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 Objections
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, “a weighing” should be replaced with “the weighing”. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
One power line (claim 7)
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-7, 15-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Luechinger, US PGPub 2009/0159153.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Luechinger discloses an apparatus (1, fig 3) for detecting a dispensing event in a bulk product dispensing system, the apparatus comprising: a sensor (36,37) arrangement for detecting flow of product (from 31) through a detection zone (interior of 38), the sensor arrangement (36,37) comprising a transmitter module (37) and a receiver module (36), wherein, in use, the flow of product through the detection zone (as described above) causes a transmission beam (L) between the transmitter module (37) and receiver module (36) to be altered (see [0047]-[0048]); and at least one retainer (funnel holder) for retaining the sensor arrangement (36,37) about the detection zone (as described above).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Luechinger discloses the apparatus of claim 1, comprising an attachment mechanism (3) for releasably attaching a bulk product hopper (4 – “exchangeable dosage dispensing device, see [0041]) to the apparatus (1, fig 3), such that when the bulk product hopper (4) is attached to the apparatus (1), a dispensing path (below 31) from a spout (lower opening of 31) of the bulk product hopper (4) intersects the detection zone (as described above) of the sensor arrangement (36,37).
Regarding claim 6, Luechinger discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a fixture (2) extending from the at least one retainer (as described above), the fixture (2) being configured to mount the apparatus (1) to a surface (2 rests on ground).
Regarding claim 7, Luechinger discloses the apparatus of claim 6, further comprising at least one power line (connected with 32) mounted to the fixture (2) for supplying electrical power to the sensor Regarding claim 3, Luechinger discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the transmitter module (37) is disposed on a first side (right side in fig 3) of the detection zone (as described above) and the receiver module (36) is disposed on a second side (left side in fig 3) of the detection zone (as described above) opposing the transmitter module (37).arrangement (36,37) from an external power supply.
Regarding claim 16, Luechinger discloses the bulk product dispensing system of claim 15, further comprising a control module (35) communicatively coupled to the sensor arrangement (36,37), wherein the control module (35) is arranged to: receive a detection signal (from 36) from the sensor arrangement (36,37) indicative that the transmission beam (from 37) between the transmitter module (37) and the receiver module (36) has been altered (see [0048]); and determine that a dispensing event has occurred for the bulk product hopper (4) in dependence on receiving the detection signal (as described above).
Regarding claim 18, Luechinger discloses the bulk product dispensing system of claim 16, comprising a further apparatus (34) for detecting a dispensing event in a bulk product dispensing system and a further bulk product hopper (4) releasably attached (as described above) to the further apparatus (34), wherein the control module (35) is communicatively coupled to the sensor arrangement (36,37) of each of the apparatus (as described above) and the further apparatus (34).
Regarding claim 19, Luechinger discloses a method for detecting a dispense event using the bulk product dispensing system of claim 15, comprising: generating, at the transmitter module (37), the transmission beam (light beam); detecting, at the receiver module (36), an alteration in the transmission beam (as described above); in dependence on the detection of the alteration in the transmission beam, transmitting a detection signal (see [0048]) to the control module (35); and determining that a dispensing event has occurred for the bulk product hopper (4) in dependence on receiving the detection signal (as described above).
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.
Claim(s) 4, 11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luechinger in view of Zhang et al. US PGPub 2021/0131941.
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 13, Luechinger discloses the apparatus of claim 3, but does not disclose the specified detector frame configuration.
PNG
media_image2.png
476
454
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Zhang et al. teaches a similar optical sensor arrangement (fig 2) wherein the at least one retainer (202) comprises a detector frame (200) surrounding the detection zone (204) and wherein: the transmitter module (206) is disposed on a first inner surface (left side in fig 2) of the detector frame (200) facing the detection zone (204), and the receiver module (208) is disposed on a second inner surface (right side in fig 2) of the detector frame (200) opposing the first inner surface (as described above) and facing the detection zone (205). (claim 4)
wherein the sensor arrangement (206,208) comprises a plurality of transmitter modules (206 –six shown in fig 2) and a plurality of corresponding receiver modules (208 – six shown in fig 2). (claim 11)
wherein the or each transmitter module comprises an infra-red, IR, transmitter module configured to generate an IR pulse and the or each receiver module comprises an infra-red, IR, receiver module configured to detect the IR pulse generated by the corresponding IR transmitter module (see [0023]-[0024]). (claim 13)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the detector frame configuration described by Zhang et al. to the system disclosed by Luechinger in order to enhance the sensor precision for more accurate dispensing operations.
Regarding claim 14, Luechinger in view of Zhang et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 13 but does not specify the IR beam pulse rate. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to employ the specified detection rate since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated employ the specified detection rate in order to optimize the sensing accuracy for a specific dispensing operation.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luechinger in view of Zhang et al. and further in view of Kucharczyk, US PGPub 2020/0096458.
Regarding claim 12, Luechinger in view of Zhang et al. disclose the the apparatus of claim 11 but does not specify that the sensor arrangement comprises: a plurality of alternately spaced transmitter and receiver modules.
PNG
media_image3.png
556
410
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kucharczyk teaches a similar optical detector (see fig 2b) including a plurality of alternately spaced transmitter (147) and receiver modules (148) along a first side (149) of the detection zone; and a corresponding plurality of alternately spaced transmitter (147) and receiver (148) modules along a second side (149b) of the detection zone, such that each transmitter module opposes a receiver module and vice versa; wherein, in use, the flow of product through the detection zone causes a transmission beam between at least one of the transmitter modules and its opposing receiver module to be altered. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the alternating transmitters and receivers as described by Kucharczyk in the system disclosed by Luechinger in order to improve the resolution threshold of the sensor.
Claim(s) 5, 8-9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luechinger in view of Pavlich et al., US PGPub 2022/0296009.
Regarding claims 5 and 8, Luechinger discloses the apparatus of claim 1 but does not specify the electronic shelf label or first or second arm portions.
PNG
media_image4.png
736
502
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Pavlich et al. teaches a similar bulk dispenser (fig2) , further comprising an electronic shelf label (132) (see fig 2). (claim 5)
wherein the fixture comprises a mounting mechanism (76) for mounting the apparatus to a surface (78), a first flexible arm portion (124) attached to the at least one retainer and a second rigid arm portion (118) connecting the first flexible arm (124) portion to the mounting mechanism (76). (claim 8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electronic label and mounting mechanism described by Pavlich et al. to the system disclosed by Luechinger in order to facilitate bulk dispenser replacement and a seamless user interface for dispensing.
Regarding claim 9, Luechinger in view of Pavlich discloses the apparatus of claim 8, but does not specify the materials of the first and second arms. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to employ the specified materials, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended us as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to employ the specified materials in order to ensure proper rigidity for the components for the specific application.
Regarding claim 17, Luechinger discloses the bulk product dispensing system of claim 16, further comprising a weighing apparatus (34), wherein the control module (35) is configured to transmit a control signal (see [0048]) to a weighing apparatus (34) in dependence on the determination that a dispensing event has occurred for the bulk product hopper (4), and wherein the weighing apparatus (34). Luechinger does not specify the display. Pavlich teaches a similar dispensing system including an indication of the dispensing event for the bulk product hopper on a display device (132) of the weighing apparatus. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electronic label described by Pavlich et al. to the system disclosed by Luechinger in order to create a seamless user interface for dispensing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 10 is patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claim 10, including every structural element recited in the claims, especially, the configuration wherein the first flexible arm portion comprises an concertinaed surface.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the dispensing system as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the system in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A RIEGELMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7956. The examiner can normally be reached 8-6 EST 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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
MICHAEL A. RIEGELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/MICHAEL A RIEGELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654