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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-11) in the reply filed on 2/13/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the overall features of alleged Invention I of claims 1-11 are the same as that of alleged Invention II of claims 12-15. This is not found persuasive because in Group II, there are still some limitations (for example, in claims 12, 13, 14, 15 ‘(in) a reducing station in which a first control variable of a pressure of the flowable medium is provided’) that needs to be searched separately.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, there is the lack of clear steps for the method (lack of active voice/verbs first), e.g., -comparing a target pressure to an actual pressure in the reservoir- instead of the current ‘wherein a target pressure is compared with an actual pressure in the reservoir’
In claim 1, lines 2-3, ‘plastic preforms are applied with a flowable medium’ should read “plastic preforms are supplied with a flowable medium”
Claims 2-11 depended on claim 1 are objected as well.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-11 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations “wherein the plastic preforms are applied with different pressure levels” in lines 3-4. It is unclear whether or not it can be read like the preforms are doing the action of pressing something when we know from experience in the art that the pressure is being applied to the preforms to expand them/shape them into the containers the different pressure levels. Claim 1 is indefinite.
Claims 2-11 depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geltinger et al. (US 8,460,599).
Regarding claims 1, 4, Geltinger discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, a method for forming plastic preforms into plastic containers by at least one apparatus for forming plastic preforms into plastic containers (ABSTRACT), wherein plastic preforms are applied with a flowable medium and are thus formed into the plastic containers (e.g., col. 6, lines 14-17), wherein the plastic preforms are applied with different pressure levels (e.g., as shown in Fig. 5) and the flowable medium (e.g., col. 3, line 40 (i.e., air)) is stored in at least two reservoirs (e.g., as illustrated in Fig. 3, the first pressure compartment 21, the second pressure compartment 22, and the third pressure compartment 23 (col. 7, lines 30-35) (i.e., at least three reservoirs)) and is supplied from these reservoirs to the plastic preforms(as shown in Fig. 3), wherein at least one of these reservoirs is supplied with the flowable medium by a pressure supply device (e.g., from the external unit 20 to the central pressurized air distributor 25 (col. 7, lines 43-44)), and wherein at least temporarily the flowable medium is returned from the plastic container to at least one of these reservoirs (e.g., guiding at least one part of a venting of the final blown containers into a pressure compartment (col. 3, lines 17-18)), wherein a pressure in at least one reservoir is controlled, and wherein a target pressure is compared with an actual pressure in this reservoir , and a value characteristic of this comparison is determined (col. 4, lines 36-40 (i.e., a predefined pressure difference between the pressure in the first pressure compartment and a first set pressure is compared)),
wherein
at least one first control variable (e.g., the first pressure in the first pressure compartment) and at least one second control variable (e.g., the control unit extends the venting time of the containers into the first pressure compartment (col. 4, lines 46-48)) are controlled on the basis of this characteristic value, wherein the at least one first control variable and the at least one second control variable are controlled in a prioritized manner (e.g., likewise this time (i.e., the venting time) can be reduced, if the second set pressure is exceeded by the second pressure difference (col. 4, lines 49-51)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the pressures in the multiple reservoirs maintaining the preset levels (e.g., based on controlling the first control variable) then control the venting time of air in the containers into the reservoirs (e.g., based on controlling the second control variable) in a prioritized manner (related to claim 4).
Regarding claims 2, 3, Geltinger discloses that, for example, a predefined first pressure difference between the pressure in the first pressure compartment and a first set pressure is preferentially between 0.1 bar and 0.6 bar, if the pressure in the first pressure compartment falls below the first set pressure (col. 4, lines 36-40). Here, the pressure difference of 0.1 bar and 0.6 bar can be considered as an offset value of a pressure for the first control variable. Furthermore, Geltinger discloses that, the control unit extends the venting time of the containers into the first pressure compartment of low pressure, if the pressure falls below the first set pressure by the first pressure difference (col. 4, lines 46-49). Here, the venting time is considered as the second control variable for controlling the air returned from the containers to the reservoir(s) (related to claim 3).
Regarding claims 5, 6, 7, Geltinger discloses that, a predefined first pressure difference between the pressure in the first pressure compartment and a first set pressure is preferentially between 0.1 bar and 0.6 bar, if the pressure in the first pressure compartment falls below the first set pressure (col. 4, lines 36-40). Furthermore, Geltinger discloses that, the control unit extends the venting time of the containers into the first pressure compartment of low pressure, if the pressure falls below the first set pressure by the first pressure difference (col. 4, lines 46-49).
Thus, Geltinger discloses that, the pressure in the first pressure compartment is evaluated based on the preset pressure first then the venting time is determined how much air being able to return from the containers to the first pressure compartment (related to claims 5, 6).
It is noticed that, at least the first pressure in the first pressure compartment is within the first set pressure which is a function of a predetermined operating state of the blow pressure of air. Another operating state of the apparatus is related to the venting time of the containers into the first pressure compartment (related to claim 7).
Regarding claim 8, Geltinger discloses that, the first pressure compartment of low pressure is connected with a pressure sensor (col. 4, lines 55-56).
Regarding claims 9, 10, Geltinger discloses that, the first pressure compartment of low pressure is connected with a pressure sensor (col. 4, lines 55-56). Thus, when a predefined first pressure difference between the pressure in the first pressure compartment and a first set pressure is preferentially between 0.1 bar and 0.6 bar (if the pressure in the first pressure compartment falls below the first set pressure) (col. 4, lines 36-40), the current offset value of the pressure and the characteristic value for the comparison of the pressure difference between the pressure in the first pressure compartment (i.e., the actual pressure) and a first set pressure (i.e., the target pressure) are taken into account.
Regarding claim 11, Geltinger discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, from the external unit 20 to the central pressurized air distributor 25 (i.e., the pressure supply device), the pressurized air with the respective pressure level is directedly via a first conduit 21i into the first pressure compartment 21 (col. 7, lines 43-47). Geltinger discloses that, the pressure supply device has an adjustable pressure level in which a control unit is provided which maintains an essential constant pressure in the first pressure compartment (ABSTRACT, lines 1-5 from bottom).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIBIN LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8811. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30 - 4:30.
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, Alison L Hindenlang can be reached on 571 270 7001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHIBIN LIANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741