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 Amendment
Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 9/29/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1, and 3-16 remain pending.
Claims 17-20 are new and now also pending
Claim Objections
Claims 3-9, 13, 18, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claims 3-9 and 13, appear to describe further method steps (i.e. “are queried”- Claim 3, “are determined”-Claim 4, “are optimized”-Claim 5, “are determined”-Claim 6, etc.) but these recitations would be better recited as in an action manner such as “querying”, “determining”, “optimizing”, etc. consistent with Claim 1 to further clarify what method steps are being further included.
-Claim 3, line 3, “these actual positions collision-free” would be better recited as “these actual positions, collision-free”.
-Claim 4, lines 1-2, “wherein the trajectories of at least two machine elements” would be better recited as “when trajectories of two machine elements”.
-Claim 18:
“separations between the contours of the machine elements (12, 14, 17) or between the contours of the machine element and of the product or between the contours of the products are determined”
would be better recited as:
“separations between contours of the two machine elements (12, 14, 17) or between contours of the one machine element and of the product or between contours of the products are determined”
Claim 19:
“separations between the contour of the machine element or of the product moved by it, on the one hand, and the contour of the stationary component, on the other hand are determined”
would be better recited as:
“separations between contour of the one machine element or of the product moved by it, on the one hand, and contour of the stationary component, on the other hand are determined”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim recites “A system comprising the apparatus as claimed in claim 15 and a method for controlling the apparatus as claimed in claim 15, wherein the apparatus comprises several drives…, and the method comprises”. In this instance both a machine and process appear to be claimed and attempted to be claimed and therefore it is unclear as to what category of patent eligible subject matter is being encompassed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 5, 7, 11-12, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 3, the claim recites similar limitations “wherein the actual positions of the drives (A, B, C) of the packaging machine are queried,” and is therefore rendered indefinite as it is unclear if this is referring to the querying step in Claim 1 or a further query of the actual positions. This is interpreted as a further querying step.
Regarding Claim 5, line 2 recites “these separations are optimized” which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to what “optimized” is intending to encompass.
Regarding Claim 7, line 2 recites “these separations are optimized” which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to what “optimized” is intending to encompass.
Regarding Claims 11 and 12, lines 2-3 of Claim 11 recite “the simulations and a determination” and lines 2-3 of Claim 12 recite “the simulations, inclusive of a determination”. These limitations render the respective claim indefinite as it is unclear if the determination being claimed to is referring to the ascertained collision-free traversing paths or a different method step.
Regarding Claim 16, refer to the 101 rejection above as it is unclear if the Applicant is attempting to claim a machine or a process and therefore rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gohrs (EP 3650361 A1-cited in IDS, see attached PDF for copy including English translation with paragraph numbering referred to below).
Regarding Claim 1, Gohrs discloses a method for controlling a packaging machine (10; Figure 1) for producing wrappers for producing wrappers for smokable products (22; Figure 6) of the tobacco industry (Para. 0001, 0029), with several drives (of shafts 1, 2, 3 hereinafter referred to as 1, 2, 3; Figures 2-4) capable of being activated independently of one another which move machine elements (11, 13, 19) of the packaging machine on trajectories on which the machine elements might collide (at collision areas 15, 17) with one another or with another component of the packaging machine or with products being handled in the packaging machine (10; Para. 0030), comprising the steps of:
a) creating a digital simulation model (“digital image 28” created by simulation program 29) of the packaging machine (10), reproducing the drives (1, 2, 3) and the machine elements (11, 13, 19; as shown in Figure 3; Paras. 0059-0060);
b) simulating, with the aid of the simulation model (28), differing relative positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) and the states of the packaging machine (10) arising at these relative positions (Paras. 0020, 0022, 0055, 0059-0060);
c) querying actual positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) of the packaging machine (Para. 0023, 0047 which outline recording actual movements and positions);
d) ascertaining, within each simulation, collision-free traversing paths for the machine elements (11, 13, 19), in particular by means of a simulation program (29 via the workspace data generated; see Para. 0040, 0046 and Para. 0057-0058);
e) moving the machine elements (11, 13, 19) of the packaging machine (10) respectively along the ascertained collision-free traversing paths by appropriate control of the drives (1, 2, 3; see Para. 0040, 0046 and Para. 0057-0058);
wherein on the basis of the actual positions of the drives (1, 2, 3), each simulation is carried out and the collision-free traversing paths are ascertained (Para. 0023, 0048-0049) by adapting the positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) of the simulation model (28) to the queried actual positions of the respective assigned drives (1, 2, 3) of the packaging machine within each simulation, so that the positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) in the simulation model (28) correspond to the actual positions of the assigned drives (1, 2, 3) in the packaging machine (10; see Para. 0023, 0047 which outline recording actual movements and positions while Para. 0046 and 0040 outline generating such collision free paths thereof; Para. 0023 and 0047 also outline forecast data and future positions derived from actual values; also note in order to create the image 28, the positions of the drives must be sensed and recorded in some manner in order to create the image and carry out the simulations as disclosed).
