DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed on 12/23/2025 has been entered.
Claims 2-12 remain pending in the application.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 12/23/2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 12,084,331 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/9/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-final rejection on 9/29/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-3, 5-9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over USPGP# 20080022808 of Owen et al. (henceforth Owen) in view of EP# 1,103,513 of Cirio (henceforth Cirio).
Regarding claim 2, Owen teaches
A capping and de-capping system (1) comprising:
an array of capping and de-capping grippers (13) coupled to a gripper attachment body (12) and configured to cap and de-cap tubes in an array of tubes (10), each gripper configured to engage and retain a cap (32, para 0037).
Owen uses movement of a base platform to move the array of tubes up and down and to engage and disengage the caps. Therefore, Owen is silent on an array of ejectors coupled to an ejector attachment body, each ejector configured to translate relative to one of the grippers to contact the cap retained by the gripper to eject the cap from the gripper; an array of electromotors, each electromotor configured to induce a rotational movement to one of the grippers; and a translation drive mechanism configured to translate the ejector attachment body and the gripper attachment body relative to each other to effectuate translation of the ejectors relative to the grippers to cause the ejectors to contact the caps retained by the grippers to eject the caps from the grippers.
Cirio teaches
A capping and de-capping system (1) comprising:
an array of capping and de-capping grippers (37) coupled to a gripper attachment body (27) and configured to cap tubes (5) in an array of tubes (array of 5 on the platform 17), each gripper configured to engage and retain a cap (11a, para 0008).
an array of ejectors (43) coupled to an ejector attachment body (43a), each ejector configured to translate relative to one of the grippers to contact the cap retained by the gripper to eject the cap from the gripper (para 0013);
an array of electromotors (para 0011), each electromotor configured to induce a rotational movement to one of the grippers (para 0011, especially. “each head 9 may itself comprise a dedicated electric motor (not shown in the drawings) so that the speed of rotation of the head can be varied by control of the intensity of the current supplied to the motor and, in this case, the current can be regulated in a manner such that it becomes zero at a predetermined value of the torque with which a cap 11a is tightened onto the respective container 5”); and
a translation drive mechanism (21, 23, 45, 47) configured to translate the ejector attachment body and the gripper attachment body relative to each other to effectuate translation of the ejectors relative to the grippers to cause the ejectors to contact the caps retained by the grippers to eject the caps from the grippers (para 0013).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cap engagement/disengagement mechanism of Owen with an ejector system and translation drive mechanism as taught by Cirio in order to provide the predictable result of allowing reliable and precisely torques controlled attachment/detachment of the cap using known devices .This makes system more economical (Cirio: para 0025).
Regarding claim 3, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
a control unit (57) configured to detect a torque on each electromotor and to halt the rotational movement of the electromotor if a predetermined threshold value of torque acting on the electromotor is exceeded (para 0011).
Regarding claim 5, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
wherein each capping and de-capping gripper is made from plastic.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the ca capping and de-capping gripper out of plastic, 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 use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 6, as shown in claim 5, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
wherein each capping and de-capping gripper is injection molded.
In accordance to MPEP 2113, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of
patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight. Please
note that even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination
of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product, i.e. capping and de-capping
socket, does not depend on its method of production, i.e. injection molding. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964,
966 (Federal Circuit 1985)
Regarding claim 7, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
A method of capping and de-capping tubes using the capping and de-capping system of Claim 2, the method comprising:
moving the gripper attachment body and tubes toward each other to engage the caps on the tubes with the grippers (Owen: para 0033 and 0036-0037);
detaching the caps from the tubes by movement of the grippers away from the tubes with simultaneous rotational movement of the grippers caused by the electromotors (Owen: para 0037, individual electromotors as modified with para 0011 of Cirio);
attaching the removed caps by reversing the above steps (Owen: para 0041-0042); and
ejecting the capped tubes by translating the ejectors relative to the grippers to bring the ejectors in contact with the caps to press the caps and tubes from the grippers (Cirio: para 0013).
Regarding claim 8, as shown in claim 7, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
wherein attaching the removed caps includes sensing torque of the electromotors and stopping the rotation when the sensed torque exceeds a threshold torque (Cirio: para 0011).
Regarding claim 9, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
a control unit (Cirio: 57, para 0011) configured to control the rotational movement of the grippers (Cirio: para 0011) and the translation of the ejectors (Cirio: para 0011 and 0013).
Regarding claim 11, as shown in claim 9, the combination of Owen and Cirio teaches
wherein the control unit is internal (Cirio: see fig. 4)
Regarding claim 12, as shown in claim 9, Cirio teaches
a connection between the control unit and the system, the connection being (Cirio: see wired electrical lines between 57 and the system 1).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of Owen and Cirio in view of USP# 9,381,524 of Bailey et al. (henceforth Bailey).
Regarding claim 4, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Owen and Cirio does not teach
wherein each capping and de-capping gripper includes at least one friction pin oriented to either grab around a cap or to be inserted into a cavity within the cap or both.
Bailey teaches
a capping and de-capping system (10) comprising an array of capping and de-capping grippers (132, 134) wherein each capping and de-capping gripper includes at least one friction pin (arms of 134) oriented to be inserted into a cavity within a cap (46, see figs. 13a-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify capping and de-capping gripper of the combination of Owen and Cirio such that it includes at least one friction pin, as taught by Bailey, in order to provide the predictable result of quick and secure engagement of the gripper with the different cap design, especially those that have a corresponding cavity. This allows the system to more flexible as it allows different caps with cavities to be used with the system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of Owen and Cirio in view of USP# 6,525,498 of Zalkin et al. (henceforth Zalkin).
Regarding claim 10, as shown in claim 9, the combination of Owen and Cirio does not teach
wherein the control unit includes a user interface configured to receive a user selection of one or more grippers to engage one or more corresponding caps.
Zalkin teaches
a capping and de-capping system (apparatus shown in fig. 2) comprising a user interface (14) associated with a control unit (16) and configured to permit a user to decide which capping and de-capping gripper shall engage and/or disengage a said tube configured to receive and/or dispose of a cap placed within said rack at a position corresponding to the position of said capping and de-capping gripper (c. 4, I. 57+).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify capping and de-capping system of the combination of Owen and Cirio by adding a user interface for selecting which grippers will be selectively engaged as taught by Zalkin in order to provide the predictable result of allowing only tubes that need to be capped/de-capped to be engaged thus improving the efficiency of the apparatus (by reducing the number of actuators that
are engaged).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/23/2025 have been fully considered:
No arguments were made by the applicant
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 1/9/2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 MOBEEN AHMED whose telephone number is (571) 272-0356. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (8:30 am to 5 pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anna Kinsaul can be reached on 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 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.
/M.A./
Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/VERONICA MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731