DETAILED 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.
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 13-19 are 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 13 recites the limitation "the main receptacle". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim is unclear.
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) 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bridges et al. (US 2018/0086547 A1 – hereinafter Bridges) in view of Robert A. Luciano, Jr. (US 2011/0101016 A1 – hereinafter Luciano).
Re Claims 1, 7, 8, and 10-12:
Bridges discloses a cartridge (200) for pharmaceutical dispensing system, wherein the system is configured to dispense pouches (112) containing medicaments, the pouches (112) provided as a strip (114) of a plurality of pouches (112), the strip (114) provided in coiled form (see Fig. 6), a main receptacle having a floor and a first side wall (see Fig. 12A, see Figs. 1-42D), but fails to teach the cartridge comprising: a ceiling, a front wall, a rear wall, wherein the front wall includes a slot for dispensing pouches; a cover that engages the main receptacle and provides a second side wall opposite the first side wall; and a guide system disposed in the main receptacle, the guide system defining an interior space configured to hold the strip of pouches in coiled form, and further defining a pathway between the guide system and the ceiling, rear wall, and floor.
Luciano teaches a cartridge (100) comprising: a main receptacle having a floor (near 220), a ceiling (near 110), a front wall (near 120), a rear wall (near 170), and a first side wall (near 140) (see Fig. 2), wherein the front wall (near 120) includes a slot (230) for dispensing pouches (240) (see Fig. 3); a cover (130) that engages the main receptacle and provides a second side wall (near 130) opposite the first side wall (near 140); and a guide system (140, 150) disposed in the main receptacle, the guide system (140, 150) defining an interior space configured to hold a strip of pouches (240) in coiled form (see Figs. 1-3), and further defining a pathway between the guide system (140, 150) and the ceiling (near 110), rear wall (near 170), and floor (near 220) (see Figs. 1-25F). Re Claim 7: Luciano teaches wherein the guide system (140, 150) includes an upper arcuate segment (near 140) and a lower arcuate segment (near 220 (see Fig. 2) that define generally a 270 to 300 degree arc (see Fig. 2). Re Claim 8: Luciano teaches wherein the guide system (140, 150) further includes a pathway ceiling (see Fig. 1, lower wall of guide surfaces which is above the bottommost-wall of the container) positioned under the lower arcuate segment (if lower arcuate segment is the corner at which the segment turns, then the ceiling is below it as it continues to moves downwardly) and generally parallel with the floor (see Figs. 1 and 2). Re Claim 10: Luciano teaches wherein the cover (130) is configured to snap into the main receptacle (see paragraph [0046]). Re Claim 12: Luciano teaches wherein the coiled strip of pouches (240) lacks a central axle member (see Fig. 3 and 16 – strip has no central axle member). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Bridges with that of Luciano to provide a more secure product packaging, which would prevent tampering, for dispensing purposes.
Further Re Claim 2:
Bridges discloses wherein the floor includes an aperture (at 280) that provides access for a drive wheel (330) located below the floor to engage the strip (114) as it is routed above the floor and to a slot (opening) (see Fig. 18, see paragraph [0108]).
Further Re Claim 3:
Bridges discloses a brake (274) mounted to the main receptacle and extending into a pathway (see Figs. 12A-12B).
Further Re Claim 4:Bridges discloses wherein the brake (274) is biased toward the floor (as suggested by supporting hollow rib to increase stability and stiffness) (see Figs. 12A-12B).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bridges in view of Luciano, and further in view of Hunter B. Spencer (US 3,362,578 – hereinafter Spencer).
Re Claim 9:
Bridges in view of Luciano discloses the device of claim 8, but fails to teach a bearing member that underlies the pathway ceiling and overlies the floor.
Spencer further in view teaches a bearing member (28) that underlies a pathway ceiling (25) and overlies a floor (22) (see Fig. 1) (Examiner notes that the Spencer device is in reverse orientation but would be obvious in view of the combination to be capable of being inverted. Such would not change the scope of the invention, and would not involve any additional inventive skill). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Bridges in view of Luciano with that of Spencer to prevent a strip from retracting back into a container, while also assisting in alignment of the strip.
Claim(s) 5, 6, and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bridges in view of Luciano and George Feldstein (US 4,274,550 – hereinafter Feldstein).
Re Claims 5, 13, and 15-19:
Bridges discloses a cartridge (200) for pharmaceutical dispensing system, wherein the system is configured to dispense pouches (112) containing medicaments, the pouches (112) provided as a strip (114) of a plurality of pouches (112), the strip (114) provided in coiled form (see Fig. 6), a floor, and a first and second sidewalls (see Figs. 11A-12A, see Figs. 1-42D), but fails to teach the cartridge comprising: a ceiling, a front wall, a rear wall, wherein the front wall includes a slot for dispensing pouches; and a guide system disposed in the main receptacle, the guide system defining an interior space configured to hold the strip of pouches in coiled form, and further defining a pathway between the guide system and the ceiling, rear wall, and floor; wherein the guide system includes a round-ended bulb at an upstream end thereof.
Luciano teaches a cartridge (100) comprising: a floor (near 220), a ceiling (near 110), a front wall (near 120), a rear wall (near 170), and first (near 140) and second (near 130) sidewalls, wherein the front wall (near 120) includes a slot (230) for dispensing pouches (240) (see Fig. 3); and a guide system (140, 150) disposed in the main receptacle, the guide system (140, 150) defining an interior space configured to hold a strip of pouches (240) in coiled form (see Figs. 1-3), and further defining a pathway between the guide system (140, 150) and the ceiling (near 110), rear wall (near 170), and floor (near 220) (see Figs. 1-25F). Re Claim 19: Luciano teaches wherein the coiled strip of pouches (240) lacks a central axle member (see Fig. 3 and 16 – strip has no central axle member). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Bridges with that of Luciano to provide a more secure product packaging, which would prevent tampering, for dispensing purposes.
Feldstein teaches wherein a guide system includes a round-ended bulb (30) at an upstream end thereof (see Figs. 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have been motivated to combine the teachings of Bridges with that of Luciano and Feldstein to allow for assisting in spacing a to be dispensed strip portion from a remainder of a coil as seen in Fig. 1 of Feldstein.
Re Claims 6 and 14:Bridges in view of Luciano and Feldstein does not discloses specific values for wherein the bulb is disposed at an angle of between about 30 and 60 degrees relative to vertical, however, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the invention, through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify their invention to include the most optimum results and efficiency necessary for their particular invention since it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELVIN L RANDALL, JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-5373. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 am-5 pm 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.
/K.L.R/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights