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 .
This Office Action is in response to amendments and remarks filed June 12, 2026. Claims 1-8, 11, 13-19 are currently pending.
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baechle et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2023/0234741) in view of Waugh et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2011/0192893).
Regarding claim 19, Baechle et al. disclose (Figs.) an inspection apparatus for the inspection of packages produced in a packaging machine comprising: a control unit (36a) for controlling operation of the inspection apparatus; a conveying device (14a); and an inspection unit (58a; [0037], scanner, camera, etc.) configured to inspect packages; wherein the conveying device comprises a planar motor (planar drive) having a plurality of carriers (30a) configured to receive packages (32a) at an inlet station (at 34a) and to deliver the packages to an outlet station (at 62a, 64a); wherein the inspection unit is arranged at an inspection station (20a); wherein the control unit is configured ([0040]) to selectively control movement of the carriers so as to selectively direct one or more carriers to the inspection station and afterwards to the outlet station; wherein the inspection unit is configured to inspect the packages moved, in use, to the inspection station. Baechel et al. also disclose ([0051]) a weight detection sensor (“weighed during the transport, for example by the third packaging station 20a or by a different further packaging station”). Baechle et al. do not disclose wherein the inspection unit further comprises a support and one or more weight detection sensors coupled to the support for determining the weight of the packages moved to the inspection station. Waugh et al. teach (Fig. 4) a package inspection device having a support (60) and one or more weight detection sensors (98) coupled to the support for determining the weight of the packages moved to the inspection station. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such support and weight sensors in the apparatus of Baechle et al. in view of Waugh et al. to cost-effectively form a scale to weigh the packages as taught, known and predictable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8, 11, 13-18 are allowed over the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 19 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 THANH LUU whose telephone number is (571)272-2441. 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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/THANH LUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights