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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to Applicant’s filing on 13 December 2024.
Claims 1 – 13 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 13 December 2024 and 11 June 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 9 are objected because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the limitation, “the upper blanks and lower blanks”, should read, “the upper blanks and the lower blanks”.
Regarding claim 9, the limitation, “the first stepping surface”, should read, “the at least first stepping surface”.
Regarding claim 9, the limitation, “the feeder devices”, should read, “the upper feeder device and the lower feeder device”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
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) 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):
(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). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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) 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) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claims 3 – 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation, “the longitudinal lengths”, is indefinite because the limitation lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the examiner interprets the limitation to mean, “longitudinal lengths”.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation, “the same distance”, is indefinite because the limitation lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the examiner interprets the limitation to mean, “a same distance”.
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 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
(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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fordyce (US 3,547,013 A).
[AltContent: textbox (A)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
315
425
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Fordyce discloses a blank joining module for a converting machine, the blank joining module comprising:
a chassis (51, fig. 1),
an upper feeder device (35, fig. 1) having an upper loading surface (surface of kicker claw 35, fig. 1), and
a lower feeder device (36, fig. 1) having a lower loading surface (surface of kicker claw 36, fig. 1),
the upper feeder device being configured to receive a stack of upper blanks (10, fig. 1) and the lower feeder device being configured to receive a stack of lower blanks (12, fig. 1), the upper feeder device and the lower feeder device being configured to discharge the respective upper blanks and lower blanks, respectively, one by one in a direction of transportation (direction A, annotated fig. 1), and
wherein the upper loading surface of the upper feeder device is displaceable in the direction of transportation such that the upper loading surface is horizontally offset in relation to the lower loading surface (Figure 1 shows the kicker claw/upper feeder device 35 initially horizontally offset to the kicker claw/lower feeder device 36. Col. 2, ll. 9 – 15 describes rotation of the sprocket 28 causing the kicker claw/upper feeder device 35 and the kicker claw/lower feeder device 36 to the left in figure 1 (in the direction of transportation A) at the same speed indicating the kicker claw/upper feeder device 35 and the kicker claw/lower feeder device 36 moves to the left maintaining that initially horizontally offset to the kicker claw/lower feeder device 36 during that movement. Thus, the kicker claw/upper feeder device 35 is displaceable in the direction of transportation A such that the upper loading surface is horizontally offset in relation to the lower loading surface).
Regarding claim 7, Fordyce discloses a slide rail connection (Col. 2, ll. 5 – 6 describes the kicker claw/lower feeder device 36 having a grove or a track) located between the upper feeder device (35, fig. 1) and the chassis (51, fig. 1) (Figure 1 shows the kicker claw/lower feeder device 36 having a connection with this groove or track between the above kicker claw/upper feeder device 35 and the housing/chassis 51 below it).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, and 8 – 13 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.
Claims 3 – 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
Moem (US 4,220,076 A) discloses the claimed invention of claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID G SHUTTY whose telephone number is 571-272-3626. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5:30 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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached on 571-272-4524. 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.
/DAVID G SHUTTY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
25 July 2026
Prosecution Insights