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 action is in response to the documents received on March 10, 2025.
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.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SHANKLIN et al. (US 4,219,988).
In reference to claim 1, SHANKLIN et al. discloses a width trim module comprising: a conveyor 51 having a conveyor run (figure 1) upon which a package (P1-P8) is advanced; a gripper assembly 50 comprising gripping members 56, 58 configured to selectively engage (figure 7) an upper layer and a lower layer of unsealed packaging material, the gripping members 56, 58 movable downward relative to the conveyor run (column 8 lines 60-66); and a sealing assembly 521 positioned between (figure 7) the conveyor 20 and the gripper assembly 50 to seal the upper layer and lower layer of the packaging material to form a longitudinal seal and cut away a portion of the upper layer and the lower layer extending along the longitudinal seal (figure 3; column 4 lines 31-34).
Regarding claim 5, SHANKLIN et al. further discloses the gripping members 56, 58 mounted to an elevator 57 that vertically adjusts (column 8 lines 63-66) the gripping members 56, 58 relative to the conveyor run of conveyor 51.
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 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHANKLIN et al. (US 4,219,988) in view of BENNETT et al. (US 5,015,325).
In reference to claims 2-4, SHANKLIN et al. discloses a gripper assembly including a jaw grip member 58 that is mounted to a base for vertical movement towards the conveyor and into engagement with the packaging material, but does not pivot/rotate as claimed. BENNETT et al. teaches a gripper assembly 30 including a jaw grip member that is pivotably mounted to a base 12 by a piston shaft of a cylinder drive unit 40 for rotable movement towards a conveyor 28. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have provided the width trim module of SHANKLIN et al. with the gripper assembly mounted for vertical movement or the gripper assembly of BENNETT et al. mounted for pivotable movement since SHANKLIN et al. and BENNETT et al. acknowledge their comparable use in the packaging art and the selection of any of these known equivalents to position a gripping assembly into engagement with a packaging material would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHANKLIN et al. (US 4,219,988) in view of LIMOUSIN (US 8,272,196).
Regarding claims 6 and 8, SHANKLIN et al. discloses the sealing assembly to include an anvil 58’ member and a wire sealing member 521, each extending parallel to the conveyor run, wherein the wire sealing member 521 is selectively heated (column 9 lines 1-4). LIMOUSIN teaches a sealing assembly (figure 4) including an anvil member 84b and a heated blade sealing member 86 that extends parallel to a conveyor 22 run. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to replace the heated wire of SHANKLIN et al. with a heated blade, since column 1 lines 19-25 of LIMOUSIN states a heated blade and a heated wire are art recognized equivalents for sealing package film along a parallel direction of travel.
With respect to claim 7, SHANLIN et al. discloses the heated wire (sealing) member to vertically adjust relative to the conveyor run (column 8 lines 63-66), but does not disclose the anvil 58’ opposing the heated wire (sealing) member to also vertically adjust relative to the conveyor run. Thus, SHANLIN et al. discloses a heated blade sealing member that adjust vertically relative to the conveyor run. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of fling the invention to have further modified the sealing of SHANLIN et al. to have a vertically adjustable anvil since column 4 lines 42-52 of LIMOUSIN states vertical adjustment of both an upper jaw (supporting heated sealing member) and a lower jaw (supporting the anvil) relative to the conveyor run is well known in the packaging art for the purpose of allowing spacing between the components to allow passage of the packaging material for sealing.
Claims 9, 10, 12-14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIMOUSIN (US 6,817,163) in view of SHANKLIN et al. (US 4,219,988).
In reference to claims 9, 10, 12 and 13, LIMOUSIN discloses a packaging machine comprising; an induction conveyor (see Diagram I below) configured to advance a package P toward a height sizing conveyor 12; the height sizing conveyor 12 configured to advance the package P to an enveloping assembly (figure 3) including an adjustable 60 first bracket 36a over a second bracket 36b; a first sealing assembly 20 positioned between the height sizing conveyor 12 and a package draw conveyor 22, the first sealing assembly 20 configured to cut the packaging material between a preceding package and a package (see Diagram I below) at the height sizing conveyor (12); a width trim module 38 configured to pull (column 3 lines 57-58; column 4 lines 51-56) a portion 32 of the packaging material laterally (figure 2) relative to the draw conveyor 22; and a second sealing assembly 18 positioned between the conveyor run of the draw conveyor 22 at the width trim module 38, the second sealing assembly 18 configured to form a longitudinal seal along the side of the packaging material opposite (figure 2) that the portion of the packaging material 32 is pulled relative to the conveyor run. LIMOUSIN does not disclose a package draw member nor the width trim module including gripping members as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
454
1154
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Diagram I
SHANKLIN et al. teaches a packaging machine comprising: a height sizing conveyor 20 having a conveyor run that advances a package P1-P8 toward an enveloping assembly 41; a package draw member 23 that selectively engages the package at the height sizing conveyor 20 to advance the package onto the a draw conveyor 51; and a width trim module 50 comprising belt gripping members 56A, 56B configured to selectively engage (figure 7) an upper layer and a lower layer of unsealed packaging material delivered from the enveloping assembly, the gripping members 56A, 56B rotable about the axis of shafts driven by a rotary drive unit (figures 6 & 7) to move the gripping members 56A, 56B downward relative to the conveyor run (column 8 lines 60-66) and laterally to pull the package and packaging material along the conveyor run.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the packaging machine of LIMOUSIN to include draw members since column 5 lines 18-22 of SHANKLIN et al. states such a modification ensures advancement of the packages along the conveyor run at a predetermined rate and spacing. Furthermore column 1 line 64- column 2 line 3 of LIMOUSIN references the system of SHANKLIN et al..
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have further modified the packaging machine by providing gripping members in the width trim module since column 9 line 45-58 of SHANKLIN et al. suggests such a modification causes the package material to be tightly pulled around the product for the purpose of effectively sealing the package material about the package. Furthermore column 1 line 64- column 2 line 3 of LIMOUSIN references the system of SHANKLIN et al..
Regarding claim 14, the width trim module of LIMOUSIN as modified in view of SHANKLIN et al. discloses belt gripping members that are mounted to a base to move vertically (SHANKLIN et al. column 8 lines 63-66).
With respect to claims 18-19, LIMOUSIN teaches a packaing method comprising: determining a length and width dimension of a product (column 5 lines 59-67); advancing (figure 1) the product to an enveloping assembly 16 to advance an upper layer of packaging material 26 over the product and a lower layer of the packaging material 26 under the package, creating a center fold (column 3 lines 51-55) in the packaging material 26 (figure 2); advancing the package to a width trim module to cut and seal a leading edge 32 of the packaging material 26 to form a sealed leading edge 34; engaging and advancing the sealed package to a draw conveyor (see Diagram I above); cutting and sealing 20 a trailing edge of the packaging material. LIMOUSIN does not disclose advancing the product to width trim module including gripping members as claimed.
SHANKLIN et al. teaches a packaging method comprising: advancing a package P1-P8 toward an enveloping assembly 41; advancing the package onto a draw conveyor 51; and advancing the package to a width trim module 50 comprising belt gripping members 56A, 56B configured to selectively engage (figure 7) an upper layer and a lower layer of unsealed packaging material delivered from the enveloping assembly; moving the gripping members 56A, 56B rotable about the axis of shafts driven by a rotary drive unit (figures 6 & 7) to move the gripping members 56A, 56B downward relative to the conveyor run (column 8 lines 60-66) and laterally to pull the package and packaging material along the conveyor run. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have further modified the packaging machine by providing gripping members in the width trim module since column 9 line 45-58 of SHANKLIN et al. suggests such a modification causes the package material to be tightly pulled around the product for the purpose of effectively sealing the package material about the package. Furthermore column 1 line 64- column 2 line 3 of LIMOUSIN references the system of SHANKLIN et al..
In reference to claim 20, the method of LIMOUSIN in view of SHANKLIN et al. further discloses moving the gripping members vertically downward via n elevator (SHANKLIN et al. column 8 lines 60-66).
