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 .
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 “valve connected to a feeler” (claim 9) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the term "preferably" in lines 5 (“preferably coplanar to a work table”) and 13 (“preferably relative to a horizontal axis”) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the term are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang CN 201300419 Y (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim1 , Wang discloses a device adapted to handle flat elements (11) for a printing machine (intended use), of the type adapted to be positioned at the inlet or at the outlet of the printing machine, or both, said device comprising:
a supporting structure, defining a supporting surface (9) substantially parallel and preferably coplanar to a work table of the printing machine, adapted to accommodate a flat element (11) in a position to be able to be arranged at the inlet to the printing machine for the printing process or a flat element at the outlet from the printing machine after the printing process; and
handling means (10, 2, and 8) configured to move said flat element at least between the supporting surface and a loading or unloading position;
wherein said handling means comprise at least one arm (8, shown in FIG. 1), connected to the supporting structure, comprising articulated elements and provided with pick-up means (2, 10) of the flat element, wherein said arm is configured to rotate the flat element, preferably relative to a horizontal axis, parallel to the supporting surface.
Note: As best understood, claim 1 does not positively recite a printing machine and therefore the limitations of the printing machine (including “work table”) are not part of the claimed device.
Regarding claim 4, wherein the arm is connected to a movable support (mobile structure having wheels), which can move along a direction substantially horizontal, or parallel, to the ground.
Regarding claim 6, wherein each arm comprises a manipulating arm (2 or 8) to which the pick-up means are rotatably connected.
Regarding claim 7,wherein said pick-up means comprise a support arm (2) and a plurality of vacuum suction cups (10) mounted on said support arm.
Regarding claim 8, wherein said pick-up means comprise at least two assemblies of suction cups, the suction cups of each assembly being arranged aligned along respective staggered pick-up surfaces.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang.
Wang teaches the claimed invention except wherein said suction cups are provided with a valve connected to a feeler adapted to open the air suction passage only when these are in contact with a surface of the flat element so that said feeler is activated. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrange a valve connected to a feeler, since the examiner takes official notice that it was commonly known to provide a valve and feeler structure in order to properly ensure timing of suction to the suction cups.
Claims 1, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallucci in view of Wang.
Regarding claim 1, 10, and 11, Gallucci teaches a device (turning over apparatus 1) adapted handle flat elements (100) arranged at an inlet or outlet of a printing machine ([0061]). Gallucci does not explicitly teach the device comprising:
a supporting structure, defining a supporting surface substantially parallel and preferably coplanar to a work table of the printing machine, adapted to accommodate a flat element in a position to be able to be arranged at the inlet to the printing machine for the printing process or a flat element at the outlet from the printing machine after the printing process; and
handling means configured to move said flat element at least between the supporting surface and a loading or unloading position;
wherein said handling means comprise at least one arm, connected to the supporting structure, comprising articulated elements and provided with pick-up means of the flat element, wherein said arm is configured to rotate the flat element, preferably relative to a horizontal axis, parallel to the supporting surface.
Wang teaches a device comprising:
a supporting structure, defining a supporting surface (9) substantially parallel and preferably coplanar to a work table of the printing machine, adapted to accommodate a flat element (11) in a position to be able to be arranged at the inlet to the printing machine for the printing process or a flat element at the outlet from the printing machine after the printing process; and
handling means (10, 2, and 8) configured to move said flat element at least between the supporting surface and a loading or unloading position;
wherein said handling means comprise at least one arm (8, shown in FIG. 1), connected to the supporting structure, comprising articulated elements and provided with pick-up means (2, 10) of the flat element, wherein said arm is configured to rotate the flat element, preferably relative to a horizontal axis, parallel to the supporting surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute Gallucci’s device with the device of Wang in order to achieve the same predictable result of overturning a flat element.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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 LUIS A GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3094. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5:30pm.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/LUIS A GONZALEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653