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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the application 18/821,261 filed on 05/26/2026.
In the instant Amendment, claims 1 and 12 have been amended.
Claims 1 – 14 have been examined and are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/27/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Continued Examination under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/26/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "illumination device", "rotation device", "capturing device" in claim 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 – 14 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the same combination of references being used in the current rejection. Applicant’s arguments are directed solely to the claimed invention as amended 05/26/2026, which has been rejected under new ground of rejection necessitated by amendment. See rejection below for full detail.
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 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 1, 2, 4 – 6, 9 – 10, 12 – 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (DE 102010046461 B4) in view of Minato (US 5, 216, 481).
Regarding claim 1, Huhn discloses: “apparatus (1) for inspecting containers (3), comprising
an illumination device (27) configured to alternately illuminate an illumination region (37) with different illumination patterns [see para: 0001; The selected container area is illuminated with electromagnetic radiation from at least one radiation source] comprising at least a first illumination pattern (43) and a second illumination pattern (47), wherein the illumination device (27) is configured to illuminate the illumination region (37) with the first illumination pattern (43) in first time windows (41) and to illuminate it with the second illumination pattern (47) in second time windows (45) [see para: 0006; This makes it possible to make the selected container area more accessible to illumination by electromagnetic radiation. For example, if the mouth or an upper section of the container is to be inspected, the container is lifted; accordingly, if a bottom or lower area is to be inspected, the container can be lowered. The correspondingly raised or lowered container is then irradiated sequentially by at least two radiation sources, in particular opposite ones. This means that first the first radiation source and then the second or further radiation sources are used for irradiation and the reflected radiation is recorded accordingly by a recording device with a sensor unit assigned to the radiation source];
a rotation device (25) configured to rotate a container (3) having a bottom (5) and a sidewall (7) about an axis (35) of the container (3) in such a way that at least a portion of the sidewall (7) passes through the illumination region (37) along a rotational direction (36) [see para: 0010; the corresponding containers were therefore stopped and rotated around the vertical axis in order to irradiate light at different angles onto the selected container area]; and
a capturing device (29) configured to capture a photo of the illumination region (37) at least in each first time window (41) and in each second time window (45) [see para: 0044; A corresponding camera is then selected to capture the reflected light and, in particular, the corresponding image].
Huhn does not explicitly disclose: “wherein the illumination device is configured to illuminate the illumination region with a frequency of alternation between the at least the first illumination pattern and the second illumination pattern adapted to the rotation of the container to completely cover a region of the sidewall extending around a full circumference of the container with photos captured with the first illumination pattern and to completely cover the region of the sidewall extending around the full circumference of the container with photos captured with the second illumination pattern, in the course of a full rotation of the container”.
However, Minato, from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: “wherein the illumination device is configured to illuminate the illumination region with a frequency of alternation between the at least the first illumination pattern and the second illumination pattern [see col:1; lines: 35 – 45; The inspecting method is based in short on the fact that, where the striped pattern is, for example, a pattern wherein white and black stripes or bands repeat alternately, if a bottle has a defect, then either a black transmission image is successively produced in a white stripe or a white transmission image is successively produced in a black stripe, by a light blocking property or a refracting property of such defect, but on the contrary if a bottle has no defect, then no such image is produced or such images are produced but discretely] adapted to the rotation of the container to completely cover a region of the sidewall extending around a full circumference of the container with photos captured with the first illumination pattern and to completely cover the region of the sidewall extending around the full circumference of the container with photos captured with the second illumination pattern, in the course of a full rotation of the container [see col: 9 and 10; lines: 64 – 70; 1 – 29; FIGS. 15 and 17 show different manners of inspection and different inspecting equipments to which an inspecting method of the present invention is applied. Referring first to FIG. 15, the inspecting equipment shown includes three sets of light sources and CCD cameras including a first light source 2a and a first CCD camera 5a, a second light source 2b and a second CCD camera 5b, and a third light source 2c and a third CCD camera 5c. The three sets are disposed in a spaced relationship from each other in a transporting direction of a conveyor 3, that is, in the direction indicated by an arrow mark, and two (first and second) rotating apparatus 24 are installed between the first and seconds sets and between the second and third sets, respectively. One third of a body portion of a transparent or translucent object 4 is photographed by the first CCD camera 5a, and then the transparent object 4 is transported to the first rotating apparatus 24, at which it is rotated by 60 degrees. Then, it is transported again to an inspecting position by the second set, at which a next one third of the transparent object 4 is photographed by the second CCD camera 5b. The transparent object 4 is then transported to the second rotating device 24 and rotated further by 60 degrees, whereafter it is transported to an inspecting position by the third set and a remaining one third of the transparent object 4 is photographed by the third CCD camera 5c. It is to be noted that reference numeral 25 denotes a velocity detecting apparatus for detecting a velocity of the conveyor 3, and 26 denotes an excluding apparatus for excluding from the conveyor 3 a transparent object 4 which has been discriminated as having a defect by the defect discriminating means 21].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inspecting transparent object for defect
system disclosed by Huhn to add the teachings of Minato as above, in order to reduce or minimizing separate inspection units to the system, the system rotates the container through a fixed illumination region while rapidly alternating between at least two lighting patterns to cover full circumference of the container [Minato see col:1; lines: 35 – 45; col: 9 and 10; lines: 64 – 70; 1 – 29; FIGS. 15 and 17].
Regarding claim 2, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huhn discloses: “wherein the first illumination pattern (43) corresponds to an at least substantially uniform illumination of the illumination region (37) and the second illumination pattern (47) corresponds to an illumination of different sub-regions of the illumination region (37) with different light intensities [see para: 0010; In the methods or devices known from practice, the corresponding containers were therefore stopped and rotated around the vertical axis in order to irradiate light at different angles onto the selected container area].
Regarding claim 4, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huhn discloses: “wherein the first illumination pattern (43) is configured to make a first type of defects in the sidewall (7) recognizable, and wherein the second illumination pattern (47) is configured to make a second type of defects in the sidewall (7) recognizable [see para: 0061; In this context, it may also be advantageous if each partial image of a corresponding camera is generated by different individual light sources or groups of radiation sources. For example, a radiation source group can be activated for a partial image that is located to the left of the container in the direction of view of the camera. This group of radiation sources emits its light tangentially into the container wall, perpendicular to the viewing direction. This means, for example, that the left half of the corresponding container area is illuminated and cannot be used for testing. However, the defects on the right in the container area become visible in the form of reflections and this area of the image can be used for inspection or correction. used to detect errors].
Regarding claim 5, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huhn discloses: “further comprising a computing unit (49) configured to compose the photos captured during the rotation of the container (3) in the first time windows (41) into a first image (51) and to compose the photos captured during the rotation of the container (3) in the second time windows (45) into a second image (53) [see para: 0062; Analogously, illumination can then be applied from the right, in which the left half of the corresponding container area, for example, shows cracks in the form of reflections, so that the second partial image captures corresponding cracks in the left part of the container area. Both partial images can then be combined, together with further camera views from other cameras, so that defects in a corresponding container area can be quickly and easily recorded in the circumferential direction].
Regarding claim 6, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huhn discloses: “wherein the illumination device (27) comprises light sources (39) which are involved both in illuminating the illumination region (37) with the first illumination pattern (43) in the first time windows (41) and in illuminating the illumination region (37) with the second illumination pattern (47) in the second time windows (45) [see para: 0045; With a corresponding number of radiation source groups and cameras, it is possible, for example, to illuminate the container in the circumferential direction several times in a clockwise direction and then also several times in a counterclockwise direction. Corresponding cameras capture the reflected light].
Regarding claim 9, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huhn discloses: “wherein the illumination device (27) comprises an area array of light sources (39), wherein a distance of adjacent light sources (39) is not more than 10 millimeters [see para: 0028; In order to obtain sufficiently intense and easily producible radiation in the form of light, it is possible according to the invention to carry out corresponding irradiation by means of a radiation source from a plurality of individual radiation sources combined to form radiation source groups. Examiner notes that: having light sources in a specific distance is only a matter of design choice because it only requires mere selection determining a distance where cameras will be placed for better coverage or capturing better images during inspection].
Regarding claim 10, “wherein the first time windows (41) and the second time windows (45) alternate with a frequency of at least 10 kilohertz”, is only a matter of design choice because it only requires mere selection of determining a time frequency or interval wherein cameras will be taking images at different time interval of the bottle or jar or object for inspection.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method of claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method of claim 1.
Claim 3, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (DE 102010046461 B4) in view of Minato (US 5, 216, 481) and further in view of Caroli et al. (US 2008/0310701 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huhn and Minato does not explicitly disclose: “wherein the illumination device (27) is configured, when illuminating the illumination region (37) with the second illumination pattern (47), to illuminate the illumination region (37) in a stripe pattern in which stripes of lower light intensity alternate with stripes of higher light intensity”.
However, Caroli, from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: “wherein the illumination device (27) is configured, when illuminating the illumination region (37) with the second illumination pattern (47), to illuminate the illumination region (37) in a stripe pattern in which stripes of lower light intensity alternate with stripes of higher light intensity [see para: 0041; Between the illuminating device 6 and the preform 2 a grid 8 is provided that comprises a grid-shaped pattern 9, provided with a plurality of stripes 10 that are substantially parallel to one another. The grid 8 is arranged in such a way that the stripes 10 are substantially orthogonal to the longitudinal axis Z].
Therefore, It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system by Huhn to add the teachings of Minato as above, to further incorporate the teachings of Caroli to provide a means for improving quality of the images or detecting accurate defective of the bottles, controller will control the light sources to preform one of the grid-shaped pattern, provided with a plurality of stripes that are parallel to one another and capture images of the defects [Caroli see para: 0041].
Regarding claim 11, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huhn discloses: “wherein the capturing device (29) comprises a first capturing unit (31) and a second capturing unit (33),…wherein the first capturing unit (31) is configured to take a photo of the illumination region (37) in each first time window (41), and wherein the second capturing unit (33) is configured to take a photo of the illumination region (37) in each first time window (41) [see para: 0045; With a corresponding number of radiation source groups and cameras, it is possible, for example, to illuminate the container in the circumferential direction several times in a clockwise direction and then also several times in a counterclockwise direction. Corresponding cameras capture the reflected light]
Huhn does not explicitly disclose: “wherein the second capturing unit (33) has a polarization filter (54)”.
However, Caroli, from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: “wherein the second capturing unit (33) has a polarization filter (54) [see para: 0006; Apparatuses are furthermore known that enable defects to be detected that do not influence the absorption of light by a transparent object, such apparatuses providing a light polarising filter arranged between a light source and the object to be illuminated and a light receiving device, generally a video camera arranged opposite the light source, to detect an image of the object].
Therefore, It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system by Huhn to add the teachings of Minato as above, to further incorporate the teachings of Caroli to provide a means for improving quality of the images or detecting accurate defective of the bottles, polarization filter can be used in front of the camera lenses [Caroli see para: 0006].
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method of claim 11.
Claim 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (DE 102010046461 B4) in view of Minato (US 5, 216, 481) and further in view of Asano et al. (WO 2018/159294 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huhn and Minato does not explicitly disclose: “wherein the illumination device (27) is configured to periodically change a brightness of at least one light source (39) of the illumination device (27), in particular by means of pulse width modulation”.
However, Asano, from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: “wherein the illumination device (27) is configured to periodically change a brightness of at least one light source (39) of the illumination device (27), in particular by means of pulse width modulation [see page: 6; Different distortion occurs due to the way in which the internal stress is applied in the portion of the scratch, and as shown in the right of FIG. 3, in the image of the imaging camera 126, the portion of the scratch is clearly defined by the difference in brightness with the surroundings The state can be determined. By judging this by a known image processing system or the like, it can be detected as the strength lowered part of the bottle B].
Therefore, It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system by Huhn to add the teachings of Minato as above, to further incorporate the teachings of Asano to provide a means for improving quality of the images or detecting accurate defective of the bottles, controller will control light sources irradiation in different wavelength with different timing, this can be control using pulse width modulation technique which is also know method [Asano see page: 6].
Regarding claim 8, Huhn and Minato disclose all the limitation of claim 1 and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huhn and Minato does not explicitly disclose: “wherein the illumination device (27) comprises a plurality of groups of light sources (39), wherein the illumination device (27) is configured to control the light sources (39) of all groups of light sources (39) to emit the same luminous flux when illuminating the illumination region (37) with the first illumination pattern (43), and to control the light sources (39) of certain groups of light sources (39) to emit a different luminous flux than the light sources (39) of certain other groups of light sources (39) when illuminating the illumination region (37) with the second illumination pattern (47)”.
However, Asano, from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: “wherein the illumination device (27) comprises a plurality of groups of light sources (39), wherein the illumination device (27) is configured to control the light sources (39) of all groups of light sources (39) to emit the same luminous flux when illuminating the illumination region (37) with the first illumination pattern (43) [see page: 6; In this way, by using the same irradiation energy at different positions in the thickness direction of the glass bottle, it is possible to process materials with different scratches appearing on the inner surface. In order to change the size of scratches appearing on the inner surface, the irradiation energy and the number of irradiation pulses may be different. It is also possible to set the inner surface so that no scratches appear on the inner surface and that portions with different stress distributions exist in the glass due to thermal energy], and to control the light sources (39) of certain groups of light sources (39) to emit a different luminous flux than the light sources (39) of certain other groups of light sources (39) when illuminating the illumination region (37) with the second illumination pattern (47) [see page: 2 and 3; That is, by applying a load to the object to be inspected, the internal stress concentrates on the scratch or the impurity, and the distribution of light and dark different from the case where the load is applied to the object to be inspected having no scratch or impurity is observed by the optical system unit It is possible to detect scratches and impurities. In addition, even when there is a deposit or the like, it is possible for the optical system unit to observe a distribution of light and dark different from the object to be inspected which does not have adhered matters or the like, and it is possible to detect deposits etc].
Therefore, It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system by Huhn to add the teachings of Minato as above, to further incorporate the teachings of Asano to provide a means for improving quality of the images or detecting accurate defective of the bottles, controller will control light sources irradiation in different wavelength with different timing [Asano see page: 2, 3, 6].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nicks et al (US5969810A).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Masum Billah whose telephone number is (571)270-0701. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday 9 - 5 PM ET.
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, Jamie J. Atala can be reached at (571) 272-7384. 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.
/MASUM BILLAH/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights