DETAILED ACTION
The Office acknowledges receipt of the Applicant’s response filed 16 December 2025.
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 § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jakob (US 2018/0169884 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Jakob discloses a flexible guide (9.1-9.4) for guiding blanks in a blanking station (This is a limitation of intended use. As such, the cited structures only need to be capable of guiding blanks in a blanking station which the disclosure of Jakob is deemed to be. The limitation does not positively recite the limitations of guiding blanks or a blanking station), the flexible guide to be located between a blanking tool (5) and a blank receiving unit (1),
wherein the flexible guide comprises at least one guiding surface (20) adapted for guiding the blanks (3), being oriented in parallel to a piling direction (figs. 1 and 2 – up and down) and arranged so as to define an outer contour of a blank collecting space (W – fig. 1a), and
wherein the flexible guide further comprises a flexible portion (12 and/or 14), to be located in proximity to the blank receiving unit,
wherein the flexible portion is elastically deformable in a first direction along the outer contour of the blank collecting space (figs. 1a-1d; paragraph 0033; claim 5) and wherein the flexible portion has a lower stiffness in the first direction (paragraph 0033; claim 5; figs. 1a-d – up/down) than in a second direction perpendicular to the outer contour of the blank collecting space (paragraph 0033; figs. 2-4; The flexible portion 11 is designed to bend downward, however, the geometry and shape of that portion in the other directions perpendicular to this direction would result in a greater stiffness) to avoid deflection of the flexible portion into the blank collecting space in case of collision with the blank receiving unit (This is a limitation of intended use and the cited prior art is deemed to be able to achieve this result for the reasons provided and the disclosed geometry).
Regarding claim 9, Jakob discloses a rigid portion (10 or alternatively 8), wherein the flexible portion is connected to the rigid portion.
Regarding claim 10, Jakob discloses wherein the flexible portion and the rigid portion are connected by a plug connection (22).
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vossen (US 6,997,363 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Vossen (figs. 1-16; figs. 29-30; figs. 32-34) discloses a flexible guide (20; 62) for guiding blanks in a blanking station (figs. 1-16; figs. 29-30; figs. 32-34; This is a limitation of intended use. As such, the cited structures only need to be capable of guiding blanks in a blanking station which the disclosure of Vossen is deemed to be. The limitation does not positively recite the limitations of guiding blanks or a blanking station), the flexible guide to be located between a blanking tool (40, 41) and a blank receiving unit (16),
wherein the flexible guide comprises at least one guiding surface (52 – fig. 11; vertical interior surface of 62 facing 16a as seen in fig. 34) adapted for guiding the blanks (12), being oriented in parallel to a piling direction (figs. 4-7) and arranged so as to define an outer contour of a blank collecting space (16, 16a; figs. 7-8, 33-34), and
wherein the flexible guide further comprises a flexible portion (figs. 7-8, 29-30 - #34, 24; figs. 32-34 - #35, 64), to be located in proximity to the blank receiving unit,
wherein the flexible portion is elastically deformable in a first direction along the outer contour of the blank collecting space (fig. 11 - #34 bends down adjacent the outer contour of the blank collecting space; Comparable results for figs. 29-30 and 32-34) and wherein the flexible portion has a lower stiffness in the first direction than in a second direction perpendicular to the outer contour of the blank collecting space (figs. 4-8, 12, 27-28; The flexible portion 34, 38, 22, 24 is designed to bend downward, however, the geometry and shape of that portion in the other directions perpendicular to this direction would result in a greater stiffness due to the greater thickness of the flexible portions in those respective directions) to avoid deflection of the flexible portion into the blank collecting space in case of collision with the blank receiving unit (This is a limitation of intended use and the cited prior art is deemed to be able to achieve this result for the reasons provided and the disclosed geometry; Fig. 11 shows a bending downward while not bending toward a center of the receiving space. Thus this also supports the Office’s finding.).
Regarding claim 9, Vossen discloses a rigid portion (15, 29), wherein the flexible portion is connected (@ 26, 27, 28) to the rigid portion.
Regarding claim 10, Vossen discloses wherein the flexible portion and the rigid portion are connected by a plug connection (26, 27, 28).
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jakob (US 2018/0169884 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Jakob discloses wherein the flexible portion (11, 15) consists of an abrasion resistant material (paragraphs 0030-0033; The material of the flexible portion bends but is not cited as wearing or abrading the workpiece 3), but doesn’t disclose abrasion resistant polymeric material.
However, the Office previously took official notice on 1 October 2025 that abrasion resistant polymeric material was commonly used in the art for such guides and similar structures that are meant to be resilient and contact workpieces but not damage them. Doing so would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing in order to protect the workpieces from damage. The common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art because applicant failed to traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice (MPEP 2144.03 C).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vossen (US 6,997,363 B1).
Regarding claim 11, Vossen discloses wherein the flexible portion (34, 38, 22, 24) consists flexible plastic material (col. 6 lines 25-36), but doesn’t specifically disclose abrasion resistant polymeric material.
However, the Office previously took official notice on 1 October 2025 that abrasion resistant polymeric material was commonly used in the art for such guides and similar structures that are meant to be resilient and contact workpieces but not damage them. Vossen already discloses having the material be flexible and plastic. Flexible materials are generally understood to reduce the chance of abrasion. Plastic materials are often, if not exclusively, polymeric. Having the flexible portion of Vossen consist of an abrasion resistant polymeric material would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing in order to protect the workpieces from damage. The common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art because applicant failed to traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice (MPEP 2144.03 C).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4 June 2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The amendments to claim 8 do not positively recite the presence of a blanking station, blank receiving unit or blank collecting space. The claims only recited how the flexible guide is intended to be used in conjunction with such a station and a user’s motivation (i.e. thought process) for why they would use the guide in such a way. The prior art is deemed to read on the structural limitations claimed as detailed above.
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 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 ANDREW M TECCO whose telephone number is (571)270-3694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11a-7p.
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.
/ANDREW M TECCO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731