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 .
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s filing on 03/21/2025.
Applicant’s cancelation of claims 1-18 is acknowledged and require no further examining. Claims 19-33 are pending and examined below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 19-33 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 19 lines 5-6, the phrase “groups of products comprising at least one product” renders claim 19 vague and indefinite because it is unclear how a group consist one item. The term “group” is understood to be two or more elements forming a complete unit. It is unclear how one product can form a group of products. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “groups of products comprising at least two product”.
Regarding claim 19 line 17, the phrase “can be induced” also renders claim 19 vague and indefinite because the feature is not definitively claimed. The term “can be” implies the material may or may not induce. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “is induced”.
Regarding claim 19 line 25, the phrase “can be induced” also renders claim 19 vague and indefinite because the feature is not definitively claimed. The term “can be” implies the material may or may not induce. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “is induced”.
Regarding claim 32 line 2, the phrase “can be induced” also renders claim 32 vague and indefinite because the feature is not definitively claimed. The term “can be” implies the material may or may not induce. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “is induced”.
Claims 20-31 and 33 are dependent of claim 19 and include all the same limitations.
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.
Claims 19-21, 25-26, and 28-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Gentili et al. (6,067,780) in view of references Poli et al. (2005/0229546) and Spatafora et al. (6,903,315).
Regarding claim 19, Gentili et al. disclose a packaging machine (1) comprising:
a product feeding station (50) for grouping and feeding, one by one in succession, groups of products comprising at least two product (3);
a wrapping station (6, 7) for wrapping sheets (4) around the group of products;
a sealing station (8) for sealing the sheets (4) wrapped around the group of products,
wherein the sealing station (8) is downstream of the wrapping station (6, 7),
wherein the sealing station (8) comprises a channel (Figure 11a) for moving forward the group of products,
wherein a pair of sealing members (see figure 11a below) is provided opposite each other on two sides of said channel (see figure 11a below),
wherein each sealing member (see figure 11a below) comprising at least one flexible element (46) driven between at least two return members (46p).
(Figure 3, 11a and Column 3 lines 59-67, Column 4 lines 1-5, 27-32, Column 6 lines 34-37, Column 8 lines 31-49)
[AltContent: textbox (Channel)][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Sealing Member)][AltContent: textbox (Gentili et al.)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
359
433
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Gentili et al. do not disclose wrapping paper wrapping sheet around the products, and do not disclose an electromagnetic induction device.
Poli et al. disclose packaging machine (1) configured to wrap a sheet (9) around a group of products (2), wherein the sheet is made of heat-sealable material or made of paper. (Page 1 paragraph 20, Page 2 paragraph 21, Page 3 paragraph 43)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have substituted the sheet of Gentili et al. with the paper sheet at taught by Poli et al., since page 3 paragraph 43 of Poli et al. states paper sheet would work equally well at wrapping the group of products, thereby rendering the substitution to have predictable results.
Spatafora et al. disclose sealing station comprising: a flexible element (5); at least two return members (7); and electromagnetic induction device (6) configured to induce eddy currents in ferromagnetic material in the flexible element (5). (Figure 1 and Column 1 lines 66-67 through Column 2 lines 11, Column 2 lines 61-67)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the sealing member of Gentili et al. by incorporating the flexible element and electromagnetic induction device as taught by Spatafora et al., since column 1 lines 40-44 of Spatafora et al. states such modification would allow for accurate temperature measurement at low cost.
Since Gentili et al. disclose a pair of sealing members, Gentili et al. in view of Spatafora et al. is interpreted to disclose a pair of sealing members, wherein each sealing member comprises a flexible element and electromagnetic induction device.
Regarding claim 20, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose each said electromagnetic induction device (Spatafora et al. – 6) comprises an induction coil (Spatafora et al. – 11, 13) arranged facing frontally the sealing surface or arranged at an opposite side of the sealing member with respect to the sealing surface. (Spatafora et al. – Figure 1 and Column 2 lines 12-21)
Regarding claim 21, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the electromagnetic induction device (Spatafora et al. – 6) is configured to heat the sealing surface up to a temperature comprising between 100ºC and 400ºC. (Spatafora et al. – Column 2 lines 61-67)
Since Spatafora et al. teaches a temperature range from 15º to 250º, Spatafora et al. is interpreted to disclose a sealing surface temperature comprised between 100ºC and 400ºC.
Regarding claim 25, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the at least one return member (Gentili et al. – 46p) is motorized. (Gentili et al. – Column 8 lines 38-42)
Regarding claim 26, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the channel (see figure 11a above) comprises a conveyor (Gentili et al. – 9) for moving forward the groups of products along the sealing station (Gentili et al. – 8) according to moving forward direction. (Gentili et al. – Column 4 lines 20-25
Regarding claim 28, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the paper wrapping sheet comprises a sealant. (Poli et al. – Page 3 paragraph 43)
Regarding claim 29, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the sealant is heat activated adhesive. (Poli et al. – Page 3 paragraph 43)
Regarding claim 30, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the feeding station (Gentili et al. – 50) comprises an elevator (Gentili et al. – 5) for lifting a group of products toward the wrapping station (Gentili et al. – 6, 7), wherein the groups of products touch the wrapping sheet (Gentili et al. – 4) are arranged parallel to a plane transverse with respect to the direction of lifting of the group of products, and wherein the wrapping sheet forms a partial wrapping shaped like an overturned U. (Gentili et al. – Figure 5b and Column 8 lines 50-59)
Regarding claim 31, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the wrapping station (Gentili et al. – 6, 7) comprises:
a bottom folding device (11, 12) configured to form a tube open at two opposite sides of the group of products,
wherein the open tube has flaps of wrapping sheet to be folded projecting from each of the two sides of the group of products;
a front side folding device (13, 14) configured to form a front fold;
a back side folding device (13, 14) configured to form a back fold;
a top side folding device (17) configured to form a top fold; and
a bottom side folding device (16) configured to form a bottom fold.
(Figure 5c, 5d, 6a and Column 4 lines 27-34, Column 6 lines 38-45)
Regarding claim 32, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the material in which eddy currents is induced is ferromagnetic or paramagnetic material. (Spatafora et al. – Column 2 lines 61-67)
Claims 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Gentili et al. (6,067,780) in view of references Poli et al. (2005/0229546) and Spatafora et al. (6,903,315) as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of reference Forestelli et al. (10,816,481).
Regarding claim 22, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose an adjustment device for adjusting the sealing members.
Forestelli et al. disclose a channel (51) comprising: a pair of flexible elements (51a, 51b) situated on opposite sides of the channel (51); and an adjustment device (60), wherein the adjustment device (60) is configured to adjust a mutual distance between flexible elements (51a, 51b) and adjust the pressure applied by the flexible elements (51a, 51b). (Figure 5 and Column 7 lines 48-56)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the sealing station of Gentili et al. by incorporating the adjustment device as taught by Forestelli et al., since column 7 lines 49-51 of Forestelli et al. states such a modification would ensure the desired width and compression is maintained.
Regarding claim 23, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al., Spatafora et al., and Forestelli et al. disclose adjustment members (Forestelli et al. – 60) for adjusting the sealing pressure. (Forestelli et al. – Column 7 lines 48-56)
Claims 24 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Gentili et al. (6,067,780) in view of references Poli et al. (2005/0229546) and Spatafora et al. (6,903,315) as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of reference Raymond et al. (5,048,260).
Regarding claim 24, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose the current having a frequency between 1 kHz and 500 kHz.
Raymond et al. disclose an electromagnetic induction device (20) configured to induce eddy currents at a frequency between 200 kHz and 450 kHz. (Column 4 lines 48-52, 56-58)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the electromagnetic induction device of Gentili et al. by incorporating the frequency as taught by Raymond et al., since column 8 lines 1-3 of Raymond et al. states such a modification would provide necessary eddy current to heat the material.
Regarding claim 33, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose the tap contains an aluminum core
Raymond et al. disclose an electromagnetic induction device (20) configured to induce eddy currents to an aluminum foil, wherein the aluminum foil has a thickness of 0.0003 in (7.6 µm). (Column 7 lines 61-68)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the flexible elements of Gentili et al. by incorporating the aluminum foil as taught by Raymond et al., since column 8 lines 1-3 of Raymond et al. states such a modification would provide sufficient heat necessary to melt a heat activated adhesive.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Gentili et al. (6,067,780) in view of references Poli et al. (2005/0229546) and Spatafora et al. (6,903,315) as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of reference Gamberini (6,510,939,).
Regarding claim 27, Gentili et al. modified by Poli et al. and Spatafora et al. disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose the sealing members move the group of products faster than the exit speed from the wrapping station.
Gamberini discloses a machine comprising: a wrapping station (1); and a sealing station (2), wherein the speed of the package at the exit (ZT) of the wrapping station (1) is slower than the speed of the package at the entrance (ZI) of the sealing station (2). (Figure 2 and Column 3 lines 20-29)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Gentili et al. by incorporating the acceleration of the product as taught by Gamberini, since column 1 lines 60-64 of Gamberini states such a modification would prevent the pushers from engaging the product as the pushers move upwards.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B FRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0396. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thur 7am-4pm.
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.
/PATRICK B FRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 July 21, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights