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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1 Applicant argues:
“Peters does not disclose or suggest applying adhesive without adjustment for stack height. Peters describes coating an edge face of a stack carried in a turret, but it is entirely silent as to stack thickness variation and whether the adhesive applicator must be adjusted to accommodate such variation. Peters does not identify stack-height variability as a problem or describe any configuration that eliminates adjustment of the adhesive applicator. Because Peters is silent, it cannot be assumed that Peters inherently operates without adjustment. Multiple arrangements are possible, including adjustable or compliant applicators. The claimed limitation that adhesive is applied without adjustment for stack height is therefore not disclosed.”
However, it does not have to be assumed “Peters inherently operates without adjustment” as argued above. Peters et al. do not disclose any height adjustment for the stack. Thus, Peters et al. disclose “no adjustment of the padding station for a height of the received stack of the media sheets” as claimed. Furthermore, Figure 2 of the prior art discloses a configuration that rotates a stack (23) which requires a specific height for adhesive to be applied. Thus, it is inherent (at the very least) from Figure 2 that Peters et al. disclose “no adjustment of the padding station for a height of the received stack of the media sheets” as claimed. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding claim 1 Applicant argues:
“Peters also does not disclose rotation configured to transfer the stack between defined orientations. Although Peters includes a rotating turret, it uses the turret to transport stacks past stations. Peters does not define or require that stacks move from a first orientation to a second orientation normal to the first orientation, nor does it attribute any functional significance to orientation during adhesive application. Any change in orientation that might occur in Peters is incidental to transport and is not disclosed as a configured or purposeful transformation. The claims require a specific orientation change produced by carousel rotation, which is absent from Peters.”
However, Peters et al. disclose rotation by way of the turret/carousel which produces multiple orientations. As shown in Figure 2, a stack rotates along a path which results in multiple orientations, the multiple orientations includes first and second orientations. It is agreed upon that the “claims require a specific orientation change produced by carousel rotation” and the prior art discloses this, because it discloses the transfer of a stack along a circular path. Thus, any two points along this path, which are normal to one another, anticipate “a drive mechanism attached to the carousel and configured to rotate the carousel and transfer the stack of media sheets received in the one of the stack housings from a first orientation to a second orientation normal to the first orientation via the rotation of the carousel” as claimed. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding claim 1 Applicant argues:
“Peters further does not disclose curing during continued rotation toward an exit location. Peters explains that adhesive must be allowed to set before removal and addresses this by increasing dwell time or causing stacks to bypass the removal station. Thus, Peters relies on extended residence time or delayed removal. It does not describe curing as occurring during a defined progression of the stack toward an exit location. In the present claims, curing is integrated into the continued rotation of the stack after adhesive application and during its movement toward removal. This operating sequence is not disclosed in Peters.”
However, the prior art discloses an exit location (see “37” in Figure 2). The prior art also discloses that the stacks “23” rotate in the direction of arrow “31” as shown in Figure 2. In order to exit the device shown in Figure 2, according to the direction of travel shown in Figure 2, the stack has to rotate past the padding station (54) in order to exit the device and that it receives adhesive which cures as it travels. Thus, the prior art explicitly discloses “rotating the stack of the media sheets past the padding station and toward an exit location as the adhesive layer cures and binds” as claimed. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
For the foregoing reasons the claim stand rejected.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 1 ”wherein further comprising” is not grammatically correct. It is suggested Applicant delete “wherein” on line 1. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Peters et al. (USP 4,500,241).
Regarding claim 1, Peters et al. disclose a system for automatically binding stacks of media sheets, the system comprising:
a carousel (12) including a plurality of stack housings (21) attached to the carousel adjacent a periphery thereof (see Figure 2), one of the stack housings (21) configured to receive a stack of media sheets (23) and to rotate the received stack of media sheets incrementally around the carousel (see column 7 lines 64-68 to column 8 lines 1-22);
a drive mechanism attached to the carousel and configured to rotate the carousel and transfer the stack of media sheets received in the one of the stack housings from a first orientation to a second orientation normal to the first orientation via the rotation of the carousel (see column 10 lines 58-68 to column 11 lines 1-54); and
a padding station (54) adjacent the one of the plurality of stack housings (see Figure 2), the padding station (54) including a container (see Figure 2) housing an adhesive and an adhesive applicator (56) configured to deposit an adhesive layer of the adhesive onto a side of the received stack of the media sheets (see column 11 lines 20-22) with no adjustment of the padding station for a height of the received stack of the media sheets (see Figure 2), wherein the carousel is configured to continue rotating the stack of the media sheets past the padding station and toward an exit location as the adhesive layer cures and binds the received stack of the media sheets together into a bound bundle of the media sheets (see column 10 lines 58-68 to column 11 lines 1-54).
Regarding claim 2, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, further comprising an exit conveyor mechanism (37) adjacent the carousel and configured to remove the bound bundle from the one of the stack housings (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 2, wherein the exit conveyor mechanism includes a conveyor belt (38).
Regarding claim 4, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the adhesive applicator (56) includes a roller (56) configured to roll the layer of adhesive across the side of the stack of the media sheets rotated by the one of the stack housings rotating around the carousel (see column 9 lines 60-68).
Regarding claim 5, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the stack housings (21) include an aperture on a side of the stack housings adjacent the side of the stack of the media sheets (21) configured to receive the layer of the adhesive, and the adhesive applicator (56) deposits the layer of the adhesive through the aperture onto the side of the stack (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the stack housings include a first support configured to abut one side of the received stack of media sheets, and a second support configured to abut another side of the received stack of media sheets to hold the received stack together during a rotation of the received stack and adhesive deposition onto the side of the received stack (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, further comprising a delivery unit (32) having an automated pusher (34), the automated pusher configured to move the stack of media sheets from an upstream source adjacent the carousel to the one of the stack housings for rotation thereof around the carousel (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 10, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the carousel is a vertically oriented carousel (see column 12 lines 11-17 and Figure 2).
