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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the another component, first width, second width, working distance, safety distance, new working distance as recited in claim 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 4 and 16 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.
With respect to claim 4, the term “the flexographic plate cylinders” in line 5 has no proper antecedent basis because no flexographic plate cylinders were previously recited in claim 1.
With respect to claim 16, this claim is unclear in scope and meaning as to what this language is intended to recite. Specifically, it is unclear what the “another component” encompasses or what the difference is between the working distance, safety distance, new working distance and the different widths as recited.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. In particular, it is noted that claim 17 is improperly modifying the subject matter of claim 1 rather than further limiting it. Specifically, claim 1 has recited a respective double printing unit for flexographic printing in lines 10-11 but then claim 17 recites using gravure printing units instead of flexographic units. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under each of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Stein et al. (US 5,699,735).
With respect to claim 18, Stein et al. teach a method for operating a web-fed printing press (Fig. 4) comprising:
carrying out a flying web change from a first web 1, 11 to a second web 1, 12 with a production of a splice (see column 5, lines 66-67, and column 6, lines 10-21 and 61-63 and Figures 2-4, 9a-9b); and
disengaging at least two plate cylinders 2 of separate printing units 30, 40 from the first web 1 or engaging each of the at least two plate cylinders 2 of separate printing units 30, 40 with the second web 1 in coordination with a passage of a splice through the web-fed printing press. Particular attention is invited to the embodiment of Figure 4 which shows the plate cylinders 3 pivoted away from the respective printing cylinders 2. Note that an automatic changeover from one printing production to another as described in column 1, line 42-column 2, line 6, column 4, lines 50-53, and column 6, lines 50-56 involves changing from one web product to another via a splicing operation as well as changing the printing group used for each web and thus involves engaging/disengaging the printing units “in coordination with passage of a splice” as broadly recited). See, in particular, Figures 2-4 which show several configurations of double printing arrangements, the production change process of Figure 12, and column 1, line 64-column 2, lines 64 and column 4, lines 50-67, column 6, lines 66-67, column 7, lines 31-32, and column 8, lines 3-4.
With respect to claim 19, note that the printing units 30, 40 of Stein can be considered a double printing unit or a single printing unit, as broadly recited.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-8 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein et al. US 5,699,735) in view of Schwab et al. (US 2022/0126567 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Stein et al. teaches a method for operating a web-fed printing press (Figs. 2-4) for producing printed products 1, the method comprising:
providing a web-fed printing press (Figs. 2-4) having a reel stand 13 and a plurality of printing units 30, 40;
carrying out a flying web change from a first web 1, 11 to a second web 1, 12 with a production of a splice (see column 5, lines 66-67, and column 6, lines 10-21 and 61-63 and Figures 2-4, 9a-9b);
making settings on the plurality of printing units 30, 40 in coordination with a passage of a splice through the web-fed printing press (note that an automatic changeover from one printing production to another as described in column 1, line 42-column 2, line 6, column 4, lines 50-53, and column 6, lines 50-56 involves changing from one web product to another via a splicing operation and thus involves making settings on the printing units “in coordination with passage of a splice” as broadly recited);
providing and configuring each of at least two of the plurality of printing units 30, 40 of the web-fed printing press as a respective double printing unit for printing and operating the double printing units for production of printed products 1, each double printing unit including a first partial printing unit 10 and a second partial printing unit 10; and
activating or deactivating a respective first partial printing unit or second partial printing unit in coordination with the passage of the splice through the web-fed printing press, or
making a switchover from a first partial printing unit to a second partial printing unit of the respective double printing unit, or vice versa. See, in particular, Figures 2-4 which show several configurations of double printing arrangements, the production change process of Figure 12, and column 2, lines 7-64 and column 4, lines 50-67, column 6, lines 66-67, column 7, lines 31-32, and column 8, lines 3-4.
Note while Stein et al. teaches the provision of printing units that can be activated and deactivated (i.e., making a switchover) dependent upon during a production changeover and what printing units are desired to be in use for each production (see column 2, lines 7-64), Stein et al. is silent with respect to whether the double printing units are configured for flexographic printing in particular. However, Schwab et al. teaches a method of operating a web-fed printing press including providing and configuring at least two of a plurality of printing units 10 as a respective double printing unit 11 for flexographic printing and operating the double printing units for production of printed products, each double printing unit including a first partial printing unit (i.e., left-hand unit 11 in Figures 2a-2f) and a second partial printing unit (i.e., right-hand unit 11 in Figures 2a-2f). Furthermore, Schwab et al. teach the provision of each of the partial printing units of the double printing unit capable of being activated (i.e., performing a switchover) in an alternating fashion to allow for the deactivated printing unit to undergo maintenance or set-up operations during a continuous printing operation, which allows for fast and easy job changes. See, in particular, paragraphs [0007], [0020]-[0022], [0047]-[0050], and [0073]-[0074] and Figures 1-2f and 8-9. In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the printing units of Stein et al. to include the flexographic double printing unit that can be activated in an alternating fashion as taught by Schwab et al. to allow for a fast and efficient changeover from one print job to the next that can include both flying web changes and flying plate changes during a continuous print operation.
With respect to claims 2-3 and 5, note Stein et al. the concept of engaging the alternating printing units and adapting various parameters such as speed (column 7, lines 23-24, column 8, lines 12-13), print cylinder pressure or advance (column 7, lines 8-16 and 31-32, column 8, lines 3-4), pre-register (column 6, lines 50-56) to the second web at the time of switchover.
