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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, “a roller configured for supplying the tubular film” and “a wheel configured for discharging the sleeve-like covering” do not comply with the written description requirement because the disclosure does not support these limitations. The specification does not describe “a roller configured for supplying the tubular film” and “a wheel configured for discharging the sleeve-like covering”.
Regarding claims 2-9 and 11-13, claims 2-9 and 11-12 are rejected because they depend from rejected claim 1.
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.
Claim 10 is 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.
Regarding claim 10, “the spreading element” lacks antecedent basis.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawamura (US 2013/0017290).
Regarding claim 1, Sawamura discloses a device (Fig. 1, item 1) for arranging a sleeve-like covering (Fig. 1, item F) around a product (Fig. 1, item B), comprising:
- a spreading device (Fig. 1, item 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36), comprising a spreading element (Fig. 1, item 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36), for receiving a tubular film (Para. 0032- 0040) in a flat state (Para. 0032- 0040) and deploying the tubular film into an opened state (Para. 0032- 0040), and a suspension (Fig. 2, item 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45) in which the spreading element is receivable (Para. 0032- 0040),
- a roller (Fig. 1, item 10) configured for supplying the tubular film (Para. 0030) in said flat state to the spreading device (Para. 0030) and round the spreading element (Para. 0030),
- a cutter (Fig. 1, item 20, 21, 22) configured to separate the sleeve-like covering (Para. 0030-0031) from the tubular film (Para. 0030-0031), and
- a wheel (Fig. 1, item 50, 51) configured for discharging the sleeve-like covering (Para. 0041) from the spreading device (Para. 0041) and arranging the sleeve-like covering round the product (Para. 0041),
wherein the spreading element has a supply side (Fig. 1, supply side is top side of mandrel 3), comprising a flat mouth (Fig. 3, top of mandrel 30 is relatively flat), and a discharge side (Fig. 2, discharge side is bottom of mandrel 30 where rollers 36 are located),
wherein the spreading element comprises between the supply side and the discharge side a transition section (Fig. 2, middle section of mandrel 30 is transition section),
wherein the spreading element widens transversely of a main plane (Para. 0032- 0040) of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040) in a direction from the supply side to the discharge side in the transition section (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element imposes a substantially constant circumference (Fig. 2, tubular film has a substantially constant circumference over the mandrel 30) (Para. 0032- 0040) on the tubular film in the direction from the supply side (Para. 0032- 0040) to the discharge side (Para. 0032- 0040), and the tubular film, when passing over the spreading element (Para. 0032- 0040), thereby developing from the flat state to the opened state (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element provides in the main plane of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040) a path of at least a same length (Para. 0032- 0040) as in a central perpendicular plane transversely thereof (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the suspension comprises a first set of transport rollers (Fig. 2, item 44) and a second set of transport rollers (Fig. 2, item 41) which are driven and carry the tubular film (Para. 0032- 0040) over the spreading element (Para. 0032- 0040) in a direction from the supply side to the discharge side (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element comprises, in the main plane of the flat mouth, a narrowing (Fig. 3, item 31a) (Para. 0032- 0040) in the transition area between the first set of transport rollers and the second set of transport rollers (Para. 0032- 0040) in the main plane of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element comprises in the transition area a first set of film guides (Fig. 2, item 32, 33) (Para. 0032- 0040) and, in the main plane of the flat mouth, supports (Fig. 3, supports are the sides of the mandrel 30 on either side of rollers 32, 33) thereby on either side on the first set of transport rollers (Para. 0032- 0040), and
wherein the spreading element comprises beyond the transition area a second set of film guides (Fig. 2, item 35) and, in the main plane of the flat mouth, supports (Fig. 3, supports are the sides of the mandrel 30 on either side of rollers 35) thereby on either side on the second set of transport rollers (Para. 0032- 0040),
the suspension comprises at the position of the narrowing (Para. 0032- 0040) between the first set of transport rollers and the second of transport rollers a third set of film guides (Fig. 2, item 45) (Para. 0032- 0040), that enter into the narrowing (Fig. 2, rollers 45 enter into concave portions 31a, 31e) (Para. 0032- 0040) from opposite sides in order to guide the tubular film inward into the narrowing (Para. 0032- 0040).
Sawamura does not expressly disclose that the spreading element imposes a constant circumference on the tubular film in the direction from the supply side to the discharge side. However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the figures of Sawamura that the spreading element is capable of imposing a constant circumference on the tubular film, as the figures show a substantially constant circumference is imposed on the tubular film (see for example Figure 2 of Sawamura). Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the spreading element impose a constant circumference on the tubular film, since applicant has not disclosed that the constant circumference solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the substantially constant circumference of Sawamura.
Sawamura does not expressly disclose the second set of transport rollers maintains a mutual distance which is at most equal to a corresponding mutual distance between the first set of transport rollers. However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the figures of Sawamura that the second set of rollers 41 are the same distance apart as the first set of rollers 44. Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to position the second set of transport rollers at a mutual distance that is equal to a corresponding mutual distance between the first set of transport rollers, since applicant has not disclosed that these mutual distances solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the locations of the first and second set of rollers of Sawamura.
Regarding claim 2, Sawamura discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the narrowing comprises a recess (Fig. 3, item 31a) in a wall (Fig. 3, item 31) of the spreading element (Para. 0032- 0040).
Regarding claim 6, Sawamura discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein rotations of the first set of transport rollers and the second set of transport rollers are synchronized by a direct transmission (Fig. 2, item 46) (Para. 0035-0036, belt 46 connects each of the rollers together so the rollers are rotating at the same time).
Regarding claim 7, Sawamura discloses the device according to claim 6, wherein the direct transmission comprises a direct belt transmission (Fig. 2, item 46) (Para. 0035-0036) or chain or gear transmission with a transmission ratio of one.
Regarding claim 8, Sawamura discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, and third set of film guides comprise guide rollers (Fig. 2, item 33, 34, 35) with mutually parallel rotation axes (Fig. 2), parallel to respective rotation axes of the first set of transport rollers and the second set of transport rollers (Fig. 2) (Para. 0032-0040).
Regarding claim 9, Sawamura discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the first set of transport rollers and the second set of transport rollers (Para. 0033, 0038) comprises transport rollers that have a running surface a central recess (Para. 0033, 0038), with a groove (Para. 0033, 0038), receiving a film guide co-acting therewith (Para. 0033, 0038).
Regarding claim 10, Sawamura discloses a spreading device (Fig. 7, item 64) having a supply side (Fig. 1, supply side is top side of mandrel 3), comprising a flat mouth (Fig. 3, top of mandrel 30 is relatively flat), and a discharge side (Fig. 2, discharge side is bottom of mandrel 30 where rollers 36 are located) for discharging the tubular film into an opened state (Fig. 1-3),
wherein the spreading element comprises a transition section (Fig. 2, middle section of mandrel 30 is transition section) between the supply side and the discharge side,
wherein the spreading element widens transversely of a main plane (Para. 0032- 0040) of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040) in a direction from the supply side to the discharge side in the transition section (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element imposes a substantially constant circumference (Fig. 2, tubular film has a substantially constant circumference over the mandrel 30) (Para. 0032- 0040) on the tubular film in the direction from the supply side (Para. 0032- 0040) to the discharge side (Para. 0032- 0040), and the tubular film, when passing over the spreading element (Para. 0032- 0040), to deploy the tubular film from the flat state to the opened state (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element provides in the main plane of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040) a path of at least a same length (Para. 0032- 0040) as in a central perpendicular plane transversely thereof (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element comprises in the transition area a first set of film guides (Fig. 2, item 32, 33) (Para. 0032- 0040),
wherein the spreading element comprises beyond the transition area a second set of film guides (Fig. 2, item 35) and,
wherein the transition section comprises a narrowing (Fig. 3, item 31a) (Para. 0032- 0040) in the in the main plane of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040).
Sawamura does not expressly disclose that the spreading element imposes a constant circumference on the tubular film in the direction from the supply side to the discharge side. However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the figures of Sawamura that the spreading element is capable of imposing a constant circumference on the tubular film, as the figures show a substantially constant circumference is imposed on the tubular film (see for example Figure 2 of Sawamura). Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the spreading element impose a constant circumference on the tubular film, since applicant has not disclosed that the constant circumference solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the substantially constant circumference of Sawamura.
Sawamura does not expressly disclose the second set of transport rollers maintains a mutual distance which is at most equal to a corresponding mutual distance between the first set of transport rollers. However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the figures of Sawamura that the second set of rollers 41 are the same distance apart as the first set of rollers 44. Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to position the second set of transport rollers at a mutual distance that is equal to a corresponding mutual distance between the first set of transport rollers, since applicant has not disclosed that these mutual distances solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the locations of the first and second set of rollers of Sawamura.
Regarding claim 11, Sawamura does not expressly disclose the according to claim 1, wherein the spreading element provides in the main plane of the flat mouth a path of the same length as in the central perpendicular plane transversely thereof.
However, Figures 1-3 of Samura shows the spreading element provides in the main plane of the flat mouth (Para. 0032- 0040) a path of at least a same length (Para. 0032- 0040) as in a central perpendicular plane transversely thereof (Para. 0032- 0040). Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to position the spreading element such that a path is formed in the mail plane of the flat mouth that is the same length as the path in the central perpendicular plane, since applicant has not disclosed that these orientations solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the path formed by the spreading element of Sawamura.
Claims 3-4 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawamura (US 2013/0017290) in view of Konstantin et al (US 5,737,900), hereinafter Konstantin.
Regarding claim 3, Sawamura is silent about the device according to claim 1, wherein the third set of film guides is adjustable.
However, Konstantin teaches a third set of film guides (Konstantin, Fig. 1, item 56) that are adjustable (Konstantin, Col. 8, lines 15-40).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention having the teachings of Sawamura and Konstantin to modify the device of Sawamura to include the adjustable film guides as taught by Konstantin. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such changes in order to accommodate mandrels of various diameters for handing tubular film of various diameters (Konstantin, Col. 8, lines 15-40).
Regarding claim 4, Sawamura is silent about the device according to claim 3, wherein the third set of film guides comprises one or more film guides are each carried by an actuator, a maximum stroke of which is limited by a setting wheel.
However, Konstantin teaches the third set of film guides (Konstantin, Fig. 1, item 56) comprises one or more film guides that are each carried by an actuator (Konstantin, Fig. 8, item 164) (Konstantin, Col. 12, line 58-Konstantin, Col. 13, line 11), a maximum stroke of which is limited by a setting wheel (Konstantin, Fig. 8, item shaft 113, brake 166, motor 164) (Konstantin, Col. 12, line 58-Konstantin, Col. 13, line 11).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention having the teachings of Sawamura and Konstantin to modify the device of Konstantin to include the actuator of Konstantin. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such change in order to ensure the device works accurately at high speeds (Konstantin, Col. 2, lines 22-35).
Regarding claim 12, as combined above, Konstantin teaches the device according to claim 3, wherein the third set of film guides is adjustable in a width direction in the main plane of the flat mouth (Konstantin, Col. 8, lines 15-40, guides 56 are adjustable laterally and vertically).
Regarding claim 13, as combined above, Konstantin teaches the device according to claim 4, comprising the actuator (Konstantin, Fig. 8, motor 164) (Konstantin, Col. 12, line 58-Konstantin, Col. 13, line 11).
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to utilize a linear actuator to adjust the guides, since applicant has not disclosed that the linear actuator solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the motor of Sawamura.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawamura (US 2013/0017290) in view of Konstantin further in view of Ichikawa et al (US 2022/0306416), hereinafter Ichikawa.
Regarding claim 5, as combined above, Konstantin teaches the device according to claim 4, wherein the setting wheel of the actuators are electronically coupled to a central control device (Konstantin, Col. 13, line 52-Col. 14, line 25).
Sawamura in view of Konstantin is silent about in the event of an unequal setting between the one or more film guides, the central control device generates an error message which interrupts operation of the device.
However, Ichikawa teaches in the event of an unequal setting (Ichikawa, Para. 0236, unequal setting occurs when the film is off-center) between the film guide (Ichikawa, Fig. 13A, item 11C) (Ichikawa, Para. 0236) the central control device generates an error message (Ichikawa, Para. 0236) which interrupts operation of the device (Ichikawa, Para. 0236).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention having the teachings of Sawamura, Konstantin, and Ichikawa to modify the device of Sawamura in view of Konstantin to include the error message of Ichikawa. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such change in order to increase the convenience for the user when using the device (Ichikawa, Para. 0004).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reason:
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Sawamura does not disclose a narrowing in the main plane of the flat mouth, Examiner disagrees. Figure 4b of Sawamura shows the main plane of the flat mouth. In this main plane, narrowing 31a occurs between the first set of transport rollers and the second set of transport rollers. Therefore the rejection is maintained.
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 VERONICA MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-6:00.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571)270-1926. 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.
/VERONICA MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights