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 .
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.
Claim(s) 8-10, 13-15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cere (U.S. Pat. No. 11,427,356) in view of Scherer (U.S. Pat. No. 5,404,691).
Regarding claim 8: Cere discloses a wrapping machine for wrapping a film around a product, the wrapping machine, comprising:
a supporting frame (Fig. 1; via the shown frame and stand 2, 26, 30, & 38);
a rotating ring rotatably supported by said supporting frame (via driving rings 4, 11, 12) so as to rotate about a substantially horizontal wrapping axis (via around axis X);
a plurality of supporting wheels fixed to said supporting frame free to rotate and configured to rotatably support said rotating ring by engaging an external peripheral edge of said rotating ring (Figs. 2-6; via rollers 13, 14, 17, and 18),
an unwinding unit that is fixed to said rotating ring, supports a reel of film and is provided with a roller assembly to unwind the film (Fig. 2; via unwinding unit 5 with rollers 52/53); and
a drive system for rotating said rotating ring about the substantially horizontal wrapping axis and comprising at least a flexible element wrapped around said external peripheral edge of said rotating ring and moved by a pulley driven by a motor (Figs. 1-2; via driving belts 15, 16, and 22);
wherein said external peripheral edge comprises a first annular portion and an adjacent second annular portion, each of said supporting wheels having a cross section with a semi-circular shape and suitable to receive and engage said first annular portion of said external peripheral edge having cross section with a semi-circular shape and complementary to the cross section of said annular guide groove, see for example (Figs. 3-5; via wheels 13 & 17 appears to be inserted on groove of ring 4), said second annular portion of said peripheral edge being provided with an annular seat suitable for receiving said flexible element and having a second external diameter smaller than a first external diameter of said first annular portion (Figs. 3-5; via belts 15, 16, and/or 22 received by peripheral edge of ring 4 inside a groove with smaller diameter in comparison with the diameter of the ring with extending out guiding ribs).
Cere does not suggest the use of supporting wheel comprising an annular guide groove. However, Scherer discloses similar wrapping machine with the use of supporting wheels with grooves, see for example (Fig. 1; via grooved wheels 14 to fit on ring 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have substituted Cere’s supporting wheels, with another grooved wheels, as suggested by Scherer, in order to gain more control and support of the rotating ring.
Regarding claim 9: Cere discloses that the guide groove comprises inside a central annular channel, which separates two opposite side walls of said guide groove arranged to abut said first annular portion of said external peripheral edge, see for example (Figs. 2-6; via the shown dark grooved areas on driving ring 11).
Regarding claim 10: Cere comprises at least one supporting wheel that is adjustably fixed to said supporting frame in order to vary a distance thereof from said external peripheral edge (via adjustment means 33, 34, 35 between rollers 13/14 and driving ring 11/12).
Regarding claim 13: Scherer discloses that the first annular portion and said guide groove have semi-circular cross-section shape, respectively convex and concave, having the same radius of curvature (Fig. 1; via the shown grooved roller 14 on top periphery of ring 16).
Regarding claims 14 & 17: Cere in view of Scherer do not suggest the claimed cylindrical covering element, coaxially connected to said rotating ring, being connected to an inner peripheral edge of said rotating ring. However, the Office takes an official notice that a use of covering element to cover a station or cylindrical body is very old and well known in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention, to have substituted Cere’s ring, with an inner cover, in order to protect the ring from having any packaging materials or small items from being inserted or damaging the ring.
Regarding claim 15: Cere discloses that the supporting wheels of the plurality of supporting wheels are fixed to said supporting frame free to rotate about respective rotation axes parallel to said wrapping axis, see for example (Figs. 2-6; via wheels 13, 14, 17, and 18 supporting on frames 2, 26, 30, & 38).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the applied art of Cere ‘356 does not suggest the claimed rotating ring “so as to rotate about a substantially horizontal wrapping axis”, rather the shown ring 4 rotates about a vertical wrapping axis.
The office draws applicant’s attention that the claims are given the broadest reasonable meaning; in this case the claimed term is referring to “so as to” and “substantially horizontal”, not necessarily to be in a complete “horizontal” orientation nor an intended use limitations followed term “so as to” of the “rotating ring” would be given much patentable weight.
It is noted that, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Applicant further argues that the rotation ring 4 of ‘356 is rotated by the driving belt 22, nowhere shows the claimed “a first annular portion and an adjacent second annular portion”.
The Office believes that indeed ‘356 shows the surface of ring 4 serving as “annular portion” with multiple annular sections provided to accommodate the guide rollers (via recess C; “the annular elements of the driving rings 11, 12 may have a closed cross-section’).
Further, applicant argues that the secondary applied art of Scherer ‘691 does not show the claimed “annular guide groove having a cross section with a semi-circular shape”, rather using supporting wheels 14 with an annular guide groove in a rectangular shape with a rectangular cross section.
The Office believes that applicant’s remarks regarding ‘691’s wheel 14 having a rectangular cross section groove has no proper support nor been identified anywhere by ‘691 as a wheel with a rectangular groove. It appears that applicant is highlighting and arguing for an issue without no proper support.
Being that said, the Office believes that a use of guiding rollers grooved in a “semi-circular shape” in the packaging art is very old and well know, no novelty. Therefore, a use of “semi-circular” or “rectangular” grooved guide rollers would only be a matter of engineering design choice to be made.
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 SAMEH TAWFIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4470. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Shelle 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.
/SAMEH TAWFIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731