With respect to claims 4 and 6, note that Stein et al. teaches controlling various parameters of the printing press during switchover of print productions from the first web to the second web in column 7, line 4-column 8, line 54. While Stein et al. does not specifically teach a flexographic printing arrangement including anilox rollers and/or dryers, note that Schwab et al. teach that flexographic double printing unit arrangements including anilox rollers and dryers are well known in the art. See, in particular, the ink application device 21 (see Figs. 2s-2f, paragraph [0082]) and the dryer 19, 19a (see Figs. 2a-2f, 9 and paragraph [0091]) of Schwab et al. In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the additional parameters of flexographic unit (such as anilox roll pressure or advance or dryer power) during switchover and adapted to the second web to allow for fully automated changeover from one printing production to another printing production.
With respect to claim 7, note both Stein et al. and Schwab et al. render obvious carrying out a print job change (i.e., a plate change and/or web change) at a time of switchover. See, in particular, column 1, lines 27-41 of Stein et al. and paragraphs [0047]-[0050] of Schwab et al.
With respect to claim 8, note the teachings of Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. render obvious successively disengaging or engaging: flexographic plate cylinders of the first partial printing units, or conversely, correspondingly flexographic plate cylinders of the second partial printing unit, in coordination with the passage of the splice through the web-fed printing press.
With respect to claims 11-12, Stein et al. teaches providing at least one substantially different parameter of the first web and the second web, such as web width as described in column 1, lines 31-33, column 1, line 64-column 2, line 6 and column 6, lines 39-42 and 61-63.
With respect to claims 13-14, Stein et al. teaches loading the web parameter from a database (i.e., data supply 202) or from a memory on the web or on a web reel, as described in column 7, lines 8-16 and shown in Figure 12.
With respect to claim 15, note Stein et al. teaches that during the passage of the splice through the web-fed printing press (i.e., the web changeover operation): setting at least one first partial printing unit for a first print job and using the at least one first partial printing unit to contribute to the first print job on the first web, and setting at least one second partial printing unit for a second print job and using the at least one second partial printing unit to contribute to the second print job on the second web, as described in column 7, lines 31-32 and column 8, lines 3-4.
With respect to claim 16, to the extent the claim language is clear in meaning and scope, note Stein et al. teaches the provision of a web 1 having different widths and moving a component 190 between different positions to compensate for fan out of the web, as shown in Figures 11a-11b and described in column 8, lines 16-49.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein et al. (US 5,699,735) as modified by Schwab et al. (US 2022/0126567 A1) as applied to claims 1-8 and 11-16 above, and further in view of Seyfried (US 2004/0231542 A1).
With respect to claim 9, Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. teaches a method of operating a web-fed press as recited with the possible exception of disengaging the flexographic plate cylinders of the first partial printing units, or in a reverse case correspondingly the flexographic plate cylinders of the second partial printing units, directly before the splice or directly after the splice. However, Seyfried teaches a method of operating a web-fed press including making settings on the plurality of printing units in coordination with a passage of the splice through the web-fed printing press by controlling the timing of the settings/corrections in the press based upon the location of the splice (see paragraphs [0033], [0040], [0046]). Additional attention is invited to Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0021]-[0051] of Seyfried. In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. to time the disengagement of the cylinders in either the first or second partial printing unit to occur either directly before the splice or directly after the splice so that the switchover occurs in a manner to minimize the potential occurrence of web breaks and to reduce the amount of waste created during a printing production changeover.
Claims 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein et al. (US 5,699,735) as modified by Schwab et al. (US 2022/0126567 A1) as applied to claims 1-8 and 11-16 above, and further in view of MacArthur (US 2,974,587).
With respect to claim 10, Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. teaches a method of operating a web-fed printing press as recited, with the possible exception of including a register sensor at each printing unit and changing respective measuring positions of the sensors in accordance with passage of the splice through the web-fed printing press. MacArthur teaches it is well known in the art to have a method of operating a web-fed printing press (Fig. 1) including a sensor 47, 48 associated with each printing unit 10, 11 and changing respective measuring positions of the register sensors in accordance with the passage of the splice 28 through the web-fed printing press. See, in particular, Figure 1 and column 3, lines 43-54 and 66-70 which describe the movement of the web thickness sensor in accordance with the passage of the splice through the press. In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. with a web thickness sensor that changes its measuring position in correspondence with the passage of the splice to allow for better controlled operation of the printing cylinder positioning during the process.
With respect to claim 17, again to the extent that this claim is a proper dependent claim, note that Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. teach a method of operating a web-fed press as recited with the possible exception of the printing units being gravure printing units. However, MacArthur teaches it is well known in the art to provide a web-fed gravure press that makes settings on the printing units in coordination with passage of the splice, as exemplified by column 1, lines 15-44. In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of operating a web-fed press as taught by Stein et al. as modified by Schwab et al. to use printing units for gravure printing with gravure cylinders instead of the printing units for flexographic printing, as it would simply require the obvious substitution of one type of web-offset printing arrangement for another to allow for efficient and fully automated printing of the web(s) by gravure printing arrangements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Horn et al. (US 6,983,689 B2) teaches a web fed printing press having similarities to the claimed subject matter that are readily apparent.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESLIE J THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2161. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 8:30-5:00 pm.
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, Stephen D Meier can be reached at 571-272-7149. 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.
/Leslie J Thompson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
