is known, as evidenced by Franceschini, who teaches a valve assembly (Figs 5-6) further comprising:
- a first electric motor (pneumatic actuator 46 controlled by an electromagnetic valve, see para 49) kinematically connected to said tubular control stem (stem 44) to move the shutter (valve member 43) between the closing position and said one or more opening positions (this action described at paras 46-49), and
- a second electric motor (pneumatic actuator 58 connected to a solenoid valve, see para 68) kinematically connected to said probe (probe 54) to move the probe with respect to said tubular control stem between said at least one extracted position and said retracted position (this action described at paras 58-59 and 64-70),
- said first electric motor (46) and said second electric motor (58) being controllable independently from each other to respectively regulate:
- an axial position of the shutter (43) along the valve axis with respect to an abutment seat so as to adjust:
- an amplitude of the flow section during the filling of the container (see at least para 44: " the valve member 43 is movable by the stem 44 between a position of contact with the seal seat 42, wherein the valve 4 is closed, and a position apart from the seal seat 42, wherein the valve 4 is open"), and
- the position of the probe (54) inside the container to be filled so as to adjust the filling level controllable by the probe (this action described at paras 58-70, with emphases on para 59: "The control system which controls the valve 4 is operationally connected to the level sensor 51... It is configured to control the valve 4 based on the filled level detected by the level sensor 51.")
PNG
media_image2.png
676
716
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The Weiss and Franceschini references each teach the use of a probe to detect and control the filling of a container. While the Weiss reference discloses only a general mention of insertion control of the probe and valve assembly, the Franceschini reference provides detailed guidance for the separate control of each component, thereby giving greater control and accuracy of the apparatus via independent control of the probe and filling valve.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the generically described pneumatic cylinder 29 of the Weiss reference with the first and second electric motors/ pneumatic actuators 46/58 as taught by Franceschini, in order to gain greater control and accuracy of the apparatus via independent control of the probe and filling valve.
Further regarding Claim 1, the Weiss and Franceschini references each teach a probe (Weiss, 31 and/or Franceschini, 54), but neither reference specifically mentions “a single detection point near a probe tip”, as claimed by Applicant. However, it is known to have a single detection point near a probe tip, as taught at least by Clusserath ‘921, who teaches “probe 17, which is oriented with its axis essentially parallel to the vertical axis… but is radially offset from said vertical axis, forms on its lower end a probe tip 18 that has at least one exposed electrical contact that causes the probe signal to be sent when said electrical contact is immersed in the surface of the liquid being bottled”. See at least para 36.
The Weiss, Franceschini, and Clusserath references each teach the use of a probe to detect and control the filling of a container. The Clusserath reference provides specific guidance for a sensor on a probe tip, which would have the obvious advantage of limiting the length of the probe required to be inserted in the liquid, thereby providing more accurate results and limiting contamination. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the sensory element on the tip 18 of probe 17, as taught by Clusserath ‘921, for the advantages of more accurate results and limitation of contamination.
Regarding Claim 2, Weiss as modified above teaches a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein said shutter comprises an annular gasket (Franceschini, annular gasket 431) which with said shutter (Franceschini, 43) in the closing position sealingly engages the abutment seat (Franceschini, seal seat 42) provided inside said adduction conduit near the discharge mouth, the abutment seat being concentric to the valve axis (Franceschini, see at least para 48 and Fig 6).
Regarding Claim 3, Weiss as modified above teaches a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein said abutment seat (Franceschini, 42) comprises:
- a truncated-conical portion converging towards the discharge mouth (shown in Fig 6) and
- a cylindrical portion connecting the truncated-conical portion to said discharge mouth (Fig 6, Examiner's annotations), and wherein said annular gasket comprises:
- a first annular portion intended to abut against the truncated-conical portion of the abutment seat to make a seal therewith; and
- a second annular portion of cylindrical shape intended to be inserted with an interference relationship inside the cylindrical portion of the abutment seat to make a seal therewith for a predefined axial excursion of the shutter (this action is interpreted by Examiner as describing the closing of a valve. Examiner asserts that it is extremely well known to close a valve by sealing a valve seat; see at least Franceschini, para 48).
Regarding Claim 4, Weiss as modified above teaches a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein said first annular portion is axially positioned with respect to said second annular portion so as to abut against the truncated-conical portion of the abutment seat and make the seal therewith inside said predefined axial excursion of the shutter when said second annular portion has already begun to make the seal in the cylindrical portion of the abutment seat (this action is also interpreted by Examiner as describing the closing of a valve; see at least Franceschini, para 48) .
Regarding Claim 7, Weiss as modified above teaches a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein between an internal wall of the tubular control stem and the probe, an annular gap is defined which acts as an air return conduit and is fluidically selectively connectable to the tank or to a plurality of circuits of the filling machine by respective valves (Weiss, see Claim 6 and gas return pipe 25).
Regarding Claim 16, Weiss as modified above teaches a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein the valves are installed in a valve block (Weiss, see Claim 7 and valve block 8).
Regarding Claim 8, Weiss as modified above teaches a valve assembly for a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein the probe for detecting the filling level of the container is a refractive optic fiber probe (Applicant admits that the use of "optic fiber probes" is known and " described for example in DE3218062 A1, EP2192076 A1 and EP2604572 A1". See Specification, para 26).
Regarding Claim 9, Weiss discloses a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, comprising:
- a support structure (Examiner's annotations);
- a rotating turret rotatably mounted on said support structure, and provided with a tank for containing a liquid to be bottled in the containers (the Weiss reference discloses tank 2 revolving around vertical axis 3, and states " he delivery of the drink and of the tension gas occurs in the typical fashion through radial piping, rotating distributors and control units, etc., which are not shown". See Col 1, lines 49-60);
- a plurality of valve assemblies peripherally mounted on said rotating turret each valve assembly being suitable for filling a container ("A variety of identical filling devices 5 are uniformly distributed over the circumference of the storage tank 2, from which each is allocated a controllable lifting device 6 for the bottles 1 as well as a controllable centering bell 7 for the bottle opening". See Col 1, lines 61-65); and
- a logic control unit (electronic control equipment 35, see at least Col 3, lines 33-41 and Col 3, line 64- Col 4 line 2) suitable to automatically manage operation of said filling machine (major components of the invention are specifically listed as being "controllable" throughout the disclosure),
- wherein each valve assembly (5) of said plurality of valve assemblies is suitable to regulate a filling of the container with the liquid contained in the tank of the filling machine (See Col 1, lines 61-65); and comprises:
- an adduction conduit (pipe tube 14) extending along a valve axis ('aligned with bore 11") and fluidically connectable to the tank (storage tank 2) of said filling machine to allow an inflow of said liquid from the tank to the container to be filled through a discharge mouth (centering bell 7);
- a shutter (interpreted by Examiner to be a "valve", anticipated by the combination of liquid valve 17, which includes valve body 16, and gas valve 22, which includes valve body 21. See at least Col 2, line 12- Col 3, line 15) suitable to regulate the inflow of said liquid in said container (Col 2, see at least lines 8-12),
- the shutter (specifically, item 16) being movably placed inside said adduction conduit (14) to be moved along the valve axis between (shown in the Figure)
- a closing position, in which the shutter (16) intercepts the adduction conduit closing a flow section towards the discharge mouth (Col 2, lines 16-18: " If the valve body 16 is lowered, as depicted on the left side of the drawing, then no liquid can get out of the discharge mouth 9"), and
- one or more opening positions, in which the shutter (16) does not intercept or only partially intercepts the adduction conduit leaving the flow section towards the discharge mouth open (Col 2, lines 18-25"If the valve body is raised...the liquid can flow undiminished to a large extent...into a bottle");
- a tubular control stem (valve body 21) of the shutter (again, the combination of liquid valve 17 and gas valve 21 as described above) internally defining a conduit axially extended along the valve axis and open at both ends (Col 2, lines 34-43: "The valve body 21 is basically pipe-like"),
- the tubular control stem (21) being intended to cross the tank (2) to protrude below the tank with a lower end inside the adduction conduit (14) and above the tank with an upper end (shown in the Figure),
- said shutter (16) being coaxially associated with the lower end of said tubular control stem (21);
- a probe (probe 31, introduced at Col 3, line 15) for detecting a filling level of the container (this is a statement of intended use, and given little patentable weight per MPEP 2114. Regardless, probe 31 is used by Weiss to control filling levels, as shown at Col 3, line 25, and Col 3, line 64 - Col 4 line 2),
- the probe being provided with a single detection point near a probe tip and being coaxially inserted inside the conduit defined by the tubular control stem (Col 3, lines 15-32: "The valve body 21 is permeated along its entire length by a rodlike probe 31") to be moved between
- at least one extracted position, in which the probe exits from said conduit so as to be inserted inside the container (Col 3, lines 29-32: " the probe 31 protrudes into the neck area, approximately up to the area of the desired filling level of one of the bottles 1"), and
- a retracted position, in which the probe does not exit from said conduit so as not to engage the container (Col 3, lines 29-32).
Further regarding Claim 9, Weiss teaches the claimed invention, to include actuation and insertion of the valve assembly and probe, via pneumatic cylinder 29 (see at least Col 3 lines 10-11, and 32-42). However, Weiss does not explicitly recite said pneumatic cylinder as being operated by a first and second electric motor, as claimed by Applicant.
Therefore, the Weiss reference is silent on a valve assembly further comprising “a first electric motor kinematically connected to said tubular control stem to move the shutter between the closing position and said one or more opening positions, and a second electric motor kinematically connected to said probe to move the probe with respect to said tubular control stem between said at least one extracted position and said retracted position, said first electric motor and said second electric motor being controllable independently from each other to respectively regulate: an axial position of the shutter along the valve axis with respect to an abutment seat so as to adjust an amplitude of the flow section during the filling of the container, and the position of the probe inside the container to be filled so as to adjust the filling level controllable by the probe.”
However, electric actuation of pneumatic cylinders is known, as evidenced by Franceschini, who teaches a valve assembly (Figs 5-6) further comprising:
- a first electric motor (pneumatic actuator 46 controlled by an electromagnetic valve, see para 49) kinematically connected to said tubular control stem (stem 44) to move the shutter (valve member 43) between the closing position and said one or more opening positions (this action described at paras 46-49), and
- a second electric motor (pneumatic actuator 58 connected to a solenoid valve, see para 68) kinematically connected to said probe (probe 54) to move the probe with respect to said tubular control stem between said at least one extracted position and said retracted position (this action described at paras 58-59 and 64-70),
- said first electric motor (46) and said second electric motor (58) being controllable independently from each other to respectively regulate:
- an axial position of the shutter (43) along the valve axis with respect to an abutment seat so as to adjust:
- an amplitude of the flow section during the filling of the container (see at least para 44: " the valve member 43 is movable by the stem 44 between a position of contact with the seal seat 42, wherein the valve 4 is closed, and a position apart from the seal seat 42, wherein the valve 4 is open"), and
- the position of the probe (54) inside the container to be filled so as to adjust the filling level controllable by the probe (this action described at paras 58-70, with emphases on para 59: "The control system which controls the valve 4 is operationally connected to the level sensor 51... It is configured to control the valve 4 based on the filled level detected by the level sensor 51.")
The Weiss and Franceschini references each teach the use of a probe to detect and control the filling of a container. While the Weiss reference discloses only a general mention of insertion control of the probe and valve assembly, the Franceschini reference provides detailed guidance for the separate control of each component, thereby giving greater control and accuracy of the apparatus via independent control of the probe and filling valve.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the generically described pneumatic cylinder 29 of the Weiss reference with the first and second electric motors/ pneumatic actuators 46/58 as taught by Franceschini, in order to gain greater control and accuracy of the apparatus via independent control of the probe and filling valve.
Further regarding Claim 9, the Weiss and Franceschini references each teach control systems.
- The Weiss reference teaches electronic control equipment 35, (see at least Col 3, lines 33-41 and Col 3, line 64- Col 4 line 2).
- The Franceschini reference teaches separate control of:
the valve 4 (para 49: “The valve 4 is controlled by a control system…. Specifically, the pneumatic actuator 46 is controlled by a solenoid valve (ie, an electromagnetic valve) remotely located in a pneumatic panel of the control system of the machine 100”) and
the probe (para 59: “The control system which controls the valve 4 is operationally connected to the level sensor 51”, and para 64: “The level sensor 51, in the embodiment illustrated, comprises a probe 54 designed to be inserted into the internal volume 92 of the container 90”).
Therefore, Examiner concludes that it would also be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate separate control of the valve and probe (as taught by Franceschini) within the electronic control equipment 35 as taught by Weiss, for the obvious advantage of more accurate control of individual components and better filling results.
The above combination would therefore also teach a “logic control unit…programmed to manage each valve assembly during the filling of the respective container according to predefined operating steps, regulating the axial position of the shutter and an axial position of the probe by the first electric motor and the second electric motor, respectively”, as claimed by Applicant at Claim 9.
Further regarding Claim 9, the Weiss and Franceschini references each teach a probe (Weiss, 31 and/or Franceschini, 54), but neither reference specifically mentions “a single detection point near a probe tip”, as claimed by Applicant. However, it is known to have a single detection point near a probe tip, as taught at least by Clusserath ‘921, who teaches “probe 17, which is oriented with its axis essentially parallel to the vertical axis… but is radially offset from said vertical axis, forms on its lower end a probe tip 18 that has at least one exposed electrical contact that causes the probe signal to be sent when said electrical contact is immersed in the surface of the liquid being bottled”. See at least para 36.
The Weiss, Franceschini, and Clusserath references each teach the use of a probe to detect and control the filling of a container. The Clusserath reference provides specific guidance for a sensor on a probe tip, which would have the obvious advantage of limiting the length of the probe required to be inserted in the liquid, thereby providing more accurate results and limiting contamination. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the sensory element on the tip 18 of probe 17, as taught by Clusserath ‘921, for the advantages of more accurate results and limitation of contamination.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weiss as modified by Franceschini and Clusserath '921 above, and in further view of Fantone et al. (US 6,226,081).
Regarding Claim 13, as shown above (see the rejection of Claim 9), the combination of the Weiss and Franceschini references teach a logic control unit programmed to control filling height. However, the references do not explicitly teach the logic control unit (being) programmed to adjust the predefined intermediate filling level as a function of a format of the container treated in each valve assembly and/or based on foaminess of the liquid, based on preset data (although Examiner does note the Weiss reference teaches a “height-adjustable valve body” (Claim 1), while the Franceschini reference teaches movement of plate 12 with respect to the filling of the type of container 95 (cans vs. bottles), per paras 73-81.
However, Fantone et al. teaches the logic control unit (computer system 80, see at least Col 9, lines 21-35 and Col 17, line 10) is programmed to adjust the predefined intermediate filling level ("height of fill") as a function of a format of the container treated in each valve assembly and/or based on foaminess of the liquid, based on preset data (the software includes analysis of " foam presence, quality, and/or correction, height of fill, container shape, color, and feature integrity, or container content color features and transmission characteristics", as shown at step 110 of Fig 3, and Col 10, lines 1-11).
The Weiss, Franceschini, and Fantone references each teach adjustment of components to affect the filling of a container. The Fantone reference additionally teaches an accurate, programmable computerized control system to ensure correct placement and control for both container size and foam content. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to ensure that the “electronic control circuitry” of the Weiss reference, and the valve control of the Franceschini reference were themselves incorporated as part of an accurate, programmable computerized control system, in order to gain the advantages of ensuring correct placement and control for both container size and foam content.
Regarding Claim 14, Weiss as modified above teaches a filling machine for filling containers with liquids, wherein the logic control unit is programmed to regulate the axial position taken by the shutter and thus the flow section as a function of a desired liquid flow rate during a specific filling step of the container, based on preset data (the Fantone reference teaches (Col 6, lines 10-15) "The output of the present apparatus can be used for subsequent downstream applications such as...providing feedback to adjust upstream nozzle fill rates). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the computer 80 and associated software of Fantone et al. to provide instruction (e.g. "feedback") to the electronic control system of Weiss and regulate the shutter axial position to achieve the desired flow rate(s).)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 10-12 and 15 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
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 CHRISTOPHER M AFFUL whose telephone number is (571)272-8421. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 5712723607. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M AFFUL/Examiner, Art Unit 3753