DETAILED ACTION
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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) 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “flow path switching unit” in claim 1, lines 7 and 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-9 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. In claims 1 and 9, Applicant claims a can manufacturing apparatus, a printed can manufacturing apparatus and a plain can manufacturing apparatus but no can manufacturing means are set forth so the scope of the can manufacturing is not ascertainable as to what if any difference there is between a can manufacturing apparatus, a printed can manufacturing apparatus and a plain manufacturing apparatus. Claim 4, lines 2 and claims (DI) can or resin-coated can and this scope of limitation is not clear since no drawing and ironing means or coating means are set forth in claim 1. Claim 5, lines 5-7 and claims (DI) can or resin-coated can and this scope of limitation is not clear since no drawing and ironing means or coating means are set forth in claim 1.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stock et al. (2022/0404818) in view of Brandt et al. (7,954,621). Regarding claims 1,2 and 9, Stock discloses a can manufacturing system (Fig. 2A) and can manufacturing method for manufacturing container bodies (2, can barrels) in a can barrel manufacturing apparatus (bodymaker, 36) comprising an inlet conveyor (32), a branch conveyor ([0471], lines 12-14) arranged in a post-process (after the bodymaker; Fig. 2A) and configured to convey the can barrels (2) to a basecoater (42; dotted lines, 42,44; Fig. 2A) with a first branch of the branch conveyor (32 to basecoater 42; Fig. 2A) at a sensing point (34B) for can barrels to be printed in a printing apparatus (46) and a second branch of the branch conveyor being a bypass conveyor (at a sensing point 34C; [0481]) for can barrels that bypass the basecoater (42) and printer (46) and are palletized at inspection station (57A; [0523]). In claims 1 and 9, Applicant claims a can manufacturing apparatus, a printed can manufacturing apparatus and a plain can manufacturing apparatus but no can manufacturing means are set forth so the scope of the can manufacturing is not ascertainable, but Stock discloses bodymaking (36), necking (54) and flanging (56) configured to manufactured printed and unprinted cans. Stock discloses that the sensor (34; [0464]) is in communication with a control apparatus (100) and is configured to detect the can barrels as they are being conveyed. Stock discloses ([0477],[0478]) that the inlet conveyor (32) conveys the can barrels (2) to the bodymaker (36) and to a washer (38) and a drier (40) for plain can forming in the second branch of the branch conveyor, wherein a number ([0478], lines 1-2) of the can barrels are switched to be transported to a basecoater (42) and thereafter to the printing apparatus (46) and printed can manufacturing (54,56) in the first branch of the branch conveyor for printed can barrel manufacturing. Stock discloses (Fig. 2A) that the inlet conveyor (32) conveys the can barrels form the bodymaker (36) to the washer (38) and drier (40) and the plain can barrels are conveyed in the second branch conveyor (32 to 57A) at the sensing point (34C) without printing and the number of the can barrels are switched from the inlet conveyor (32) at sensing point (34B) for separate conveyance to the basecoater (42) and basecoat oven (44) prior to printing ([0480]-[0482]) in the printing apparatus (46) in the first branch conveyor. Stock does not disclose a flow switching means for switching the can barrels from the inlet conveyor to the first and second branch conveyor.
Brandt teaches an inlet conveyor (12) for conveying workpieces (20) to a branch conveyor (14,18; Fig. 1) by actuating a flow switching means (42) that is signaled by a workpiece sensor (34; col. 3, lines 53-57) to switch the workpieces from the inlet conveyor (12) to the branch conveyor (14,18) at a switching point (24). Regarding claim 2, the flow switching means (42) is a switching device comprising a movable guide (actuator 44; col. 4, lines 27-28) configured to switch the workpieces (20) between the first branch of the branch conveyor (18) and the second branch (14) of the branch conveyor (14,18) which is a bypass inlet conveyor (14). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the inlet conveyor and branch conveyor of Stock to include a flow switching means as taught by Brandt in order to automatically transfer the can barrels from the inlet conveyor to the first branch of the branch conveyor and to the second branch of the branch conveyor in response to information sensed from the workpieces.
Regarding claim 3, Stock discloses [0042] that manufacturing station speed and conveying line speed are controlled and Brandt teaches that a motor controller (28,116; col. 7, lines 39-45) is configured to drive conveyors. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to provide the conveying system of Stock with a motor controller as taught by Brandt to drive the conveyors.
Regarding claim 4, Stock discloses drawing and ironing ([0475], lines 1-3) can production.
Regarding claim 5, Stock discloses that the can barrels printing conveyor is a pin conveyor configured to retain the can barrels ([0085],[0485]).
Regarding claim 6, Stock discloses that the printing inlet conveyor moving can barrels from the basecoater (42) to the printing apparatus (46A,46B,46C; Fig. 2A) includes a can barrel sensor (34B) configured to sense the can barrels (2) and divert the number of can barrels through the basecoater and to the printer and Stock discloses that the can barrels are sorted according to can barrel information (26) and direction to a selected routing ([0504],[0505]. Brandt teaches that the flow switching unit (44) is configured by a sensor (34) to divert workpieces when a signal from the workpiece (20) is received. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to switch the can barrels of Stock to the basecoater and printer inlet conveyor when the can barrel mark, barcode or radio frequency tage (RFID) is sensed.
Regarding claim 7, Stock discloses lubricating [0491] of the can barrels prior to necking [0492].
Regarding claim 8, Stock discloses a necking apparatus (54; Fig. 2A), a cradle (storage, 60), a palletizer section (59A,59B) and a connecting conveyor cradle (32A,32B) which is an input branch conveyor to the palletizer section (59A,59B) at an outlet of a necking section cradle (32) wherein an outlet section of the necking section cradle (32) from the necking apparatus (54) and flanging apparatus (56) is a movable module (it conveys) and is connected to a connection conveyor cradle (32A,32B) which connects the necking outlet conveyor (32) and the palletizer section (59A,59B).
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 EDWARD THOMAS TOLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
/EDWARD T TOLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights