DETAILED ACTION
The preliminary amendment filed February 29, 2024 has been entered. Claims 21-40 remain pending.
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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claims 21-24, 26-28, and 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE202007015871 (DE’871) in view of US Patent 8,701,719 to Clusserath (Clusserath). This document was cited on an IDS and a copy thereof filed with the application. Therefore, a copy has not been included with this office action. A machine translation of DE’871 has also been filed with the application. References to specific portions of the disclosure of this document refer to the translation document.
Regarding claim 21, DE’871 discloses a system for treating kegs (see [0001]), said system comprising at least two treatment module (each of the respective filling locations; see Fig. 2), each of which comprises a keg receiver (13) for receiving at least one keg (containers 1 are kegs; [0027]), a treatment head (4) configured for treating the keg, at least one interface (valve 20) for a discharge line (16) and for at least one cleaning line and/or at least one filling line (line 15 is used for cleaning fluid and product); a controller (11) for controlling the at least two treatment modules being connected by the interface to a filling product source and at least one treatment module of the at least two treatment modules being connected by the interface to a filling product source providing a first filling product (inherent that there is a product source which supplies the product to be filled to the kegs via filling line 15 of the interface). DE’871 does not disclose at least one other treatment module of the at least two treatment modules being connected by the interface to a filling product source providing a second filling product; and the controller being configured to actuate and control the at least two treatment modules for simultaneous and/or time-offset filling with different filling products. Clusserath discloses a filling machine including a plurality of filling interfaces (each of the respective filling heads) wherein at least one treatment module of the at least two treatment modules being connected by the interface to a filling product source providing a first filling product and at least one other treatment module of the at least two treatment modules being connected by the interface to a filling product source providing a second filling product (see col. 7, line 65 – col. 8, line 6; two separate product sources are supplied each having a product line coupled to the filling interfaces) and the controller configured to actuate and control the at least two treatment modules for simultaneous and/or time-offset filling with different filling products (see col. 7, line 65 – col. 8, line 6; the products are either dispensed simultaneously or at different times [i.e., with a time offset] as these are the only possible options). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of DE’871 such that two product sources are connected to one or more of the interfaces and the controller configured to selectively dispense one of the products to the containers as taught by Clusserath, such that two different products can be dispensed without the need for separate filling systems or the need for a product changeover.
Regarding claim 22, DE’871 discloses a loading device (5, 7) connected to the controller (controller 11 controls the loading device) for delivering and removing the kegs to and from the treatment modules.
Regarding claim 23, DE’871 further discloses the controller is configured to control the loading device (controller 11 controls the loading device), and the loading device is configured to move kegs filled with different filling products out of the treatment modules onto a transport pallet or a transporter (discharge unit 7 moves the kegs to conveyor 3 which is a transporter; as modified above, the kegs can be loaded with different products).
Regarding Claim 24, DE’871 discloses the controller has a work plan memory for filling and/or cleaning commands which are to be carried out (inherent that the controller includes a memory and work plan [i.e., programming] for the filling and/or cleaning commands), and the controller has a computer module configured to control the treatment modules and the loading device based on the filling and/or cleaning commands (the controller operates the treatment modules and loading device based on the filling/cleaning commands [i.e., loading a desired keg into the treatment module, carrying out the filling/cleaning, removing the cleaned/filled keg]).
Regarding Claim 26, DE’871 further discloses the keg receiver of at least one of the treatment modules is configured to receive one single keg (each keg receiver 13 receives a single keg).
Regarding Claim 27, DE’871 discloses the at least two treatment modules are configured for the treatment of different kegs, at least one of the treatment modules is configured for the treatment of kegs of a first type and/or of a first size, and at least one other of the treatment modules is configured for the treatment of kegs of a second type and/or a second size (keg receivers 13 are adjustable such that a first one can receive a keg of one size and a second one can receive a keg of a second size).
Regarding Claim 28, DE’871 discloses the treatment head of at least one treatment module is configured both for the filling as well as for the interior cleaning of kegs (the treatment heads supply both cleaning fluid and the product to be filled; [0038]).
Regarding claim 33, DE’871 discloses the keg receiver of the at least one treatment module is configured for the static receiving of one or more kegs (receiver 13 can receive a keg while static).
Regarding Claims 34-35, Clusserath further teaches a signal device (the display of control computer 10) for guiding operating personnel in treatment activities to be carried out at the treatment modules, wherein the signal device has at least one visual indicator, at least one display, and/or at least one audible signaler. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a display as taught by Clusserath in the system of DE’871 so that information regarding the operation of the system can be supplied to an operator thereof.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’871 as modified by Clusserath as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of US Patent 5,398,734 to Hartel (Hartel).
Regarding Claim 32, DE’871 as modified by Clusserath discloses the system according to claim 21, but does not disclose at least one of the treatment modules contains a temperature detection device configured to measure an outer wall temperature of the keg during the treatment of the keg in the treatment module. Hartel teaches a bottle treatment system (title) which includes a temperature sensor (13) for measuring the outer wall temperature of the bottle during treatment to ensure an adequate temperature has been reached for proper sterilization. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a temperature sensor as taught by Hartel in the treatment modules of DE’871 for measuring the outer wall temperature of the bottle during treatment to ensure an adequate temperature has been reached for proper sterilization.
Claims 36-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’871 as modified by Clusserath as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of EP0679605 (EP’605). EP’605 was cited on an IDS, so a copy has not been included with this office action. A machine translation has been included and references to specific paragraphs refer to the translation document.
Regarding claim 36, DE’871 does not disclose an identification device connected to the controller for reading the information deposited on the data carrier, and said controller being configured to carry out an optimized treatment of the kegs, based on the information read by the identification device. EP’605 teaches a keg treatment system ([0001] and the figure) which includes an identification device (reader 9) connected to a controller (the plant control system; see [0018]) for reading the information deposited on the data carrier (transponders 5 which is coupled to keg 2), and said controller being configured to carry out an optimized treatment of the kegs, based on the information deposited on the data carrier read by the reading device ([0018]-[0020]; by tracking the kegs and ensuring that each keg receives treatment in accordance with the information on its tag, the process is optimized). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included data carriers on the kegs and a reader connected to the controller as taught by EP’605 in the system of DE’871 as modified by Clusserath for tracking the kegs through the system, ensuring that all of the necessary treatment steps have taken place in a timely manner, and for individually controlling the treatment steps of each keg (EP’605, paragraphs [0018]-[0019]).
Regarding claim 37, EP’605 further teaches the controller is configured to optimize actuation of the treatment modules based on at least one of cleaning parameters for the keg, filling product for the keg, filling parameters for the keg, and origin or destination of the keg (EP’605 teaches optimization based at least one the cleaning parameters for the keg; see [0009], [0018]-[0019]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the controller of DE’871 to include optimization of the treatment modules based on information from the data carrier as taught by EP’605 to improve plant safety, reduce waste, and ensure the kegs are properly sterilized and filled.
Regarding claims 38-40, EP’605 further teaches the identification device is a reader with a reader unit configured to read the information deposited on the data carriers assigned to the kegs with electromagnetic waves ([0015]), wherein the reader device has several reader units arranged at or in at least one treatment module (“by arranging the transponder readers 9 at all treatment stations” [0018]; EP’605 teaches readers positioned at the conveyor(s) and at “all treatment stations”), wherein the reader device is a combined writing and reading device, and is configured to write information onto the data carriers and/or into a databank (see [0018]; information from the transponder 5 is read by reader 9 and is stored in a data processing unit). These limitations are present in the combination as set forth above.
Claims 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’871 in view of Clusserath and further in view of US Patent 6,494,238 to Sindermann (Sindermann).
Regarding claims 29-31, DE’871 as modified by Clusserath discloses the apparatus of claim 21, and DE’871 further discloses the treatment module including a connection to a steam line ([0038]; water vapor supplied to the filling/cleaning module), but does not disclose the treatment module has an external cleaning module for cleaning an exterior surface of said kegs. Sindermann teaches a container filler which includes an external cleaning module (exterior washer; see col. 9, lines 31-35) having a connection to a water line (water is supplied to the cleaning module) to remove contaminates from the exterior of the bottle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included an exterior washer as taught by Sindermann in the treatment modules of DE’871 as modified by Clusserath to remove contaminates from the exterior of the keg.
Claims 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’871 in view of Clusserath as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of US Patent 4,820,101 to Fenn (Fenn).
Regarding claim 25, DE’871 as modified by Clusserath discloses the system according to claim 24, but does not disclose the controller calculates the movement of the loading device based on an optimization criterion, wherein the optimization criterion has a criterion for the optimization of at least one of the path, time, capacity and energy. Fenn teaches manufacturing facility in which a controller calculates the movement of the loading device based on an optimization criterion, wherein the optimization criterion has a criterion for the optimization of at least energy (col. 18, lines 19-34) to reduce power consumption of the facility. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the controller of DE’871 to calculate a path for the keg which optimizes energy usage as taught by Fenn to reduce power consumption of the facility.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLAS A ARNETT whose telephone number is (571)270-5062. The examiner can normally be reached M- F, 8AM - 3PM.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached on 571-272-4881. 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.
/NICOLAS A ARNETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753 January 8, 2026