DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed 11/18/2024.
The status of the Claims is as follows:
Claim 26 has been cancelled;
Claims 1-25 have been amended;
Claims 1-25 are pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/18/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the Application on 11/18/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) include:
First and Second Transport device: robotic arm, mover, gripper arm, mover/stator, elevator, (7, 8, 14, 15)
Monitoring unit: ? (30)
Container moving arrangement: ? (17)
Algebraic sign: pressure difference as a pressure drop (-) or a pressure increase (+)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 12-15 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claimed limitation “monitoring unit” recited in Claims 12 and 23 fails to provide adequate written description such that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention.
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 12 and 23 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.
Claim limitation “Monitoring Unit” and “Container Moving Arrangement” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification fails to disclose any structural components to performing the monitoring function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
For the purposes of examination the Examiner has interpreted the limitations as follows:
Monitoring Unit: a means for detecting position.
Container Moving Arrangement: an isolator including a conveyor and robotic arms moving containers.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, 11, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bechini et al. (US 20190315004; Bechini).
Regarding Claim 1 Bechini discloses an arrangement (9’), comprising: at least one input region (space inside of 917 par 88) and one output region (space preceding 919) which are mutually separated by a bulkhead (916, 918 OR 912, 95), the bulkhead (916, 918 OR 912, 95) has at least one opening (917, 919 OR 913) through which at least one container (70) having a preferably closable or closed container opening (73) is able to be transferred, the input region (inside of 917 par 88) has a first transport device (1), the output region (space preceding 919) has a second transport device (2), and for transfer, the first transport device (1) and the second transport device (2) are designed such that the at least one container (70) is adapted to be gripped by the first transport device (1, 12) at a different distance from the container opening (73) than by the second transport device (2, 22). (Fig. 4a)
Regarding Claim 2 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses the at least one container (70) is adapted to be positioned partially in the input region (space inside of 917 par 88) and partially in the output region (space preceding 919) for receiving by the second transport device (2). (Fig. 2a)
Regarding Claim 3 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses at least one of the first transport device (1) or the second transport device (2) is positioned outside the opening (913), and/or the first and the second transport device (1, 2) do not protrude or reach through the opening (913). (Fig. 5)
Regarding Claim 5 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses
b) at least one of the input region (space inside of 917 par 88) or the output region (space preceding 919) is designed as part of a protected region (par 30; Claim 20)
Regarding Claim 6 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses
d) at least two of the containers (70) are adapted to be simultaneously transferred through the at least one opening (917, 919 OR 913). (Fig. 5)
Regarding Claim 7 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses
at least one of the first or the second transport device (1, 2) is connected to the bulkhead (912). (par 67)
Regarding Claim 9 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses the at least one container (70) is adapted to be transferred into the output region (space preceding 919) by a movement with a horizontal component of at least one of the first or of the second transport device (1, 2).
Regarding Claim 11 Bechini discloses an arrangement (9’), comprising: a first transport device (1), comprising a mover (11), and a second transport device (8), comprising a mover (21), for transferring at least one container (70) designed with a closable or closed container opening (73),wherein the first transport device (1) and the second transport device (2) are designed such that the at least one container (70) is able to be gripped by the first transport device (1) at a different distance from the container opening (73) than by the second transport device (2),and the container (70) is in each case adapted to be gripped by the first and by the second transport device (1, 3) at least one gripping point such that a plane (24) of the container (70), intersecting the latter is positioned between the gripping points of the first and of the second transport device (1, 2). (Fig. 4a)
Regarding Claim 16 Bechini discloses a method for transferring a container (70) provided with a container opening (73) from an input region (space inside of 917 par 88) into an output region (space preceding 919), the method comprising: holding the container (70) in the input region (space inside of 917 par 88) by a first transport device (1), transferring the container (70) to a second transport device (2),which is disposed in the output region (space preceding 919), through an opening (917, 919 OR 913) in a bulkhead (916, 918 OR 912, 95), wherein the input region (2) and the output region (space preceding 919) are separated by the bulkhead (916, 918 OR 912, 95), and for transferring the container (70), gripping the container (70) by the first transport device (1) at a different distance from the container opening (73) than gripping of the container (70) by the second transport device (2). (Fig. 4a)
Regarding Claim 17 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses at least one of the first transport device (1) or the second transport device (2) remains outside the opening (913) at least during the transferring. (Fig. 5)
Regarding Claim 18 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses at least two containers (70) are transferred, and the at least two containers (70) are not singularized during transfer. (Fig. 4D)
Regarding Claim 19 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses at least two of the containers (70) are transferred, and the gripping further comprises individually gripping each of the containers (70) by the second transport device (2). (Fig. 7a)
Regarding Claim 20 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses a) the at least one container (70) is transferred into the output region (space preceding 919) by a movement with at least one of a vertical or a horizontal movement component of at least one of the first or the second transport device (1, 2). (par 68)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8, 12, 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bechini (US 20190315004) in view of Eberhardt US 20170225814.
Regarding Claim 8 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini does not expressly teach at least one of the first or second transport devices is a mover which is magnetically coupled to a stator assembly.
Eberhardt teaches an arrangement that includes a first transport device (46) and a second transport device (20) and further teaches at least one of the first or second transport devices (46, 20) is a mover (20) which is magnetically coupled to a stator assembly (18) providing a transport device that is displaceable in at least two degrees of freedom and or rotatable for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus. (par 4)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the first or second transport device of Bechini to include at least one of the first and second transport devices as a mover which is magnetically coupled to a stator assembly as taught by Eberhardt since par 4 of Eberhardt suggests that such a modification provides a transport device that is displaceable in at least two degrees of freedom and or rotatable for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus.
Regarding Claim 12 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini does not expressly teach at least one monitoring unit, formed on at least one of the first or the second transport device.
Eberhardt teaches an arrangement that includes a first transport device (46) and a second transport device (20) and further teaches at least one monitoring unit (par 24), formed on the second transport device (20) providing position data for the transportation device for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus. (par 24)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the first or second transport device of Bechini to include a monitoring device on at least one of the first or second transport device as taught by Eberhardt since par 24 of Eberhardt suggest that such a modification provides position data for the transportation device for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus.
Regarding Claim 21 Bechini discloses a method, for transferring a container (70) provided with a container opening (73), the method comprising: holding the container (70) a first transport device (1), transferring the container (70) to a second transport device (2),
However Bechini does not expressly teach at least one of the first or the second transport device is designed as a mover which is magnetically coupled to a stator assembly, and for transferring, gripping the container by the first transport device at one of an identical distance to or a different distance from the container opening than by the second transport device.
Eberhardt teaches an arrangement that includes a first transport device (46) and a second transport device (20) and further teaches at least one of the first or the second transport device (46, 20) is designed as a mover (20) which is magnetically coupled to a stator assembly (18), and for transferring, gripping the container (36) by the first transport device (46) at a different distance from the container opening than by the second transport device (20) providing a transport device that is displaceable in at least two degrees of freedom and or rotatable for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus. (par 4)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the first or second transport device of Bechini to include at least one of the first and second transport devices as a mover which is magnetically coupled to a stator assembly as taught by Eberhardt since par 4 of Eberhardt suggests that such a modification provides a transport device that is displaceable in at least two degrees of freedom and or rotatable for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus.
Regarding Claim 22 the modified invention of Bechini in view of Eberhardt teaches the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses the container (70) is gripped by the first and the second transport device (1, 2), and at least one of the first transport device (1) at least during transfer does not protrude or reach through a plane extending through the container (70) or intersecting the container (70).
Regarding Claim 23 the modified invention of Bechini in view of Eberhardt teaches the invention as described above. Bechini does not expressly disclose monitoring the transferring by at least one monitoring unit (30) formed on at least one of the first or the second transport device (7, 8).
Eberhardt teaches an arrangement that includes a first transport device (46) and a second transport device (20) and further teaches at least one monitoring unit (par 24), formed on the second transport device (20) providing position data for the transportation device for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus. (par 24)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the first or second transport device of Bechini to include a monitoring device on at least one of the first or second transport device as taught by Eberhardt since par 24 of Eberhardt suggest that such a modification provides position data for the transportation device for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus.
Regarding Claim 24 the modified invention of Bechini in view of Eberhardt teaches the invention as described above. Bechini further discloses transporting the at least one container (70) to a filling device (3) for filling. (par 10, 79, 83)
Regarding Claim 25 Bechini discloses the invention as described above. Bechini does not expressly teach at least one of the first or second transport device comprises a, magnetically levitated transport device, which is movable on a non-vertical, for transporting the container, from a first processing station to a second processing station.
Eberhardt teaches an arrangement that includes a first transport device (46) and a second transport device (20) and further teaches a second transport device (20) comprises a, magnetically levitated transport device (20), which is movable on a non-vertical, for transporting the container (36), from a first processing station (144) to a second processing station (154). (Fig. 3)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the first or second transport device of Bechini to include at least one of the first or second transport device comprises a, magnetically levitated transport device, which is movable on a non-vertical, for transporting the container, from a first processing station to a second processing station as taught by Eberhardt since par 4 of Eberhardt suggests that such a modification provides a transport device that is displaceable in at least two degrees of freedom and or rotatable for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the apparatus.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 10, 13-15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 4 the Prior Art does not teach either a) the container opening and a base of the container are disposed on different sides of the opening when the container is gripped by the first transport device and the second transport device, or b) the bulkhead is positioned between the gripping points of the first and of the second transport device in addition to the limitations included in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 10 the Prior Art does not disclose an opening aligned between a high pressure side and a low pressure side such that a resultant air flow through the opening assumes an angle of less than 90 degrees in relation to an air flow running vertically from top to bottom in addition to the limitations included in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 13 the Prior Art does not teach an output region of a container moving arrangement, in which there is a pressure difference in relation to an input region exists in the of.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Procyshyn (US 20220194646) pressure differential (par 40)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHINYERE J RUSHING-TUCKER whose telephone number is (571)270-5944. The examiner can normally be reached 4 pm - 11:59 pm Monday - Friday.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at 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 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.
/CHINYERE J RUSHING-TUCKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3731