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 .
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s amendment filing on 11/17/2025.
Claims 1-19 are pending and examined below.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by reference Wu (5,667,096).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a medicine supply module comprising:
a canister (20) having:
an internal space (see figure 3 below) adapted to accommodate a medicine;
an insertion hole (25) through which the medicine enters the internal space (see figure 3 below); and
a discharge hole (21) through which the medicine is discharged from the internal space (see figure 3 below),
wherein the insertion hole (25) being on a first side of the canister (20),
wherein the canister (20) has a first length and a first axis line (see figure 3 below) along the first length, and
wherein the discharge hole (21) being on a second side of the canister (20) opposite from the first side and above the first axis line (see figure 3 below),
a rotor (31) in the internal space (see figure 3 below) configured to rotate and discharge the medicine one tablet at a time through the discharge hole (21);
a cassette frame (52) that supports the canister (20) at an angle such that the second side of the canister (20) is lower than the first side of the canister (20); and
an electric motor (51) that provides power to rotate the rotor (31) and is supported by the cassette frame (52).
(Figures 1, 3, 7 and Column 4 lines 14-30, 34-38, 60-62, Column 5 lines 1-3, 14-16)
Regarding claim 3, Wu discloses the cassette frame (52) comprises a front surface (see figure 3 below) having an inlet (see figure 3 below) into which the canister (20) fits, wherein the canister (20) is detachably coupled to the cassette frame (52). (Figure 1, 3 and Column 4 lines 22-25)
Regarding claim 4, Wu discloses the canister (20) has a cylindrical shape in part or in whole, wherein the cassette frame (52) comprises a front surface (see figure 3 below) having an inlet (see figure 3 below) into which the canister (20) fits and having a shape corresponding to the cylindrical shape of the canister (20). (Figure 4)
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Second Axis Line)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Axis Line)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Inlet)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Upper Side Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rear End)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Lower Side Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Front Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Internal Space)][AltContent: textbox (Wu)]
PNG
media_image1.png
478
673
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Wu discloses the cassette frame (52) is attachable and detachable from another cassette frame via a frame (10). (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 8, Wu discloses cassette frame (52) supports a plurality of the canisters (20), wherein the rotors (31) and the electric motors (51) are in a one-to-one corresponding with the plurality of canister (20). (Figure 3, 4 and Column 4 lines 25-30)
Regarding claim 9, Wu discloses a remaining quantity detection sensor (28) configured to detect a quantity of the medicine remaining in the internal space. (Figure 3 and Column 5 lines 23-28)
Regarding claim 11, Wu discloses a discharge guide (56) that is coupled to the cassette frame (52) and in communication with the discharge hole (21), configured to guide the medicine discharged from the discharged hole (21). (Figure 3 and Column 5 lines 56-61)
Regarding claim 12, Wu discloses the cassette frame (52) has a front surface (see figure 3 above), an upper side surface (see figure 3 above) and a lower side surface (see figure 3 above) that are rectangular in shape, a left side surface and a right side surface that are rectangular in shape, and a rear end.
A rectangle is a type of parallelogram. Therefore, Wu does disclose a left side surface and a right side surface that are parallelogrammatic in shape.
However, Wu does not disclose the rear end that inclines a shape of the cassette frame forward and upward.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art to have the rear end incline a shape of the cassette frame forward and upward, since it has been held that a change in shape is a matter of design choice absent of persuasive evidence that particular change is significant. [MPEP 2144.04 (IV-B)]
On page 17 paragraph 53 of the Specification, the surface of the cassette frame opposite the front surface is not at a right angle to the axis line. The Specification as originally filed does not disclose any criticality for the claimed feature. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Wu to obtain the invention as specified in claim 12 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 13, Wu discloses a medicine packing apparatus comprising:
a medicine cabinet (10) comprising:
a plurality of medicine supply modules of claim 1 in a matrix; and
a rear frame (11, 12) that supports the plurality of medicine supply modules; and
a packing unit (col 5 ln 59-61) that packs the medicine discharged from the medicine cabinet on a dose basis.
(Figures 1, 3, 7 and Column 1 lines 18-21, Column 4 lines 14-30, 34-38, 60-62, Column 5 lines 1-3, 14-16, 56-61)
Regarding claim 14, Wu discloses the cassette frame (52) of each of the plurality of medicine supply modules is detachably coupled to the cassette frame (52 of an adjacent one of the medicine supply modules via a frame (10). (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 16, Wu discloses the medicine is inserted into the canister (20) through the insertion hole (25) while the canister is supported by the cassette frame (52). (Figure 1, 3 and Column 5 lines 18-22)
Regarding claim 19, Wu discloses the entire discharge hole (21) is above the first axis line (see figure 3 above). (Figure 3)
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 reference Wu (5,667,096) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Farnsworth et al. (2009/0039097).
Regarding claim 2, Wu discloses the rotor (31) has a second length and a second axis line (see figure 3 above) along the second length, wherein the second axis line is inclined at an angle relative to the horizontal line or plane. (Figure 3 and Column 5 lines 14-16)
However, Wu do not explicitly disclose the second axis line is inclined at an angle of 30º to 40º relative to a horizontal line or plane.
Farnsworth et al. disclose an element (104), containing medicine, has an angle between 30º to 60º relative to a horizontal line. (Page 2 paragraph 36)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the canister of Wu by incorporating the range of 30º to 60º relative to a horizontal line as taught by Farnsworth et al., since page 2 paragraph 36 of Farnsworth et al. states such a modification would enable the medicine to slide to the lower end of the canister.
When modifying Wu in view of Farnsworth et al., the second axis line of the rotor is interpreted to be inclined at an angle of 30º to 40º relative to a horizontal line or plane since the canister is inclined at an angle of 30º to 40º relative to a horizontal line or plane.
Claims 6-7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Wu (5,667,096) as applied to claims 5 and 14 respectively above, and further in view of reference Berkheimer et al. (5,271,515).
Regarding claim 6, Wu discloses the cassette frame comprises: a front surface (see figure 3 above) having an inlet (see figure 3 above) into which the canister (20) fits; and an outer side surface (see figure 3 above) that extends from an outer peripheral edge of the front surface (see figure 3 above). (Figure 3)
However, Wu does not disclose a coupling rail portion.
Berkheimer et al. disclose a canister (12) configured to couple to an adjacent canister, wherein the canister includes: a coupling rail portion (23, 24) protruding from an outer side surface (20) and extending linearly; and a coupling groove portion (56, 58) that is concavely recessed from another outer surface (22), wherein the coupling groove portion (56, 58) mates with a coupling rail portion of the adjacent canister.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the cassette frame of Wu by incorporating the rails and groove as taught by Berkheimer et al., since column 2 lines 35-37 of Berkheimer et al. states such a modification would allow for direct stacking and interlocking of the cassette frame to an adjacent cassette frame.
Regarding claim 7, Wu modified by Berkheimer et al. disclose the outer side surface (Wu – see figure 3 above) is inclined at an inclination angle with respect to a horizontal plane that is equal to an inclination angle between a canister axis line extending in a lengthwise direction of the canister (Wu – 20) and a horizontal line or the horizontal plane. (Wu – Figure 3)
Regarding claim 15, Wu modified by Berkheimer et al. disclose the cassette frame (Wu – 52) comprises: a front surface (Wu – see figure 3 above) having an inlet (Wu – see figure 3 above) into which the canister (Wu – 20) fits; and an outer side surface (Wu – see figure 3 above) that extends from an outer peripheral edge of the front surface (Wu – see figure 3 above), wherein the outer side surface (Wu – see figure 3 above) of the cassette frame (Wu – 52) of each of the plurality of medicine supply module faces and contacts an outer side surface of the cassette frame of the adjacent one of the medicine supply modules. (Wu – Figure 1) (Berkheimer et al. – Figure 1)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Wu (5,667,096) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Yuyama et al. (9,790,017).
Regarding claim 10, Wu discloses the claim invention as stated above but do not disclose a state display unit.
Yuyama et al. disclose a medicine supply module (1) comprising a state display unit (8) configured to project light indicating a state of the medicine supply module that is visible from the front of the medicine supply module (1). (Figure 1 and Column 6 lines 45-52)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the medicine supply module of Wu by incorporating the state display unit as taught by Yuyama et al., since column 8 lines 1-3 of Yuyama et al. states such a modification would allow the user to be informed of any changes to the states of the cassette.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Wu (5,667,096) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Park, IV (9,550,619)(referred as Park).
Regarding claim 17, Wu discloses the claim invention as stated above but do not disclose automatically rotating the electric motor in an opposite direction.
Park discloses a medicine supply module comprising:
a canister (1412) having an internal space, and a discharge hole (1444);
a rotor (1410) in the internal space configured to rotate;
a cassette frame (1582) that supports the canister; and
an electric motor (col 17 ln 16) that provides power to rotate the rotor (1415),
wherein, when the rotor (1410) is rotating in one direction and an excessive load is applied to the shaft of the electric motor (col 17 ln 16), the electric motor (col 17 ln 16) automatically rotates the rotor (1410) in an opposite direction.
(Figure 20, 21 and Column 10 lines 64-67, Column 16 lines 23-35, 48-52, 62-64, Column 17 lines 1-4, 15-17)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the module of Wu by incorporating the function of automatically rotating the rotor in the opposite direction as taught by Park, since column 1 lines 36-40 of Park states such a modification would prevent damage to the medicine and/or to the module itself.
Regarding claim 18, Wu modified by Park disclose the excessive load results from the medicine being caught or stalled in the discharge hole (Wu – 21) or between a blade on the rotor (Wu – 31) and the canister (Wu – 20). (Park – Column 1 lines 34-36, Column 10 lines 62-64)
Response to Arguments
The Amendments filed on 11/17/2025 have been entered. Claims 1-19 are pending in the application.
In response to the arguments of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), in view of the amendments to the claims, Examiner withdraws the 112(b) rejections.
In response to the arguments of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) with reference Wu (5,667,096), Examiner finds the arguments not persuasive.
Applicant states:
By contrast, the presently claimed medicine supply module comprises a canister having an axis line along its length, and a discharge hole above the axis line.
…
As a result, Wu does not anticipate the medicine supply module recited in the present Claim 1.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a particular location of the first axis line) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In the amended claim 1, the first axis line is disclosed to extend along the first length of the canister. This indicates the orientation of the first axis line relative to the length of the canister. However, the canister is a three-dimensional object. The amended feature does not disclose the location of the first axis line relative to the height or width of the canister. In other words, the first axis line can be interpreted to extend along the length of the bottom most surface of the canister, the top most surface of the canister, or the lateral most surface of the canister.
Wu discloses a canister (20) having: an internal space (see figure 3 below) adapted to accommodate a medicine; a discharge hole (21) through which the medicine is discharged from the internal space (see figure 3 below), wherein the canister (20) has a first length and a first axis line (see figure 3 below) along the first length, and wherein the discharge hole (21) being situated above the first axis line (see figure 3 below). Therefore, Wu does anticipate the medicine supply module recited in the amended claim 1.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Axis Line)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Wu)]
PNG
media_image1.png
478
673
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In response to the arguments of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 with reference Wu (5,667,096) modified by reference Farnsworth (2009/0039097), Examiner finds the arguments not persuasive.
Applicant states:
As a result, no possible combination of Wu and Farnsworth can disclose or suggest all of the features of the medicine supply module recited in Claim 1.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Farnsworth et al. is not relied upon for the teaching of a canister having a discharge hole situated above an axis line. Farnsworth et al. is relied upon for the teaching of situating the canister at an angle between 30º to 60º relative to a horizontal line. Wu is relied upon for the teaching of a canister having a discharge hole situated above an axis line.
In response to the arguments of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 with reference Wu (5,667,096) modified by reference Berkheimer (5,271,515), Examiner finds the arguments not persuasive.
Applicant states:
Therefore, the combination of Wu and Berkheimer does not disclose or suggest all of the limitations recited in the present Claim 1.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Berkheimer et al. is not relied upon for the teaching of a canister having a discharge hole situated above an axis line. Berkheimer et al. is relied upon for the teaching of coupling the cassette to an adjacent cassette. Wu is relied upon for the teaching of a canister having a discharge hole situated above an axis line.
In response to the arguments of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 with reference Wu (5,667,096) modified by reference Yuyama et al. (9,790,017), Examiner finds the arguments not persuasive.
Applicant states:
As a result, no possible combination of Wu and Yuyama can disclose or suggest all of the features of the medicine supply module recited in Claim 1.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Yuyama et al. is not relied upon for the teaching of a canister having a discharge hole situated above an axis line. Yuyama et al. is relied upon for the teaching of a state display unit. Wu is relied upon for the teaching of a canister having a discharge hole situated above an axis line.
Conclusion
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 PATRICK B FRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0396. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thur 7am-4pm.
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 at (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.
/PATRICK B FRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 February 27, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731