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 with respect to claim(s) 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Additionally, the previous indication of allowability of claims 2-5, 8-9 and 13-14 has been withdrawn.
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) 1-3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Komann et al. (US 2019/0343721). Komann et al disclose a holder device for holding a plurality of vials to be moved in a processing line, comprising a plate (2) having a plurality of housing seats (5) for housing the vials and a plurality of rigid spacer elements (22) arranged within said housing seats and configured to maintain the vials in a suspended position with respect to a substantially horizontal operating surface of the processing line, wherein each of said housing seats comprises an open base intended to face towards said operating surface, wherein said base defines a first support plane for supporting the holder device on said operating surface and wherein at least one of said spacer elements defines, within the housing seat, a second support plane for supporting a vial.
With regards to claim 2, said second support plane is parallel to said first support plane and spaced apart from said first support plane by a predetermined distance (figure 1F).
In regards to claim 3, said base has a predetermined thickness and said predetermined distance is greater than three times said predetermined thickness (figure 1E).
Regarding claim 11, Komann disclose an organized assembly of vials, comprising the holder device of claim 1, and the plurality of vials having respective base surfaces resting on the spacer elements of respective housing seats (figure 4C).
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) 4-5, 8-10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komann et al. (US 2019/0343721) in view of Hutterer et al. (US 2022/0371765). Komann et al. disclose the invention of claim 1 including wherein each housing seat comprises a tubular wall extending from said base along a substantially vertical longitudinal axis. However, Komann et al. do not teach at least three spacer elements. Hutterer et al. teach a holder device comprising a housing seat with at least three spacer elements (28) radially protruding from said tubular wall towards an inside of said housing seat and circumferentially equally space from each other. Komann and Hutterer are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e. holder devices. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify the invention to Komann as taught by Hutterer. The motivation would have been to provide more support for the vials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the invention to Komann as specified in claim 4.
In regards to claim 5 and 14, said spacer elements are formed in a single piece with said tubular wall (Komann: figure 1F). Furthermore, “formed in a single piece…” is considered a product-by-process limitation. MPEP 2113 Product-by-Process Claims states that "If the product in the product-by-process claim is that same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior art product was made by a different process." The process by which the spacer elements are made is not a patentable distinction.
In regards to claim 8, said housing seats extend on opposite sides with respect to said plate, and wherein the tubular walls of some pairs of adjacent housing seats comprise, on the opposite side to the respective base with respect to said plate, respective mutually facing lateral through openings (Komann: 41, figure 3E).
With regards to claim 9, each housing seat comprises at least three longitudinal ribs (Komann: 18, 19) radially protruding from said tubular wall towards the inside of said housing seat, each of said at least three spacer elements being an extension of a respective longitudinal rib.
With regards to claim 10, Hutterer teaches wherein said spacer elements are made of a material that is at least partially thermally conductive or non-thermally insulating (0028). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify the spacer elements of Komann as taught by Hutterer. The motivation would have been to transfer heat to and from the holder device bottom surface. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the invention to Komann as specified in claim 10.
With regards to claim 12, Komann et al. as modified are silent to whether each of said vials contains a freeze-dried product. Nonetheless, Hutterer et al. does teach that it is well-known that the product may be a food product (0003). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify the invention to Komann et al. to comprise freeze-dried product in the vials. The motivation would have been to provide a means to transport an additional product. Furthermore, it has been within the general skill of a worker to select a known product on the basis of its suitability.
Regarding claim 13 (see rejection of claim 4), Komann as modified teaches wherein each housing seat comprises a tubular wall extending from said base along a substantially vertical longitudinal axis and at least three spacer elements (Komann: 22, as modified by Hutterer) radially protruding from said tubular wall towards an inside of said housing seat and circumferentially equally spaced from each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 15-18 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-8227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thurs, 6-6.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631