Regarding Claim 4, Gohrs discloses trajectories of at least two machine elements (11, 13, 19) intersect in a region of overlap (15, 17; Figures 6-7), and in that separations between the two machine elements (11, 13, 19) and/or between one of these machine elements (11, 13, 19) and a product (group 23 of 22) moved by the other machine element and/or between products (23) moved by the two machine elements (11, 13, 19), that arise when the two machine elements (11, 13, 19) are located in the region of overlap (15, 17) are determined within each simulation for differing relative positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) of the two machine elements (11, 13, 19; see Paras. 0031-0040 describes the different overlap regions in which collisions could occur and alterations of such separations via control of the drives 1, 2, 3).
Regarding Claim 5, Gohrs discloses these separations (i.e. 20a, 20b; Figure 7 is used as an example but separation 16 is shown in Figure 6) are optimized (via determination of collision free path per Para. 0040) within the scope of the ascertainment of collision-free traversing paths for the two machine elements (i.e. 13 and 19) such that the separations (20a, 20b) in the region of overlap are at least greater than zero (Para. 0040).
Regarding Claim 6, Gohrs discloses wherein separations (16, 20a, 20b; Figures 6-7) between one of the machine elements (11, 19) moved by said drive (1, 2, 3) or a product (23) moved by this machine element (11, 19), on the one hand, and a stationary component (i.e. 13 is stationary when receiving the product 23) of the apparatus (10), on the other hand that arise when the machine element (11, 19) is moved in or along the region of the stationary component (13) are determined within each the simulation for differing relative positions of one drive (1, 2, 3 see Paras. 0031-0040 describes the different overlap regions and separations between components and alterations of such separations via control of the drives 1, 2, 3; note also Para. 0002, 0011).
Regarding Claim 7, Gohrs discloses these separations (i.e. 16, 20a, 20b; Figure 6-7) are optimized (via determination of collision free path per Para. 0040) within the scope of the ascertainment of collision-free traversing paths for the two machine elements (i.e. 13 and 19), such a manner that the separations (20a, 20b) during the entire traversing path are at least greater than zero (Para. 0040).
Regarding Claim 8, Gohrs discloses wherein separations (i.e. 20a, 20b; Figure 7) between a predetermined synchronous position or target position for one of the machine element (i.e. 19) moved by at least one of the drives (3) and the position of this machine element (19) arising at the respective relative position of the drive (3) are determined within each simulation for differing relative positions of one drive (i.e. see Para. 0042 ,0050 which outline that the positions (corresponding to a separation) will not lead to collision).
Regarding Claim 9, Gohrs discloses the separations (at 20a/20b) are considered in the ascertainment of a collision-free traversing path for the one of the machine element or further machine elements (11, 13, 19; Para. 0040, 0046 and Para. 0057-0058; it is noted that the positions and movements are determined and therefore a separation will readily be created based on such).
Regarding Claim 10, Gohrs discloses the simulation model (28 generated by 26) encompasses all the drives (1, 2, 3) and the machine elements (11, 13, 19) moved by said drives (1, 2, 3) and the other components of the packaging machine (10; as shown in Figure 2) with which the machine elements (11, 13, 19) and/or the products (23) moved by said machine elements (11, 13, 19) might collide on their trajectories (see Para. 0011-0012 which outlines the factoring of other parts of the machine).
Regarding Claim 11, Gohrs discloses each simulation and a determination of collision-free traversing paths are carried out during the operation of the packaging machine, or before or during a process of putting the packaging machine (10) into operation,(Para. 0018 discloses simulating and determining occurring prior to operation; see Para. 0023 which discloses such during operation).
Regarding Claim 12, Gohrs discloses each simulation (via 28, 29), inclusive of a determination of collision-free traversing paths, are performed by one or more computing devices (26; Para. 0055-0056).
Regarding Claim 13, Gohrs discloses the machine elements (11, 13, 19) are moved respectively along the ascertained collision-free traversing paths by the appropriate control of the drives (1, 2, 3) during the operation of the packaging machine (10) or during a process of putting it into operation (Para. 0040-0041 disclose the movement along the ascertained paths).
Regarding Claim 14, Gohrs discloses within the scope of the ascertainment of the collision-free traversing paths a first collision-free traversing path is ascertained for a first machine element (i.e. 13), and a second collision-free traversing path is ascertained for a second machine element (i.e. 19), and in that the control of the drives (2, 3) is undertaken in such a manner that the second machine element (19) is moved along the second collision-free traversing path only when the first machine element (13) has already been moved along the first collision-free traversing path (per the collision free path of Para. 0040; it is noted that the position of the pocket 13 must be obtained prior to the pushers 19 acting on the products within the pocket 13; see Para. 0036-0039 for reference).
Regarding Claim 15, Gohrs discloses an apparatus (10; Figure 1) for producing wrappers (Para. 0001, 0029), comprising:
a several drives (1, 2, 3; Figures 2-4) capable of being activated independently of one another which respectively move at least one machine element (11, 13, 19) of the apparatus (10) on a trajectory on which at least one the machine element (11, 13, 19) might collide (at collision areas 15, 17) with one another machine element or with another component of the apparatus or with products (22, 23) being handled in the apparatus (10; Para. 0030),
a computing device (26; Figure 2) that is designed and set up in such a manner that a digital simulation model (28; Figure 2) of the packaging machine (10), reproducing at least the drives (1, 2, 3) and the at least one machine element (11, 13, 19), is capable of being created with the computing device (26; see Figure 2; Paras. 0059-0060) that with the aid of which differing relative positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) and the states of the packaging machine (10) arising in these relative positions are capable of being simulated (Paras. 0020, 0022, 0055, 0060) and that is capable of ascertaining collision-free traversing paths for the at least one machine element (11, 13, 19) within each simulation (Para. 0040, 0042 describe the corresponding collision free paths that are stored in table 25), and that
the actual positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) of the packaging machine are queried (Para. 0023, 0047), wherein on the basis of the actual positions of the drives (1, 2, 3), each simulation is carried out and the collision-free traversing paths are ascertained (Para. 0023, 0048-0049) by adapting the positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) of the simulation model (28) to the queried actual positions of the respective assigned drives (1, 2, 3) of the packaging machine within each simulation, so that the positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) in the simulation model (28) correspond to the actual positions of the assigned drives (1, 2, 3) in the packaging machine (10; see Para. 0023, 0047 which outline recording actual movements and positions while Para. 0046 and 0040 outline generating such collision free paths thereof; Para. 0023 and 0047 also outline forecast data and future positions derived from actual values; also note in order to create the image 28, the positions of the drives must be sensed and recorded in some manner in order to create the image and carry out the simulations as disclosed);
a drive controller (“the control of the device 10 or to the corresponding controls of the drives of the machine elements 11, 13, 19”; Para. 0057-0058) which controls the drive (1, 2, 3) in such a manner that the at least one machine element (11, 13, 19) that is movable is moved, or capable of being moved, along the ascertained collision-free traversing paths has been assigned to each of the drives (1, 2, 3; per Para. 0040, 0042).
Regarding Claim 16, Gohrs discloses a system comprising the apparatus (10; Figure 1) as claimed in claim 15, and a method for controlling the apparatus (10; Figure 1) as claimed in claim 15, wherein the apparatus comprises several drives (1, 2, 3; see Figures 2-4) capable of being activated independently of one another which move machine elements (11, 13, 19) of a packaging machine (10) for producing wrappers on trajectories on which the machine elements (11, 13, 19) might collide (at 15, 17) with one another or with another component of the packaging machine or with products being handled in the packaging machine (10; Para. 0030), the method comprising the steps as claimed (see the rejection of Claim 1 for reference which outlines how Gohrs discloses such steps and the ability of the apparatus to carry our such steps).
Regarding Claim 17, Gohrs discloses means of a simulation program (29; Para. 0059), the digital simulation model (28) of the packaging machine is created or the collision-free traversing paths for the machine elements (12, 14, 17) are ascertained (Para. 0059-0060).
Regarding Claim 18, Gohrs discloses separations (16, 20a, 20b; Figures 6-7) between contours of the machine elements (11, 19) or between contours of the machine element (11, 19) and of the product (23) or between contours of the products (23) are determined (see Paras. 0031-0040 describes the different overlap regions in which collisions could occur and alterations of such separations between contours via control of the drives 1, 2, 3).
Regarding Claim 19, Gohrs discloses separations between contour of the machine element (11, 19) or of the product(23) moved by it, on the one hand, and contour of the stationary component(i.e. 13 is stationary when receiving the product 23), on the other hand are determined (see Paras. 0031-0040 describes the different overlap regions and separations between components and alterations of such separations via control of the drives 1, 2, 3; note also Para. 0002, 0011).
Regarding Claim 20, Gohrs discloses the digital simulation model (28) of the packaging machine is created by means of a simulation program (29) installed on the computing device (26; Para. 0059).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claim 3, while Gohrs discloses the actual positions of the drives (1, 2, 3) of the packaging machine are queried (Para. 0023, 0047), and in that on the basis of these actual positions, collision-free traversing paths are ascertained within the scope of the simulations and Gohrs discloses a database (25), Gohrs does not readily disclose storing/associating collision-free traversing paths in association with actual positions and then selecting such paths when actual positions are queried. Para. 0023 and 0047 disclose generating future positions but compares such positions to workspace data which will indicate if such future positions will result in collisions. There is no association of previously ascertained collision free paths and actual positions that are detected/queried.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments that:
PNG
media_image1.png
711
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
…
PNG
media_image2.png
451
639
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully asserts that
(1) as outlined in Paras. 0013, 0040-0042 of Gohrs, the control of the machine elements can be based on data associated with the drives and therefore the data that is recorded in Para. 0023 associated with the actual positions is readily associated with the drive positions and further Para. 0047 outlines the rotation angle being recorded which is clearly associated with the angle of rotation of the drive.
(2) Further, Para. 0047 recites “forecast data derived from the actual values can be used to calculate future positions or values resulting from the operation of the device” and therefore in order to generate/simulate such “forecast data” or “future positions”, the initial actual value of the drive has to be utilized in the simulation. Para. 0023 discloses similar features and it is noted that such forecast/future data is utilized as values stored within the table (25) which are either compared to the table areas 25.1-25.4 to determine if collision will occur per Para. 0048-0050 but such values/data can also be utilized to generate “safe travel paths” per Para. 0040, 0046. Note the generated “future positions” can also be viewed as “collision-free traversing path” when within the table area ranges of 25.1.
(3) with respect to the digital image (28) being viewed as a visual simulation model (28) that is created by the simulation program (29) to readily depict the simulation that is carried out by the simulation program as outlined in Paras. 0059-0060. While the image (28) itself is not the simulation program (29), the image (28) is used as a visual aid for depiction of the machine components and of the simulation carried out by the simulation program (29).
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 JOSHUA G KOTIS whose telephone number is (571)270-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6am-430pm.
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, Shelley Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/JOSHUA G KOTIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 12/2/2025