Final Rejection
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 .
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 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Miyashita (JP 2017192455).
Referring to claim 1. Miyashita discloses a medication support device (A; Figure 1) comprising:
a container (20) that stores a medicine package (Y);
a pickup device (5) to pick up the medicine package (Y) from the container (20);
a suction device (30) disposed at the pickup device (5) to suck the medicine package (Y) in the container by air;
a conveyor (55) to convey the medicine package (Y) picked up from the container (20) using the suction device (30);
a medicine dispensing tray (bottom portion of the interior cavity of housing 12 housing plurality of container 20; Figure 1)
wherein the medicine dispensing tray (bottom portion of 1) includes a plurality of rooms (left and right side of container housing 20; Figure 3) partitioned by a plurality of partitions and includes a plurality of subdivision boxes (2A,2B,2C and 2D), each subdivision box is contained within a corresponding one of the plurality of rooms (left and right side of container housing 20; Figure 3) and is attachable to and detachable (subdivision boxes can be disassembled for the container housing 20) from the corresponding one of the plurality of rooms, (left and right side of container housing 20; Figure 3) the medicine dispensing tray configured to receive the medicine package (Y) conveyed by the conveyor (55) at a specific one of the plurality subdivision boxes (2A,2B,2C and 2D); and
a jogger mechanism (50) to move a previously dispensed medicine package (Y) that has already been dispensed to the medicine dispensing container (interior cavity of housing 12 housing plurality of container 20; Figure 1) to a desired position of the medicine dispensing tray (interior cavity of housing 12 housing plurality of container 20; Figure 1).
Referring to claim 3. Miyashita discloses a medication support device (A; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the jogger mechanism (50; Figure 1) is retracted when the jogger mechanism is not used (member 50 in the raised position as shown in Figure 1).
Referring to claim 4. Miyashita discloses a medication support device (A; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the jogger mechanism (50; Figure 1) is disposed at the suction device (30).
Referring to claim 5. Miyashita discloses a medication support device (A; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the jogger mechanism (50; Figure 1) operates in conjunction with movement of the suction device (when suction is active of device 30).
Referring to claim 6. Miyashita discloses a medication support device (A; Figure 1) comprising:
wherein the medicine dispensing tray (bottom portion of the interior cavity of housing 12 housing plurality of container 20; Figure 1) has space in which the jogger mechanism (see jogger 50 moving belove member 28 of the housing of 20) moves.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyashita (JP 2017192455) in view of Chesler (US 2,325,039).
Referring to claim 2. Miyashita discloses a medication support device (A; Figure 1) comprising:
Miyashita does not disclose the medicine dispensing container includes a plurality of rooms partitioned by the plurality of partitions and includes a box attachable to and detachable from each one of the plurality of rooms,
the jogger (50) moves the medicine package (Y) that has already been dispensed to the one of the plurality of rooms or the box (20).
Chesler discloses a dispensing container (Figure 9) includes a plurality of rooms (see partitioned rooms in Figure 9) partitioned by the plurality of partitions (37) and includes a subdivision box attachable (11; Figure 9) to and detachable from each one of the plurality of rooms (see partitioned rooms in Figure 9), and
wherein, before the medicine package (articles) to be dispensed is inserted into one of the plurality of rooms or the subdivision box corresponding to the one of the plurality of rooms (see partitioned rooms in Figure 9),
corresponding to the one of the plurality of rooms (see partitioned rooms in Figure 9) to the desired position of the one of the plurality of rooms or the subdivision box corresponding to the one of the plurality of rooms (see Figure 9).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Miyashita to include a plurality of rooms partitioned by the plurality of partitions and includes a box attachable to and detachable from each one of the plurality of rooms as taught by Chesler because the medicine dispensing container can be partitioned to the specific size of the product to be carried thus allowing the medicine dispensing container to be partitioned to house a maximum number of articles of specific sizes.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
See modified rejections including all newly added claimed limitations rejected in view Miyashita (JP 2017192455) and Miyashita (JP 2017192455) in view of Chesler (US 2,325,039) cited above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 RAKESH KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8314. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH from 8AM-6:30PM EST.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/RAKESH KUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights