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 April 13, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has argued that the 35 USC 102(a)(1) of anticipation by ARRANT et al. is invalid since the connecting component 38 of ARRANT et al. does not hold the outer carrier housing 106 in a manner that allows adjustment of the magnetic clutch. Examiner would like to first note that the rejection identifies element 106 of ARRANT et al. as the claimed adjustment component; wherein the claim limitations require the connecting component be configured to adjustably hold the adjustment component on the holding component to adjust the first magnetic ring relative to the second magnetic ring.
As referenced in the rejection, connecting component 38 supports a first magnetic ring (see Diagram I below); wherein column 4 line 55- column 5 line 8 and lines 36-50 of ARRANT et al. discloses the movement/adjustment of the connecting component 38 and first magnetic ring 114 along the longitudinal axis 14 (see Diagram I below). Likewise, column 6 lines 58-64 of ARRANT et al further discloses the adjusting component 106 is held on/against the holding component 142 as the connecting component 38 translates the first magnetic ring 114 relative to the second magnetic ring, thereby meeting the functional limitation of “adjusting the first magnetic ring relative to the second magnetic ring” as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
651
657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s second argument is drawn to the elastic pretension of the connecting component of ARRANT et al. In particular, the connecting component, as claimed, should be eleastically pretensioned in a rotationally fixed manner. Examiner has identified the connecting component of ARRANT et al. as the lower housing 38. The claim requires the connecting component 38 of ARRANT et al. to be elastically pretensioned into a holding position that connects the adjusting component 106 to the holding component 42 in a rotationally fixed manner. Column 5 lines 36-41 of ARRANT et al. states the holding component 42 is eleastically pretensioned away from the connecting component 38 such that the elastic pretension of spring 70 must be overcome for the connecting component 38 to move telescopically relative to the holding component 42. While in this elastically pretensioned positioned, connecting component 38 secures the adjusting component 106 in a rotationally fixed manner relative to the holding component per longitudinally extending splines as referenced by Applicant on page 10 of the pending remarks and as cited in the rejection below (column 4 lines 55-61).
Applicants final argument, per page 11 of the pending remarks, is drawn to the inability of the locking component 74 of ARRANT et al. to “lock” the connecting component 38 in a holding position. In particular, claim 1 requires “the locking component blocks the connecting component in the holding position”, which is identified in the immediate response above. According to column 5 lines 36-50 of ARRANT et al., the connecting component (lower housing) 38 is retained in a given elastically pretensioned position by the locking component 74 during operation of the closure head. It is only upon unlocking (rotation) of the locking component that the connecting component facilitates movement (adjustment) of the adjustment component 106 relative to the holding component 42.
In light of the responses of above, Examiner has maintained the rejection of the pending claims as detailed below.
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, 2, 6, 7, 9-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ARRANT et al. (US 6,941,724).
In reference to claims 1 and 2, ARRANT et al. discloses a closure head comprising: a magnetic coupling including a first magnetic ring 114 that interacts magnetically with a second magnetic ring 190; an adjusting component 106 that carries the first magnetic ring 114; a connecting component 38 adjustably holding the adjusting component 106 to facilitate adjustment of the first magnetic ring 114 relative to the second magnetic ring 190, the connecting component 38 elastically pretensioned (spring loaded) 70 to a holding position in which the connecting component 38 connects the adjusting component 106 to a holding component 42 in a rotationally fixed manner (column 4 line 55- column 5 line 8); and a locking component 74 is elastically pretensioned 70 to a locked position in which the locking component 74 blocks the connecting component 38 in the holding position (column 5 lines 51-62).
Regarding claim 6, figure 1 of ARRANT et al. further discloses a stop element 78 that limits the movability of the locking component 74.
With respect to claim 7 figure 1 of ARRANT et al. further discloses the stop element 78 having a connection mechanism 86 engaging an elongated hole 90 of the locking component 74.
In reference to claim 9, column 7 lines 26-28 of ARRANT et al. discloses magnets 194 of the second magnetic ring 190 are encapsulated.
Regarding claim 10, column 8 lines 4-25 of ARRANT et al. discloses the first magnetic ring 114 as adjustable by the adjusting device 106 to increase or decrease an overlap with the second magnetic ring 190 as claimed.
With respect to claim 11, figure 1 of ARRANT et al. discloses the first magnetic ring 114 as an outer magnetic ring relative to the second magnetic ring 190.
In reference to claim 12, column 4 lines 55-62 of ARRANT et al. discloses the connecting component 38 is mounted to the to the adjusting component 106 and axially movable per axially extending splines.
Regarding claim 13, column 5 lines 36-47 of ARRANT et al. discloses the locking component 74 as movable parallel to a central axis 14 of the closure head (figure 1).
With respect to claim 15, column 5 lines 55-62 and column 6 lines 1-3 of ARRANT et al. the adjusting component 106 is helically (threads-figure 1) rotable about a center 14 of the holding component 42 when the locking component 74 is an unlocked position.
In reference to claims 16 and 17, ARRANT et al. discloses a closure head 10 comprising: a magnetic coupling including a first magnetic ring 114 that interacts magnetically with a second magnetic ring 190; an adjusting component 38 that carries the first magnetic ring 114; a connecting component 38 adjustably holding the adjusting component 106 to facilitate adjustment of the first magnetic ring 114 relative to the second magnetic ring 190, the connecting component 38 elastically pretensioned (spring loaded) 70 to a holding position in which the connecting component 38 connects the adjusting component 106 to a holding component 42 in a rotationally fixed manner (column 5 lines 36-43); and a locking component 74 is elastically pretensioned 70 to a locked position in which the locking component 74 blocks the connecting component 38 in the holding position (column 5 lines 51-62). ARRANT et al. further discloses the outer peripheral surface of the holding component 42 having a helical groove track (threads).
Regarding claim 18, figure 1 of ARRANT et al. further discloses the locking component 74, the adjusting component 106 and the holding component arranged concentrically about a longitudinal axis 14.
With respect to claim 19, figure 1 of ARRANT et al. further discloses a drive shaft 26 connected (14) to the holding component 42.
In reference to claim 20, ARRANTE et al. further discloses a process of using the closure head of claim 1 comprising: manually (78) moving the locking component 74 against the elastic pretension of the spring 70 from a locked position (fixed axially) to an unlocked position (axial movement along 14) thereby rotating the adjusting component 106 and the first magnetic ring 114 relative to the second magnetic ring 190 (column 5 lines 44-50); wherein the connecting component 38 rotates to a released position (closure released onto container) against the elastic pretension (70) and then moves back (slips) to a holding position under the elastic pretension (column 8 line 65 – column 9 line 21)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 8 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
June 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights