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 3-8 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 claims contain 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.
Claim 3 states the stop (33) physically interacts with the gripper (22) and/or first actuator (30) to arrest horizontal travel. The disclosure is limited to functional statements and schematic figures, without identifying the particular mechanical interface that performs the claimed/disclosed functions.
Similarly, claims 4-8 are rejected due to same reasoning as claim 3.
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 7-8, 11 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.
Claims 7 and 8 recite “a retraction” and “an extension”, it is unclear what elements are retracting or extending.
Claim 11 states “said frame and/or said housing of the device” lacks antecedent basis. It should be, for example, said at least one of the frames or the housing.
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)(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 1-9 and 11, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Ekshinge et al. (US 11358843).
Regarding claim 1:
Ekshinge et al. teaches a device for lifting and moving a stack of flat products lying on top of one another, the device comprising:
a horizontally movable gripper (12) configured for reaching under the stack;
a first actuator (44) configured for selectively positioning said gripper in a first horizontal position or in a second horizontal position;
and a second actuator (44) configured for establishing an additional horizontal position for said gripper.
Regarding claim 2:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein said second actuator is configured to establish the additional horizontal position by performing a shifting movement.
Regarding claim 3:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 1, which comprises a movable stop (14) for said gripper, and wherein said second actuator is configured to shift said movable stop for said gripper.
Regarding claim 4:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 3, wherein said movable stop is mounted for rotation. Movable stop rotates due to being coupled to a rotary cylinder (48) that rotates the retractable attachment (22).
Regarding claim 5:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 3, wherein said second actuator is configured to selectively position said movable stop in a passive position (Fig. 8) or in at least one active position (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 6:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 3, which comprises a linkage (40) coupling said movable stop to said second actuator.
Regarding claim 7:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 3, wherein, during a retraction, said first actuator stops at said movable stop in an active position thereof.
Regarding claim 8:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 7, wherein, during an extension, said first actuator moves said movable stop out of the active position.
Regarding claim 9:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein said second actuator is a cylinder device selected from the group consisting of a pneumatic cylinder, a hydraulic cylinder, and an electric cylinder (col 3, lines 54-55).
Regarding claim 11:
Ekshinge et al. teaches the device according to claim 1, further comprising at least one of a frame or a housing (20), and wherein said gripper is arranged for movement relative to said frame and/or said housing of the device.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ekshinge et al. (US 11358843) in view Matti (US 20130177374).
Regarding claim 10:
Ekshinge et al. disclose the device according to claim 1.
Ekshinge et al. don’t disclose the device according to claim 1 further comprising at least one additional actuator configured for establishing another additional horizontal position for said gripper.
On the other hand, Matti teaches the device according to claim 1 further comprising at least one additional actuator (25) configured for establishing another additional horizontal position for said gripper.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ekshinge et al. in view of Matti to include an additional actuator for establishing another additional horizontal position. Doing so would allow the device to handle various configurations and sizes for flat products to be handled and transported.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Ackermann et al. (US 12139351) and Tomasetta et al. (US 10968051) disclose other configurations for the device for lifting and moving a stack of products.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIA AHADI whose telephone number is (571)270-3145. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-430pm.
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.
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/ELIA AHADI/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights