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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the semicolons should be replaced by commas. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the preceding dashes in the claim should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
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: gripping element, first drive device, (at least one) second drive device (Claims 1-17), at least partially movable sealing device (Claims 1-3,6-8,14), an inner gripping element part, an outer gripping element part (Claims 3,10-11), movable transport element (Claims 6-8), at least one contact element (Claims 8,14), a downstream container treatment device, container transport apparatus (Claim 9), and third drive device (Claim 10). The limitations element, device, part, element, and apparatus are construed to be generic placeholders.
third drive device 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 1-17 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 Claim 1, lines 6-7, “a gripping element” is introduced for a second time. It is unclear if this is the same gripping element of line 3.
In Claims 2, et al., it is not clear if the multiple phrases with “preferably” are positively recited or not. They are construed not to be positively recited since they are not required to be in the prior art as claimed.
In Claim 8, it is unclear what combinations are being claimed in the phrase, “the gripping element, a shaft and/or a sleeve with respect to the carrier” since there are three structures therein. It would be clear if there were two structures therein since it would be (1) both or (2) one or the other.
In Claim 9, it is unclear which drive device (first or second) is being claimed in the phrase, “a shaft arranged between the drive device and the gripping element.”
Claim limitation “(at least one) second drive device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. There neither structure disclosed in the orig. spec. nor clearly shown in the orig. drawings. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim limitation “movable transport element” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. There neither structure disclosed in the orig. spec. nor clearly shown in the orig. drawings. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim limitation “downstream container treatment device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosed, “a treatment device such as a heating device and/or a forming device” are not disclosed structures thereto. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim limitation “container transport apparatus” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. There neither structure disclosed in the orig. spec. nor clearly shown in the orig. drawings. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim limitation “third drive device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. There neither structure disclosed in the orig. spec. nor clearly shown in the orig. drawings. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-9, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Procyshyn et al. (US 2016/0184986) (“Procyshyn”).
Claim 1: a carrier (FIG. 2, 103),
a gripping element (para. [0043]; 204) which is movable with respect to the carrier (articulated) for gripping a container during transport thereof along a transport path arranged at least in portions inside a clean room (para. [0034]/[0043]),
a first drive device configured for rotating a shaft connected to a gripping element (240; para. [0042]-[0045]; FIG. 2-3), and
at least one second drive device configured for shifting the gripping element with respect to the carrier (para. [0052]-[0054]; drive devices in 102), wherein the first drive device and the second drive device are arranged outside the clean room (para. [0054]),
wherein a clean room boundary extends between the carrier and the gripping element, which boundary is formed at least in portions by an at least partially movable sealing device, which allows the transmission of a movement pulse generated outside the clean room from both the first drive device and the second drive device to the gripping element arranged inside the clean room while maintaining the clean room boundary (para. [0033]-[0040]/[0054]);
Claim 2: wherein the shaft rotatable by the first drive device is shiftable with respect to the carrier in its longitudinal direction (via 112), wherein the shaft is preferably surrounded at least in portions by a sleeve which is preferably shiftable in the longitudinal direction of the shaft with respect to the carrier, wherein the shaft and the sleeve are preferably shiftable independently of one another with respect to the carrier along the longitudinal direction of the shaft (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art);
Claim 4: wherein the sealing device has a flexible collar (124; para. [0066] et al.), preferably a bellows, which has a first portion which is immovable with respect to the carrier when the gripping device is in the operating state and another second portion which is movable with respect to the carrier when the gripping device is in the operating state, preferably shiftable in the longitudinal direction of the shaft (para. [0036]-[0037]/[0066]; the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art);
Claim 6: wherein the transport device preferably has a movable transport element (222) on which at least one, preferably a plurality of the gripping devices is/are arranged (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art);
Claim 7: wherein the at least one gripping device is configured to be guided along a circular path by the movable transport element, wherein the movable transport element forms at least a portion of a clean room wall (para. [0034]/[0042]-[0045]; the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art);
Claim 8: at least one control cam (110/116), preferably at least two control cams, on which at least one contact element of a gripping device is guided, which specifies the relative movement of the gripping element, a shaft and/or a sleeve with respect to the carrier (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art; here, the preferably clause is construed to include the limitations after preferably);
Claim 9: shifting a gripping element (para. [0043]; 204) arranged within a clean room (para. [0034]/[0043]) with respect to a carrier (FIG. 2, 103) by a second drive device (para. [0052]-[0054]; drive devices in 102) arranged outside the clean room (para. [0054]),
gripping a container by the gripping element (para. [0043]), rotating the container and the gripping element by a first drive device (240; para. [0042]-[0045]; FIG. 2-3) arranged outside the clean room (para. [0054]), preferably about a shaft arranged between the drive device and the gripping element (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art), transporting the container held by the gripping element through the clean room (para. [0052]-[0054]; drive devices in 102), and
transferring the container to a downstream container treatment device or container transport apparatus along the transport path (para. [0033]-[0040]/[0054]);
Claim 12: wherein the sealing device has a flexible collar (124; para. [0066] et al.), preferably a bellows, which has a first portion which is immovable with respect to the carrier when the gripping device is in the operating state and another second portion which is movable with respect to the carrier when the gripping device is in the operating state, preferably shiftable in the longitudinal direction of the shaft (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art; here, the preferably clause is construed to include the limitations after preferably);
Claim 14: at least one control cam (110/116), preferably at least two control cams, on which at least one contact element of a gripping device is guided, which specifies the relative movement of the gripping element, a shaft and/or a sleeve with respect to the carrier (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art; here, the preferably clause is construed to include the limitations after preferably).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fahldieck et al. (US 2014/0174029) (“Fahldieck”). These rejections are for the rejections of Claims 3, 10-11, and 15 below.
Claim 1: a carrier (Fig. 1, 15),
a gripping element (6) which is movable with respect to the carrier for gripping a container during transport thereof along a transport path arranged at least in portions inside a clean room (27),
a first drive device configured for rotating a shaft (5) connected to a gripping element (4), and
at least one second drive device configured for shifting the gripping element with respect to the carrier (10,11), wherein the first drive device and the second drive device are arranged outside the clean room (27),
wherein a clean room boundary (12,43) extends between the carrier and the gripping element, which boundary is formed at least in portions by an at least partially movable sealing device, which allows the transmission of a movement pulse generated outside the clean room from both the first drive device and the second drive device to the gripping element arranged inside the clean room while maintaining the clean room boundary (para. [0048]/[0064]);
Claim 2: wherein the shaft rotatable by the first drive device is shiftable with respect to the carrier in its longitudinal direction, wherein the shaft is preferably surrounded at least in portions by a sleeve which is preferably shiftable in the longitudinal direction of the shaft with respect to the carrier, wherein the shaft and the sleeve are preferably shiftable independently of one another with respect to the carrier along the longitudinal direction of the shaft (para. [0039]/[0044]; the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art);
Claim 9: shifting a gripping element (6) arranged within a clean room (27) with respect to a carrier (15) by a second drive device (10,11) arranged outside the clean room (para. [0048]/[0064]),
gripping a container by the gripping element (6), rotating the container and the gripping element by a first drive device (5) arranged outside the clean room (para. [0048]/[0064]), preferably about a shaft arranged between the drive device and the gripping element (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art), transporting the container held by the gripping element through the clean room (para. [0048]/[0064]), and
transferring the container to a downstream container treatment device or container transport apparatus along the transport path (para. [0048]/[0064]).
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) 3, 10-11, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fahldieck in view of Kirschner et al. (DE 10 2011 051 926 A1) (“Kirschner”). Fahldieck discloses all the limitations of the claims as discussed above; and
Claim 15: wherein the sealing device has a flexible collar (124; para. [0066] et al.), preferably a bellows, which has a first portion which is immovable with respect to the carrier when the gripping device is in the operating state and another second portion which is movable with respect to the carrier when the gripping device is in the operating state, preferably shiftable in the longitudinal direction of the shaft (the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art; here, the preferably clause is construed to include the limitations after preferably).
Fahldieck does not directly show:
Claim 3: wherein the gripping element has an inner gripping element part and an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in portions, wherein these two gripping element parts can be moved are movable with respect to one another along the longitudinal direction of the inner gripping element part;
Claim 10: wherein an inner gripping element part is preferably moved in its longitudinal direction with respect to an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in part, wherein this relative movement is preferably triggered by the second drive device and/or a further third drive device which is preferably also arranged outside the clean room;
Claim 11: wherein the gripping element has an inner gripping element part and an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in portions, wherein these two gripping element parts are movable with respect to one another along the longitudinal direction of the inner gripping element part.
It is noted that the preferably clauses are not positively recited; therefore, they are not required by the prior art.
Kirschner shows a similar device having:
Claim 3: wherein the gripping element has an inner gripping element part and an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in portions, wherein these two gripping element parts can be moved are movable with respect to one another along the longitudinal direction of the inner gripping element part (Fig. 5a; para. [0036]);
Claim 10: wherein an inner gripping element part is preferably moved in its longitudinal direction with respect to an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in part, wherein this relative movement is preferably triggered by the second drive device and/or a further third drive device which is preferably also arranged outside the clean room (Fig. 5a; para. [0036]);
Claim 11: wherein the gripping element has an inner gripping element part and an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in portions, wherein these two gripping element parts are movable with respect to one another along the longitudinal direction of the inner gripping element part (Fig. 5a; para. [0036]);
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of providing a reliable actuation possibility in which no incorrect operation occurs during the gripping and/or release of the articles (para. [0011]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fahldieck as taught by Kirschner and include Kirschner’s similar device having:
Claim 3: wherein the gripping element has an inner gripping element part and an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in portions, wherein these two gripping element parts can be moved are movable with respect to one another along the longitudinal direction of the inner gripping element part;
Claim 10: wherein an inner gripping element part is preferably moved in its longitudinal direction with respect to an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in part, wherein this relative movement is preferably triggered by the second drive device and/or a further third drive device which is preferably also arranged outside the clean room;
Claim 11: wherein the gripping element has an inner gripping element part and an outer gripping element part which surrounds the inner gripping element part at least in portions, wherein these two gripping element parts are movable with respect to one another along the longitudinal direction of the inner gripping element part;
with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of providing a reliable actuation possibility in which no incorrect operation occurs during the gripping and/or release of the articles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 13, and 16-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose that the sealing device comprises a ball bearing which is arranged between the shaft or a sleeve surrounding this shaft and a part which is immovable with respect to the carrier.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2020/0338765 discloses robot 22.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gerald McClain whose telephone number is (571)272-7803. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and at gerald.mcclain@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 (II)).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/Gerald McClain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights