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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/17/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-8, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al. (US 2021/0170741) in view of PrintWiki and Behnke (US 2019/0351671). Regarding claim 1, Sebesta et al. disclose “a decorator (Figure 2) configured to decorate an exterior surface of a metallic container (title, abstract), comprising: an inking assembly (item 200), comprising: an ink fountain (item 202) configured to provide a supply of ink; an ink roller (item 204) to receive ink from the ink fountain; an ink train (paragraph 78) comprising a plurality of cylindrical rollers to transfer ink from the ink roller to a form roller (item 230); and a plate cylinder (item 222) comprising a printing plate (item 224) with a decoration adapted to receive ink from the form roller; a blanket wheel (item 112) comprising a transfer blanket (item 114) adapted to receive ink from the printing plate; and a support cylinder (item 12, paragraph 72) comprising a support to receive the cylindrical metallic container, the support cylinder operable to move the cylindrical metallic container into contact with the transfer blanket.” Sebesta et al. fail to disclose “the plate cylinder further comprising a first spacer with a first bearing surface” or “the blanket wheel further comprising a second spacer with a second bearing surface selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer, wherein the first and second spacers set a distance between the plate cylinder and the blanket wheel.” However, PrintWiki discloses putting bearer rings on both ends of the plate and blanket cylinders in an offset press in order to achieve easy alignment of the cylinders and/or reduced gear damage (third sentence). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the plate and blanket cylinders of Sebesta et al. with bearer rings in order to achieve easy alignment of the cylinders and/or reduced gear damage. Sebesta et al. also fail to disclose “a release mechanism operable to move a portion of the inking assembly away from an axle of the plate cylinder such that the plate cylinder is removable from the decorator.” However, Behnke discloses providing each inking unit with a mechanism (paragraph 72) to throw on and/or throw off the pate cylinder and/or the ink form roller (paragraph 72) in order to be able to engage each inking unit selectively and/or to enable a production change while the decorator is in an ongoing production operation (abstract, paragraphs 22-23). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the inking assembly of Sebesta et al. with a throwing on/throwing off mechanism in order to be able to selectively engage each inking station and/or to be able to carry out a production change while the decorator is in an ongoing production operation. Regarding claim 3, PrintWiki further discloses “wherein the plate cylinder comprises a first cylindrical body with a first diameter (the plate cylinder is the first cylindrical body) and the first bearing surface of the first spacer has a first spacer diameter (the ring of the bearer implicitly has a diameter), and wherein: the first spacer diameter is less than the first diameter (second sentence).”
Regarding claim 6, Sebesta et al. further disclose “wherein the support is a mandrel configured to receive the cylindrical metallic container (paragraph 3).”
Regarding claim 7, Sebesta et al., as modified, further disclose “wherein: a vertical cross-section of the first bearing surface is linear (since the ring is placed coaxial with the axis of rotation of plate cylinder, a vertical cross-section will be linear); and a vertical cross-section of the second bearing surface is linear (since the ring is placed coaxial with the axis of rotation of blanket cylinder, a vertical cross-section will be linear).” Regarding claim 8, PrintWiki further discloses “the first spacer is one of a pair of first spacers associated with the plate cylinder (first sentence) such that a first one of the pair of first spacers is associated with a first end of a first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder and a second one of the pair of first spacers is associated with a second end of the first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder (first sentence); and the second spacer is one of a pair of second spacers associated with the blanket wheel (first sentence) such that a first one of the pair of second spacers is associated with a first end of a second cylindrical body of the blanket wheel and a second one of the pair of second spacers is associated with a second end of the second cylindrical body of the blanket wheel (first sentence).” Regarding claim 21, Behnke further discloses “wherein the release mechanism comprises an actuated system to move the portion of the inking assembly away from the axle of the plate cylinder (paragraph 72: hydraulic or pneumatic working cylinder … preferably controllable by a control unit).” Behnke fails to specifically mention that the system is electrically actuated. However, it has been held that selection based upon a suitability for an intended purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.07. Examiner takes Official Notice that, at the time of the invention, control units which electrically actuate hydraulic or pneumatic cylinders were known in the art to be suitable means for controlling hydraulic or pneumatic cylinders. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use a control unit which actuates hydraulic or pneumatic cylinders electrically because it was known in the art to be suitable for the intended purpose. Regarding claim 22, Behnke further discloses “wherein the release mechanism is configured to move an axle of the form roller a predetermined distance away from the axle of the plate cylinder (see the distance as shown in the difference between Figure 2 and Figure 3).” Behnke fails to specifically disclose “wherein the predetermined distance is between at least about 0.1 inches and about 3 inches,” leaving the choice up to one having ordinary skill in the art. It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation. See MPEP §2144.05. Examiner asserts that one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the difference in the two operating positions would affect the overall size of the machine, and also the ease with which the plate cylinders could be changed. Therefore, the distance chosen for the second operating position would be a variable which one having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to change in order to determine the optimal distance which would balance the overall size of the machine with the ease of change of plate cylinders. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to set the predetermined distance to between at least about 0.1 inches and about 3 inches in order to determine the optimum or workable distance. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would have more than a reasonable expectation of succeeding in finding an optimal distance.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al., PrintWiki, and Behnke, further in view of Binder et al. (US 2008/0289523). Regarding claim 2, Sebesta et al., as modified, disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 1 above, but are silent as to whether or not the ink form cylinder has a bearer ring. That is, Sebesta et al., as modified, fail to disclose “wherein the form roller comprises a third spacer with a third bearing surface selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer of the plate cylinder, wherein the first and third spacers set a distance between the form roller and the plate cylinder.” Binder et al. disclose such an arrangement wherein the ink form roller also has a bearer ring (Figure 2, paragraph 36). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include bearer rings on the ink form cylinder of Sebesta et al. because doing so has been shown to be known in the art, and/or in order to provide the ink form cylinder with the benefits of bearer rings.
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al. and PrintWiki, further in view of Binder et al. (US 2008/0289523).
Regarding claims 18 and 19, Sebesta et al. disclose “a decorator (Figure 2) configured to decorate an exterior surface of a metallic container, comprising: an inking assembly (item 200), comprising: an ink fountain (item 202) configured to provide a supply of ink; an ink roller (item 204) to receive ink from the ink fountain; an ink train (item 402) comprising a plurality of cylindrical rollers to transfer ink from the ink roller to a form roller (item 230); and a plate cylinder (item 222) comprising a printing plate (item 224) with a decoration adapted to receive ink from the form roller; and a blanket wheel (item 112) comprising a transfer blanket (item 114) adapted to receive ink from the printing plate; and a support cylinder (item 12, paragraph 72) with a support to receive the cylindrical metallic container, the support cylinder operable to move the cylindrical metallic container into contact with the transfer blanket.” Sebesta et al. fail to disclose “the form roller further comprising a first spacer with a first bearing surface” or “the plate cylinder further comprising a second spacer with a second bearing surface selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer, wherein the first and second spacers set a distance between the form roller and the plate cylinder” or “the blanket wheel further comprising a third spacer with a third bearing surface selectively engageable with the second bearing surface of the second spacer of the plate cylinder, wherein the second and third spacers set a distance between the plate cylinder and the blanket wheel, and wherein the second and third bearing surfaces are each continuous and comprise circumferences with constant diameter diameters.” However, PrintWiki discloses putting bearer rings on both ends of the plate and blanket cylinders in an offset press in order to achieve easy alignment of the cylinders and/or reduced gear damage (third sentence). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the plate and blanket cylinders of Sebesta et al. with bearer rings in order to achieve easy alignment of the cylinders and/or reduced gear damage. Binder et al. disclose a similar arrangement wherein the ink form roller also has a bearer ring which has a continuous surface and a constant diameter (Figure 2, paragraph 36). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include bearer rings on the ink form cylinder Sebesta et al. because doing so has been shown to be known in the art, and/or in order to provide the ink form cylinder with the benefits of bearer rings.
Claim(s) 4, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al., PrintWiki, and Behnke, further in view of Riese et al. (DE 102016015722). Regarding claim 4, PrintWiki et al. further disclose “wherein the first and second bearing surfaces are each continuous (first sentence: the surface of rings are continuous).” Sebesta et al., as modified, fail to disclose “wherein contact of the first bearing surface with the second bearing surface creates a first gap between a first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder and a second cylindrical body of the blanket wheel, wherein the first gap has a first magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches.” It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation. See MPEP §2144.05. In this instance, Riese et al. disclose a similar system (Figures) comprising a plate cylinder (item 32) with bearers (items 86 and 87) and a blanket (item 33) with bearers (items 88 and 89), and that the first gap determines the force between the bearing surfaces (paragraph 83), and that the force between them determines the friction, which is to be optimized (paragraph 87). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to set the first gap to a magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches in order to determine the optimal friction between the bearing surfaces. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would have had more than a reasonable expectation of being able to successfully change the gap as suggested. Regarding claim 10, Sebesta et al., as modified, disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 1 above, except “further comprising a sensor positioned proximate to the first bearing surface of the first spacer, the sensor operable to determine one or more of: a rate of rotational movement of the first spacer (paragraphs 20 and/or 21); and vibration of the first spacer.” However, Riese et al. disclose a similar system (Figures) comprising a plate cylinder (item 32) with bearers (items 86 and 87) and a blanket (item 33) with bearers (items 88 and 89) wherein wear of the bearers is reduced by measuring and control of the system (paragraph 12) by measuring parameters such as the pressure between the bearers (paragraph 24). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the decorator of Sebesta et al. to include a sensor to determine the pressure between the first and second bearing surfaces in order to reduce the wear of the bearers. The determination of the pressure is carried out by measuring the torque of the motor 91(paragraph 85), which is considered to be proximate to the first bearer 86. Regarding claim 11, Riese et al. further disclose “further comprising a control system (paragraph 102) operable to receive data from the sensor, wherein the control system is further operable to one or more of: send a signal to an actuator to alter the position of the first spacer relative to the vertical reference plane; and send a signal to one or more of the first spacer and the second spacer to alter a magnitude of a gap between a first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder and a second cylindrical body of the blanket wheel (paragraph 102).”
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al., PrintWiki, Behnke, and Riese et al., further in view of Binder et al. Regarding claim 5, Sebesta et al., as modified, disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 4 above, except “wherein the form roller comprises a third spacer with a third bearing surface selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer of the plate cylinder, wherein contact of the third bearing surface with the first bearing surface creates a second gap between a third cylindrical body of the form roller and the first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder, wherein the second gap has a second magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches.” Binder et al. disclose such an arrangement wherein the ink form roller also has a bearer ring (Figure 2, paragraph 36). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include bearer rings on the ink form cylinder of Sebesta et al. because doing so has been shown to be known in the art, and/or in order to provide the ink form cylinder with the benefits of bearer rings. Furthermore, it has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation. See MPEP §2144.05. In this instance, similar to the analysis in the rejection of claim 4 above with respect to the first gap, the second gap would also have an associated force and, therefore, an associated friction. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to set the second gap to a magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches in order to determine the optimal friction between the bearing surfaces. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would have had more than a reasonable expectation of being able to successfully change the gap as suggested.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al. and PrintWiki, further in view of Riese et al. (DE 102016015722).
Regarding claim 13, Sebesta et al. disclose a method of decorating a cylindrical exterior surface of a metallic container (abstract) wherein the method comprises: providing an inking assembly (item 200), comprising: a form roller (230) configured to receive ink from an ink fountain (item 202); and a plate cylinder (item 220) comprising a printing plate adapted to receive ink from the form roller, providing a blanket wheel (item 112) of the decorator, the blanket wheel comprising a transfer blanket (item 114) adapted to receive ink from the printing plate (see figure 1); providing a support cylinder (item 12) to move the metallic container into contact with the transfer blanket, the support cylinder comprising a support to receive the metallic container (item 12, paragraph 72); transferring ink from the form roller to the printing plate (Figure 4); transferring ink from the printing plate to the transfer blanket (Figure 4); transferring ink from the transfer blanket to the cylindrical exterior surface of the metallic container while the metallic container is retained by the support cylinder (Figures 1, 2, paragraph 72).” Sebesta et al. fail to disclose that the plate cylinder comprises a first spacer with a first bearing surface that is continuous” or that the blanket wheel comprises a second spacer with a second bearing surface that is continuous, wherein the second bearing surface is selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer.” However, PrintWiki discloses putting bearer rings on both ends of the plate and blanket cylinders in an offset press in order to achieve easy alignment of the cylinders and/or reduced gear damage (third sentence). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the plate and blanket cylinders of Sebesta et al. with bearer rings in order to achieve easy alignment of the cylinders and/or reduced gear damage. Sebesta et al. also fail to disclose “a method of controlling one or more of a pressure and a distance between two rotating cylindrical components of a decorator configured to apply a decoration to a cylindrical exterior surface of a metallic container” or “setting a pressure between the first and second bearing surfaces.” Riese et al. disclose “a method of controlling one or more of a pressure and a distance between two rotating cylindrical components of a decorator configured to apply a decoration (paragraphs 48, 85, and 103), comprising: providing an inking assembly (item 42) of the decorator, comprising: a form roller (item 50) configured to receive ink from an ink fountain; and a plate cylinder (paragraph 32) comprising a printing plate adapted to receive ink from the form roller (paragraph 76), and a first spacer (item 86) with a first bearing surface; providing a blanket wheel (item 33) of the decorator, the blanket wheel comprising a transfer blanket (paragraph 53) adapted to receive ink from the printing plate, and a second spacer (item 87) with a second bearing surface selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer; setting a pressure between the first and second bearing surfaces (paragraphs 82, 83, and 87); transferring ink from the form roller to the printing plate (paragraph 76); transferring ink from the printing plate to the transfer blanket (paragraph 77); and transferring ink from the transfer blanket to the” object to be printed (paragraph 77).” The method of Riese et al. results in reduced wear on the bearer rings (paragraph 12). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the method of Riese et al. in the modified method of Sebesta et al. in order to reduce wear on the bearer rings. Regarding claim 14, Riese et al. further disclose “further comprising setting a first magnitude of a first gap between a first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder and a second cylindrical body of the blanket wheel, wherein the first gap is created by contact of the first bearing surface with the second bearing surface, wherein the first gap remains constant during operation of the decorator (paragraphs 99-102). Regarding claim 15, Riese et al. further disclose “further comprising adjusting the first magnitude of the first gap by one or more of: altering a diameter of the first spacer; altering a diameter of the second spacer; altering a position of the first spacer relative to the first cylindrical body of the plate cylinder (paragraphs 99-102); removing the first spacer and replacing it with a different first spacer with a different diameter than the first spacer; and removing the second spacer and replacing it with a different second spacer with a different diameter than the second spacer.”
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta, PrintWiki, and Riese et al., further in view of John et al. (US 2009/0114107). Regarding claim 16, Sebesta et al. disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 13 above, except “further comprising collecting data with a sensor positioned on the first spacer, the sensor operable to determine vibration of the first spacer.” However, John et al. disclose measuring the temperature of a bearer ring in a printing press using a sensor arranged within bearer ring (paragraph 12) in order to have measurements of the temperature during printing operation (paragraph 14). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the bearer ring in the modified method of Sebesta et al. with a temperature sensor in order to measure the temperature during printing operation. Examiner notes that temperature is a measurement of the average kinetic energy of a system, which includes the vibrating and colliding atoms in the system. Therefore, a measurement of the temperature of the spacer is a measurement of the vibration of the spacer, albeit indirectly.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al., PrintWiki, and Riese et al., further in view of Binder et al. Regarding claim 17, Sebesta et al. disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 13 above, except “further comprising providing a third spacer associated with the form roller, wherein the third spacer has a third bearing surface selectively engageable with the first bearing surface of the first spacer.” Binder et al. disclose such an arrangement wherein the ink form roller also has a bearer ring (Figure 2, paragraph 36). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include bearer rings on the ink form cylinder 50 of Riese et al. because doing so has been shown to be known in the art, and/or in order to provide the ink form cylinder with the benefits of bearer rings.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebesta et al., PrintWiki, and Binder et al., further in view of Riese et al.
Regarding claim 20, Sebesta et al., as modified, disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 18 above, except “wherein contact of the first bearing surface with the second bearing surface creates a first gap between a first cylindrical body of the form roller and a second cylindrical body of the plate cylinder, wherein the first gap has a first magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches.” It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation. See MPEP §2144.05. In this instance, Riese et al. disclose a similar system (Figures) comprising a plate cylinder (item 32) with bearers (items 86 and 87) and a blanket (item 33) with bearers (items 88 and 89), and that the first gap determines the force between the bearing surfaces (paragraph 83), and that the force between them determines the friction, which is to be optimized (paragraph 87). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to set the first gap to a magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches in order to determine the optimal friction between the bearing surfaces. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would have had more than a reasonable expectation of being able to successfully change the gap as suggested. However, as discussed supra with respect to claim 5, the first gap would have an associated force and, therefore, an associated friction. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to set the first gap to a magnitude of between about 0.01 inches and about 0.2 inches in order to determine the optimal friction between the bearing surfaces.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA D ZIMMERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 9:30AM-6:30PM, First Fridays: 9:30AM-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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JOSHUA D ZIMMERMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853