Claim 11, 15-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIMOUSIN (US 6,817,163) in view of SHANKLIN et al. (US 4,219,988), and further in view of BENNETT et al. (US 5,015,325).
Regarding claim 11, the width trim module of LIMOUSIN as modified in view of SHANKLIN et al. discloses belt gripping members that are mounted to a base to move vertically (SHANKLIN et al. column 8 lines 63-66), not pivotably.
BENNETT et al. teaches a gripper assembly 30 including a jaw grip member that is pivotably mounted to a base 12 by a piston shaft of a cylinder drive unit 40 for rotable movement towards a conveyor 28. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have provided the width trim module of LIMOUSIN in view of SHANKLIN et al. with the gripper assembly mounted for vertical movement or the gripper assembly of BENNETT et al. mounted for pivotable movement since SHANKLIN et al. and BENNETT et al. acknowledge their comparable use in the packaging art and the selection of any of these known equivalents to position a gripping assembly into engagement with a packaging material would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claims 15-17, LIMOUSIN discloses a second sealing assembly 18, but does not illustrate the details of the second sealing assembly. Column 1 line 64- column 2 line 3 of LIMOUSIN references the system of SHANKLIN et al., wherein SHANKLIN et al. teaches a vertically adjustable (column 8 lines 63-66) sealing assembly (figure 7) comprising an anvil 58’ and a heated sealing member 521 extending parallel to the conveyor run. Neither LIMOUSIN nor SHANKLIN eta l. disclose a blade as claimed.
BENNETT et al. teaches a sealing assembly (figure 2) comprising an anvil 60 opposing a blade1 56, and a heated sealing member 78 adjacent to the blade 56, wherein the blade 56 and the heated sealing member 78 are pivotable mounted to rotate to various vertical positions, while the anvil 60 is mounted to a piston 108 for vertical movement. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the second sealing assembly of LIMOUSIN in view of SHANKLIN et al. to include both a blade and adjacent heated sealing member since column 7 lines 3-30 of BENNETT et al. states such a modification allows the package to be both sealed and perforated for the purpose of allowing air captured by the packaging material to escape the sealed package.
In reference to claim 21, LIMOUSIN teaches a packaging method comprising multiple steps of sealing and cutting a packaging material but does not disclose the specific structure provide to implement the sealing and cutting steps. Column 1 line 64- column 2 line 3 of LIMOUSIN references the system of SHANKLIN et al., wherein SHANKLIN et al. teaches vertically adjusting (column 8 lines 63-66) a sealing assembly (figure 7) comprising an anvil 58’ and a heated sealing member 521 extending parallel to the conveyor run. Neither LIMOUSIN nor SHANKLIN et al. disclose providing a blade as claimed.
BENNETT et al. teaches a packaging method comprising: sealing and cutting a packaging material by vertically adjusting an anvil 60 opposing a blade2 56, and a heated sealing member 78 adjacent to the blade 56, wherein the blade 56 and the heated sealing member 78 are pivotable mounted to rotate to various vertical positions against the anvil 60 at a height about half that of the package (figure 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified a cutting and sealing step of LIMOUSIN in view of SHANKLIN et al. to include providing both a blade and adjacent heated sealing member since column 7 lines 3-30 of BENNETT et al. states such a modification allows the package to be both sealed and perforated for the purpose of allowing air captured by the packaging material to escape the sealed package.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the attached PTO-892 for a notice of references cited and recommended for consideration based on their disclosure of limitations related to the claimed invention; in particular, the disclosure of GUZMAN (US 6,962,033).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA R WEEKS whose telephone number is (571)272-4473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-2pm & 5pm-7pm EST.
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.
Other helpful telephone numbers are listed for applicant's benefit:
Allowed Files & Publication (888) 786-0101
Assignment Branch (800) 972-6382
Certificates of Correction (703) 305-8309
Fee Questions (571) 272-6400
Inventor Assistance Center (800) PTO-9199
Petitions/special Programs (571) 272-3282
Information Help line 1-800-786-9199
/GLORIA R WEEKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
December 22, 2025
1 Cutting edge
2 Cutting edge