Regarding claim 11, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, further comprising a curing device (57) adjacent the carousel, the curing device configured to cure the adhesive layer to the side of the received stack of the media sheets and bind the media sheets at the side of the received stack together into the bound bundle of the media sheets (see column 10 lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 12, Peters et al. disclose a method for automatically binding stacks of media sheets, the method comprising:
a) receiving a stack of media sheets (23) via a stack housing (21) of a carousel (12), the stack having a first orientation, and the stack housing (21) being one of a plurality of stack housings (21) attached to the carousel (12) adjacent a periphery thereof (see Figure 2);
b) rotating, via the stack housing (21), the received stack of media sheets (23) incrementally around the carousel, and incrementally rotating the received stack of media sheets in the stack housing from the first orientation to a second orientation normal to the first orientation via a drive mechanism attached to the carousel rotating the carousel (see column 7 lines 64-68 to column 8 lines 1-22);
c) depositing a layer of an adhesive (see column 11 lines 20-22) onto a side of the received stack of the media sheets (23) during the incremental rotation via a padding station (54) adjacent the stack housing (21), wherein the padding station is not adjusted for a height of the received stack of the media sheets, and the padding station includes a container (see Figure 2) housing the adhesive and an adhesive applicator (56);
d) continuing rotation of the received stack of media sheets past the padding station and toward an exit location, wherein during the continued rotation the adhesive layer cures and binds the received stack of the media sheets together into a bound bundle of the media sheets (see column 10 lines 58-68 to column 11 lines 1-54).
Regarding claim 13, Peters et al. disclose the method of Claim 12, further comprising removing the bound bundle (23’) from the stack housing (21) via an exit conveyor mechanism (37) adjacent the carousel (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 14, Peters et al. disclose the method of Claim 13, further comprising, after step c), continuing rotation of the received stack of media sheets (23) via the stack housing (21) to the exit conveyor mechanism (57), and during the continuing rotation, curing the deposited layer of the adhesive on the side of the received stack of the media sheets together into the bound bundle of the media sheets (see column 11 lines 20-61).
Regarding claim 15, Peters et al. disclose the method of Claim 12, the step c) including the adhesive applicator (56) rolling the layer of adhesive from the container across the side of the stack of the received media sheets (see column 9 lines 60-68).
Regarding claim 16, Peters et al. disclose the method of Claim 12, further comprising, during the step b), the stack housing (21) registering the received stack of media sheets (23) within the stack housing (21), and abutting opposite sides of the registered received stack (see Figure 2) to hold the stack together during step c).
Regarding claim 17, Peters et al. disclose the method of Claim 12, wherein step a) includes moving the stack of media sheets (23) from an upstream source (32) adjacent the carousel (12) to the stack housing via an automated pusher (34) .
Regarding claim 19, Peters et al. disclose the method of Claim 12, wherein further comprising incrementally rotating the received stack of media sheets in the stack housing from the second orientation to a third orientation opposite to the first orientation via the drive mechanism (see column 7 lines 64-68 to column 8 lines 1-14), and the method further comprises removing the bound bundle (23’) from the stack housing via an exit conveyor mechanism (37) adjacent the carousel (12) with the stack having the third orientation (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 20, Peters et al. disclose a device for automatically binding stacks of media sheets, the device comprising:
a vertical carousel (12) including a plurality of stack housings (21) attached to the vertical carousel adjacent a periphery thereof (see Figure 2), each of the stack housings (21) configured to receive a respective stack of media sheets (23) from an upstream source (32) and to rotate the received stack around the vertical carousel (see column 7 lines 64-68 to column 8 lines 1-22);
a drive mechanism attached to the carousel and configured to rotate the carousel and transfer the stack of media sheets received in one of the stack housings from a first orientation to a second orientation normal to the first orientation via the rotation of the carousel (see column 7 lines 64-68 to column 8 lines 1-14);
a padding station (54) adjacent the stack housings (21), the padding station (54) including a container (see Figure 2) housing an adhesive (see column 11 lines 20-22) and an adhesive applicator (56) configured to deposit a layer of the adhesive onto a side of the respective stack of media sheets (23) received by one of the stack housings (21) adjacent the padding station (54), wherein the padding station is not adjusted for a height of the respective stack of media sheets, and the carousel is configured to continue rotating the stack of media sheets past the padding station and toward an exit location as the adhesive layer cures and binds (see column 10 lines 58-68 to column 11 lines 1-54) the respective stack of media sheets (23) into a bound bundle (23’) of the media sheets (see column 11 lines 55-61); and
an exit conveyor mechanism (37) adjacent the vertical carousel (12) and configured to remove the bound bundle (23’) from the one of the stack housings (21).
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peters et al. (USP 4,500,241) as applied to claims 1-7, 9-17, and 19-20 above, and further in view of Samborn et al. (USPGPUB 2003/0154695).
Regarding claim 9, Peters et al. disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the drive mechanism includes a motor configured to incrementally rotate the carousel (see column 7 lines 64-68 to column 8 lines 1-14). However, they do not disclose a system wherein the drive mechanism includes a stepper motor. Samborn et al. disclose a system wherein the drive mechanism includes a stepper motor (see paragraph [0030]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system disclosed by Peters et al. by including a system wherein the drive mechanism includes a stepper motor, as disclosed by Samborn et al., with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of providing rotational motion via a stepper motor (see paragraph [0030]).
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-8970. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at (571) 270-3415. 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.
M.K.C.
8/27/2026
/MICHAEL COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights