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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 3/21/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-31 are cancelled.
Claims 32-63 are new and now pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The use of the term “TEFLON”, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
-Paragraph [0081] recites “dispensing device 133” should instead be “dispensing device 33” as this is referring to a first embodiment of the dispensing device.
-Paragraph [0081] also includes different font sizes which should be corrected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because it would appear that a duplicate set of drawings were submitted. 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 Objections
Claims 38-40, 45, 55, 56 and 60 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 38, lines 2-3, “either of the line of sealant is continuous or discontinuous and has a length equal to” should instead be recited “either of the lines of sealant are continuous or discontinuous and have a length equal to”.
-Claim 39, lines 2-3, “either of the line of sealant is continuous or discontinuous and has a length equal to” should instead be recited “either of the lines of sealant are continuous or discontinuous and have a length equal to”.
-Claim 40, line 2, “the line of sealant is spaced” should instead be “the lines of sealant are spaced”.
-Claim 45, line 7, “dispensers a valve” should instead be “dispensers, a valve”
-Claim 55, lines 5-6, “the paper wrapping sheets” should instead recite “paper wrapping sheets”.
-Claim 55, line 8, “a paper wrapping sheet” should instead be “the paper wrapping sheet”.
-Claim 56, line 2, “a sealant” should instead be “the sealant”.
-Claim 60, lines 1-2, “the step of cutting” should instead be “a step of cutting”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 32-63 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.
Regarding Claim 32, lines 4-5 recite “groups of products comprising at least one product”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to how a “group” can comprise “one product” which is presented as an alternative by the limitation “at least one product”.
Regarding Claim 42, the claim recites “a first adjusting means for adjusting” and “a second adjusting means for adjusting”. These limitations appear to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), however, there is no clear link of the claimed “means” to sufficient structure to perform the function within the specification. See the “Claim Interpretation” section below.
Regarding Claim 45, the claim recites “at least two of said at least three dispensers include a plurality of dispensers”. It is unclear as to how one “dispenser” can comprise a “plurality of dispensers”. Further lines 12-13 recite “a third dispensing group of said at least three dispensers”. This renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to whether or not a first and second group of dispensers was intended to be defined and whether or not the “three dispensers” defined earlier in the claim and the “at least two of said at least three dispensers” are intending to refer to groups of dispensers.
Further regarding Claim 45, lines 20-21 recite “the web material” which lacks antecedent basis within the claim and therefore renders the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 46, line 6 recites “the web material” which lacks antecedent basis within the claim and therefore renders the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 54, line 2 recites “device includes at least one air ejection nozzle”, however, Claim 53, in which Claim 54 depends from recites “at least one air ejection nozzle” and therefore it is unclear if the same nozzle is being referred to or not.
Regarding Claim 55, lines 3-4 recite “groups of products comprising at least one product”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to how a “group” can comprise “one product” which is presented as an alternative by the limitation “at least one product”.
Claims 33-41, 43, 44, 47-53, and 56-63 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite as the claims depend from at least one of the claims outlined above.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitations including “a feeding station for feeding”, “a wrapping station for wrapping”, “a sealing device for sealing”, “a wrapping sheet feeding station for feeding” in Claim 32 are being interpreted as NOT invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as the limitations do not recite the generic placeholder “means” and while terms such as “station” and “device” can be viewed as generic placeholders, given the state of the art, “feeding station”, “wrapping station”, “sealing device”, “wrapping sheet feeding station” one of ordinary skill in the art can readily determine the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification without limiting them to the specific structures of the specification.
For similar reasoning, “a cutting unit for cutting” and “an unwinding device for unwinding” as outlined in Claim 34 and “a detection device for detecting” in Claim 43 and the “folding device” limitations in Claim 50 are being interpreted as NOT invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim limitation “a first adjusting means for adjusting” and “a second adjusting means for adjusting” of Claim 42 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
Paragraph 0083 of the specification recites “The support structure 34 may comprise means, not shown, for adjusting the transverse position of the dispensers 33.1, 33.2, 33.3 relative to the feed direction fN of the paper web material N. For example, the L-shaped brackets 39 can slide along a linear guide and be blocked thereon by means of screws or other suitable systems. In a further configuration, also not shown for the sake of simplicity, the L-shaped brackets 39 or in general the dispensers 33.1, 33.2, 33.3 can be adjusted by means of motors in order to simplify the product changeover, i.e., the switching to packages that require different sizes of paper wrapping sheets F. Additionally, the dispensing device 33 can be height-adjustable, either manually or automatically, with respect to the feed path P”. However, while several different examples of structures for adjusting the dispensers appears to be outlined, it is not clear as to what structures the “means” are attempting to encompass. For examination purposes, this limitation will be interpreted as NOT invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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)(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 32-36, 38, 46, 48, 49, 55-58, 60, 61, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135-cited in IDS; note Nordstrom US Patent 5,038,549 is incorporated by reference per Col 7, lines 38-43).
Regarding Claim 32, Nordstrom discloses a packaging machine (10; Figure 1) for wrapping groups of products (30; Figure 3) with a paper wrapping sheet (sheet of 82 formed by cutting shear 22; Col 7, lines 44-48), the machine (10) comprising:
- a feeding station (roll infeed conveyor 120) for feeding, one by one in succession, groups of products (30) comprising at least one product (30; see “input conveyor 20” of Nordstrom USP 5038549 (Col 4, lines 35-40 thereof));
- a wrapping station (station “40” including upstream portion of overhead conveyor 90 where folds are formed in machine 20 shown in Figure 3) for wrapping paper wrapping sheets (82) around the groups of products (30; Col 4, lines 44-52);
- a sealing device (heating plates 201, 206, heat sinks 210, belts 212 and 214; Figure 2) for sealing the paper wrapping sheets (82) around the groups of products (30; Col 7, line 53 through Col 8, line 3);
- a wrapping sheet feeding station (glue application station 50 including roll 60 and portion of 20 having shear 22) for feeding, one by one, the paper wrapping sheets (formed at 22 from paper 82) along a sheet feeding direction (path of 82 as shown) towards the wrapping station (40; Col 7, lines 44-52);
wherein the wrapping sheet feeding station (glue application station 50 including roll 60 and portion of 20 having shear 22) comprises a dispensing device (glue application station 50) comprising at least one dispenser (nozzles 56, 58) for applying sealant to the paper wrapping sheets (of 82; Col 5, lines 56-67).
Regarding Claim 33, Nordstrom discloses the wrapping sheet feeding station (50, 22) is provided upstream of the wrapping station (of 20) along the sheet feeding direction (path of 82 as shown in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 34, Nordstrom discloses the wrapping sheet feeding station (50, 22) further comprises
- a cutting unit (shear 22) for cutting single paper wrapping sheets (of 82) from a web material (82) unwound from a reel (60; Col 7, lines 43-48);
- an unwinding device (formed by roll 60, booster roller 53, dancer roller 51; Figure 12) for unwinding the reel (60) of web material (82; Col 5, lines 10-18).
Regarding Claim 35, Nordstrom discloses the dispensing device (50) is provided upstream of the cutting unit (22) along the sheet feeding direction (of 82 as shown).
Regarding Claim 36, Nordstrom discloses the dispensing device (50) is provided upstream of the cutting unit (22), and the paper wrapping sheet (of 82) is defined by two parallel sides and two sides transverse to the sheet feeding direction towards the wrapping station (of 20; note a wrapping sheet cut from a web will readily comprise a rectangular shape in the manner as claimed), and
wherein the at least one dispenser (“bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) is configured to apply a line of sealant (i.e. 11 as shown in Figure 10; along end seal) to an area (along longitudinal edges) of the web material (82) corresponding to a paper wrapping sheet (of 82) along a direction parallel to one of the two sides parallel to the sheet feeding direction (of 82), and the said at least one dispenser (“end seal glue nozzles 56”) is configured to apply a line of sealant along a direction parallel to each of the two sides transverse to the sheet feeding direction (“end glue seal nozzles 56” provides glue for the end seals which are readily formed near the edges of the wrapper 82 transverse to the feeding direction as shown in Figure 1).
Note: given the configuration of the machine 10, the overhead conveyor “90” clearly extends into the plane of view of Figure 1 and therefore the sides of the wrapper that are draped around the objects and folded under the objects readily form an area of the bottom seal which will be parallel to the feeding direction of 82 of Figure 1. Therefore, the two edges of the sheet transverse to the feeding direction in Figure 1 will readily comprise lines of adhesive extending parallel thereto in order to form the “end seals”.
Regarding Claim 38, Nordstrom discloses either of the line of sealant (11 applied by “end seal glue nozzles 56” or “bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) is continuous or discontinuous and has a length equal to, or shorter than, a length of respective sides of the paper wrapping sheet (82; note in order to apply glue/sealant lines to form end seals and bottom seals, the sealant lines must be a length approximately the length of the side/edge applied thereto or selectively shorter).
Regarding Claim 46, Nordstrom discloses a sealant supply system (52, 54 and pump associated therewith) associated with the dispensing device (50), the sealant supply system (52, 54) comprising a pumping apparatus (“pumped by known means”; Col 5, lines 58-62) for feeding the sealant (11) to said at least one dispenser (56, 58; Col 5, lines 58-62), wherein sealant feed rate is variable depending on feed speed of the web material (82) to which the sealant is to be applied and/or on production speed of the packaging machine (10; see Col 5, lines 64-67).
Regarding Claim 48, Nordstrom discloses the dispensing device (50) is adapted to dispense the sealant (11) in a manner providing a quantity of sealant on each paper wrapping sheet (of 82) comprising between 30% and 1% of the weight of the sheet (note while such weights are not specifically disclosed, the nozzles 56, 58 of the dispensing device 50 are clearly capable of providing such sealant amounts).
.
Regarding Claim 49, Nordstrom discloses the feeding station (120) for feeding groups of products comprises an elevator (shown in Figure 3) for lifting a group of products (30) toward the wrapping station (40 of 20 including 92), the group of products (30) touching the paper wrapping sheet (82) that is arranged parallel to a plane transverse with respect to lifting direction (as shown in Figure 3) of the group of products (30) during upward movement toward the wrapping station (40), the paper wrapping sheet (82) forming, around the group of products, a partial wrapping shaped like an overturned U (see Figure 3 within 92), when the elevator has lifted the group of products up to a level of the wrapping station (40; see elevator 50 of Figure 2 of USP 5,038,549 and Col 6, lines 8-14 of USP 5,038,549 incorporated by reference).
Regarding Claim 55, Nordstrom discloses a method (Figure 1) for packaging a group of products (30; Figure 3) with a paper wrapping sheet (formed from 82), the method comprising steps of:
- feeding one by one, in succession, groups of products (30) including at least one product (30; see “input conveyor 20” of Nordstrom USP 5038549 (Col 4, lines 35-40 thereof)),
- forming and feeding (Col 7, lines 43-52), one by one, the paper wrapping sheets (from 82 at shear 22) along a sheet feeding direction (of 82), toward a wrapping station (station “40” including upstream portion of overhead conveyor 90 where folds are formed in machine 20 shown in Figure 3),
- wrapping a paper wrapping sheet (of 82) of the paper wrapping sheets around a group of products (30; Col 4, lines 44-52);
- sealing the paper wrapping sheet (82 via heating plates 201, 206, heat sinks 210, belts 212 and 214; Figure 2) around the group of products (30; Col 7, line 53 through Col 8, line 3 to form 150),
wherein during the forming and feeding of the paper wrapping sheets (82), a sealant (11; Figure 10 via nozzles 56,58 of Figure 1) is applied to the paper wrapping sheet (82; Col 5, lines 56-67).
Regarding Claim 56, Nordstrom discloses said sealing of the paper wrapping sheet is with a sealant (11) applied by a sealant dispenser (56, 58; Col 5, lines 56-67 which is reheated to seal per Col 7, line 53 through Col 8, line 3 to form 150).
Regarding Claim 57, Nordstrom discloses the paper wrapping sheet is defined by two parallel sides and two transverse sides with respect to the sheet feeding direction (of 82; note a sheet will readily comprise such sides when cut), and
wherein during applying of the sealant to the paper wrapping sheet, a first line of sealant (11 applied by “bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) is dispersed along a direction parallel to one of the two sides ((along longitudinal edges) parallel to the sheet feeding direction (of 82) and a second line of sealant (11 applied by “end seal glue nozzles 56”) is dispensed along a direction parallel to each of the two transverse sides (i.e. sheared sides) with respect to the sheet feeding direction (of 82; “end glue seal nozzles 56” provides glue for the end seals which are readily formed near the edges of the wrapper 82 transverse to the feeding direction as shown in Figure 1).
Note: given the configuration of the machine 10, the overhead conveyor “90” clearly extends into the plane of view of Figure 1 and therefore the sides of the wrapper that are draped around the objects and folded under the objects readily form an area of the bottom seal which will be parallel to the feeding direction of 82 of Figure 1. Therefore, the two edges of the sheet transverse to the feeding direction in Figure 1 will readily comprise lines of adhesive extending parallel thereto in order to form the “end seals”.
Regarding Claim 58, Nordstrom discloses the first line of sealant (11 applied by “end seal glue nozzles 56”) and/or the second line of sealant (11 applied by “bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) is continuous or discontinuous and has a length equal to, or shorter than, a length of respective sides of the paper wrapping sheet (82; note in order to apply glue/sealant lines to form end seals and bottom seals, the sealant lines must be a length approximately the length of the side/edge applied thereto or selectively shorter).
Regarding Claim 60, Nordstrom discloses the step of cutting single paper wrapping sheets (82) from a web material (82) unwound from a reel (60; Col 7, lines 43-48).
Regarding Claim 61, Nordstrom discloses the forming of the paper wrapping sheets comprises unwinding a continuous paper wrapping web (82; Col 5, lines 10-18) and cutting the continuous paper wrapping web into single paper wrapping sheets (of 82; Col 7, lines 43-48).
Regarding Claim 63, Nordstrom discloses cooling (Col 3, lines 16-26 and Col 6, lines 55-67), through an airflow (air flowing over the web 82 through section 70), a sealant (11) provided on the paper wrapping sheets (82), after the sealant (11) has been applied;
wherein the cooling step is carried out on the web material (82) before cutting (At 22) if the sealant is applied to the paper wrapping sheets (82) before the paper wrapping sheets are cut from the web material (82; Col 3, lines 16-26 and Col 6, lines 55-67).
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 37 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of Fallon (US PGPUB 2017/0313449).
Regarding Claim 37, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention including the paper wrapping sheet (of 82) is defined by two parallel sides and two sides transverse to the sheet feeding direction towards the wrapping station (of 20; note a wrapping sheet cut from a web will readily comprise a rectangular shape in the manner as claimed), and
wherein the at least one dispenser (“bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) is configured to apply a line of sealant (i.e. 11 as shown in Figure 10; along end seal) to an area (along longitudinal edges) of the web material (82) corresponding to a paper wrapping sheet (of 82) along a direction parallel to one of the two sides parallel to the sheet feeding direction (of 82), and the said at least one dispenser (“end seal glue nozzles 56”) is configured to apply a line of sealant along a direction parallel to each of the two sides transverse to the sheet feeding direction (“end glue seal nozzles 56” provides glue for the end seals which are readily formed near the edges of the wrapper 82 transverse to the feeding direction as shown in Figure 1).
Note: given the configuration of the machine 10, the overhead conveyor “90” clearly extends into the plane of view of Figure 1 and therefore the sides of the wrapper that are draped around the objects and folded under the objects readily form an area of the bottom seal which will be parallel to the feeding direction of 82 of Figure 1. Therefore, the two edges of the sheet transverse to the feeding direction in Figure 1 will readily comprise lines of adhesive extending parallel thereto in order to form the “end seals”.
However, Nordstrom does not disclose the dispensing device is provided downstream of the cutting unit.
Attention is brought to the teachings of Fallon which includes a packaging system including a dispensing device (adhesive station 19, 20; Figure 7) for applying adhesive onto a blank (3’) and further teaches that the adhesive may be applied to the blank (3′) at an adhesive station after the blank (3′) is formed at a cutting station (6; Figure 5; Para. 0079).
As outlined by Fallon, it is known to apply adhesives to a packaging blank before or after formation of the blank from a web (see Para. 0079). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have arranged the cutting unit and dispensers of Nordstrom such that the adhesive dispensers are downstream of the cutting station as taught by Fallon because Applicant has not disclosed that such an arrangement provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the adhesive application of Nordstrom or Fallon incorporated into Nordstrom because in either instance the glue/adhesive is effectively applied.
Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Nordstrom to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Regarding Claim 39, Nordstrom, as modified, discloses either of the line of sealant (11 applied by “end seal glue nozzles 56” or “bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) is continuous or discontinuous and has a length equal to, or shorter than, a length of respective sides of the paper wrapping sheet (82; note in order to apply glue/sealant lines to form end seals and bottom seals, the sealant lines must be a length approximately the length of the side/edge applied thereto or selectively shorter).
Claims 40, 47, and 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135).
Regarding Claims 40 and 59, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention but does not disclose either of the first or second line of sealant is spaced from a respective side by a distance comprising between 0.5 mm and 50 mm.
However, at the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have positioned the sealant as claimed because Applicant has not disclosed that dimensions/spacing provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the sealant arrangement of Nordstrom because in either instance, the bottom seals and the end seals are properly formed.
Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Nordstrom to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Note: In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Regarding Claim 47, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention including the paper wrapping sheet comprising a thickness comprising between 10 µm and 500 µm (Col 7, lines 20-22 discloses “2 mils” thickness which is approx. 50µm) but does not readily disclose the paper wrapping sheet has a grammage comprising between 10 g/m2 and 100 g/m2, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have utilized a wrapping paper comprising such density/grammage, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claims 41, 53 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of Johnson (US Patent 1,946,697).
Regarding Claim 41, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention but does not readily disclose the at least one dispenser (56, 58) is a spreading dispenser for dispensing by touching a surface to which the sealant is to be applied.
Attention can be brought to the teachings of Johnson which includes another packaging machine (Figure 1) comprising a dispensing station (9, 10) including a spreading dispenser (roller 9) for dispensing by touching a surface to which sealant is to be applied to a web (c) of packaging material (Page 2, lines 57-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the dispensers of Nordstrom to be of a contact spreading type dispenser as taught by Johnson. By modifying Nordstrom in this manner, the adhesive can be applied more accurately along the desired positions.
Regarding Claim 53, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention including a cooling device (drying section 70) for cooling the sealant (11) applied to the paper wrapping sheets (82; Col 3, lines 16-26 and Col 6, lines 55-67), however, Nordstrom does not readily disclose the cooling device (70) is of an air type including at least one air ejection nozzle directed toward an area occupied by at least one paper wrapping sheet.
Attention can be brought to the teachings of Johnson which includes another packaging machine (Figure 1) comprising a web (c) of packaging material wherein the machine comprises a cooling device (a fan or blower as it leaves 9; Page 2, lines 107-112) for cooling adhesive applied (at 9) of an air type (a fan or blower) including at least one air ejection nozzle (of a fan or blower) directed toward an area occupied by the packaging material (Page 2, lines 107-112).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Nordstrom to include a fan/blower as taught by Johnson in its cooling device/drying section. By modifying Nordstrom in this manner, the adhesive will be dried in a quicker time and therefore the size of the drying section can thereby by reduced. With such an air application, fouling of other components such as the cutter or transport mechanisms can be avoided as taught by Johnson (Page 2, lines 107-112).
Regarding Claim 54, Nordstrom, as modified, discloses the cooling device (as taught by Johnson) includes at least one air ejection nozzle (i.e. of a blower of Johnson) directed toward a section of a web material path downstream of an area where the sealant (11 of Nordstrom) is applied and upstream of a cutting unit (22 of Nordstrom) for said web material wherein the cooling device is adapted to form a laminar airflow (“current of air”) over the paper web material (see Page 2, lines 107-112 of Johnson); and
the cooling device (blower of Johnson) comprises at least one surface (of the blower) facing at least one section of the web material path and defining with the web material (82 of Nordstrom) a channel for the airflow coming from the at least one air ejection nozzle (note Page 2, lines 107-112 of Johnson outlines forming a “current of air” and a channel to some extent must be formed between the web and the blower form such current). Alternatively, assuming arguendo that Johnson cannot be readily upon for teaching a channel formed by the cooling device and the web material, in which the Examiner does not readily concede to, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have arranged the blower of Johnson to form such a channel with the web because Applicant has not disclosed that such an arrangement provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the blower of Johnson incorporated into Nordstrom because in either instance the glue/adhesive is effectively cooled by a current/laminar airflow.
Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Nordstrom to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of May (US PGPUB 2016/0368641).
Regarding Claim 42, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention but does not readily disclose the dispensing device comprises a first adjusting means for adjusting distance between the at least one dispenser and the paper wrapping sheets and a second adjusting means for adjusting the at least one dispenser transversally with respect to the wrapping sheet feeding direction.
May teaches another packaging machine (Figure 1) including a dispensing device (nozzle assembly 100a; Figure 14C, 14D; Para. 0185) comprises a first adjusting means (246) for adjusting distance between a at least one dispenser (nozzle 39) and the packaging and a second adjusting means (341u 341b, 342 or cylinder 241) for adjusting the at least one dispenser (39) transversally with respect to a packaging feeding direction (See Paras. 0188-0192).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate adjustability features as taught by May into the dispensing device of Nordstrom, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves routine skill in the art . In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954). Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
It is noted that with such adjustability, packaging of different sizes and different adhesive placements can be accommodated for.
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of May (US PGPUB 2016/0368641), as applied to Claim 42, and in further view of Pipes (US PGPUB 2009/0255835).
Regarding Claim 44, Nordstrom, as modified, the at least one dispenser applies the sealant (11) phased with respect to a rate/speed of the wrapping (see Col 5, lines 64-67 which outline measuring the rate at which the paper is moving and timing the application of adhesive accordingly and in order to detect a rate, a displacement/position must be determined) but does not disclose the dispensers being in phase with a position of the paper wrapping sheets.
Attention can be brought to Pipes which includes a package manufacturing system (Figure 5) wherein wrapper blanks (100) are fed from a hopper (610) and the position of the blank (100) is detected by a blank sensor (641) and an adhesive dispenser (542) dispenses adhesive in phase with the detected position (Para. 0035).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate a position sensor such that the dispensers dispense in phase with the detected position of the wrapper as taught by Pipes within the machine of Nordstrom. By modifying Nordstrom in this manner, the adhesive can be placed precisely as outlined by Pipes (Para. 0035).
Claims 43 and 62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of Pipes (US PGPUB 2009/0255835).
Regarding Claims 43 and 62, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention and discloses the at least one dispenser (56, 58) applies the sealant (11) phased with respect to a rate/speed of the wrapping (see Col 5, lines 64-67 which outline measuring the rate at which the paper is moving and timing the application of adhesive accordingly and in order to detect a rate, a displacement/position must be determined) but does not disclose detecting a position of the paper wrapping sheets, with a detection device, along the sheet feeding direction and applying a sealant phased with a position of the wrapping sheets when the detecting of a position of the web material and applying the sealant phased with the position of the web material when the cutting of the paper wrapping sheets occurs after the preparing of the paper wrapping sheet with the sealant.
Attention can be brought to Pipes which includes a package manufacturing system/method (Figure 5) wherein wrapper blanks (100) are fed from a hopper (610) and the position of the blank (100) is detected by a blank sensor (641) and an adhesive dispenser (542) dispenses adhesive in phase with the detected position (Para. 0035).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate a position sensor such that the dispensers dispense in phase with the detected position of the wrapper as taught by Pipes within the machine of Nordstrom. By modifying Nordstrom in this manner, the adhesive can be placed precisely as outlined by Pipes (Para. 0035).
Claim 45 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of Ferber (US PGPUB 2004/0161531).
Regarding Claim 45, Nordstrom discloses the dispensing device (50) comprises at least three dispensers (56, 58; Col 5, lines 56-67 discloses “end seal glue nozzles 56” and “bottom seal glue nozzles 58” and given the plurality of the term “nozzles” there must be at least 4 nozzles disclosed),
wherein at least two (i.e. “end seal glue nozzles 56”) of said at least three dispensers include a plurality of dispensers (see above; Col 5, lines 56-67 discloses “end seal glue nozzles 56”);
a sealant supply system (reservoir of 11 as shown in Figure 1 and feed lines 54) associated with the dispensing device (50)
wherein the plurality of dispensers (“end seal glue nozzles 56”) are adapted to dispense sealant (11) for a first time interval, thus generating spaced strokes of a line of sealant (see Col 5, lines 62-67 discloses the control of the dispensing and are clearly capable of such dispensing),
wherein each stroke is formed by adjacent areas of sealant (given the control of the dispensers, the nozzles 56 are clearly capable of such strokes of adhesive), and
wherein a third dispensing group (“bottom seal glue nozzles 58”) of said at least three dispensers (56, 58) comprises at least one dispenser (58) adapted to dispense sealant for a second time interval longer than the first time interval (note given the configuration of the system of Nordstrom, the bottom seal sealant 11 would extend longitudinally and therefore would be readily longer than the transverse lines formed by the ”end seal glue nozzles 56”), thereby generating a continuous line of sealant orthogonal to the line of sealant of the first time interval (of 56), the sealant supply system (11, 54) comprising a pumping apparatus (“pumped by known means”; Col 5, line 59-60) for feeding the sealant (11) to said at least one dispenser (56, 58), having a sealant feed rate which is variable depending on feed speed of the web material (82) to which the sealant is to be applied (as outlined on Col 5, lines 62-67; note that the nozzles are clearly capable of providing a continuous line as shown in Figure 10).
However, Nordstrom does not readily disclose the sealant supply system (11, 54) includes for each of said plurality of dispensers a valve that allows supplying or not supplying from a respective dispenser.
Attention is brought to Ferber which teaches a dispensing device (23; Figure 2) for applying adhesive/glue to a packaging material (21) wherein the dispensing device (23) comprises a sealant supply system (shown in Figure 3) which includes for each of a plurality of dispensers (nozzle openings 25, 26 of 24) a valve (29, 30) that allows supplying or not supplying from a respective dispenser (25, 26; Para. 0020, 0026).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have incorporated valves as taught by Ferber into the sealant supply system of Nordstrom in order to allow for accurate control and regulation of the glue application as taught by Nordstrom (Para. 0020, 0022).
Claim 50 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view Gorrieri (US PGPUB 2009/0139185).
Regarding Claim 50, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention including the wrapping station comprising folding means (see abstract) including a bottom folding device (see 11 of Figure 2 and Col 6, lines 35-42 of US Patent 5,038,549) for completing partial wrapping of the paper wrapping sheet (82) around the group of products (30), forming a tube open at two opposite sides of the group of products (30), the open tube having flaps of paper wrapping sheet (82) to be folded that project from each of two sides of the group of products (30; after the bottom folding, side portions of a tube will readily extend). However, although side flap folding devices are well known in the art, Nordstrom does not specifically disclose the wrapping station comprises the following:
- a front side folding device for each of two sides of the group of products to fold against each side a portion of the flaps of paper wrapping sheet, thus forming a front fold;
- a back side folding device for each of the two sides of the group of products to fold against each side a portion of the flaps of paper wrapping sheet, thus forming a back fold;- a top side folding device for each of the two sides of the group of products to fold against each side a portion of the flaps of paper wrapping sheet, thus forming a top fold;
- a bottom side folding device for each of the two sides of the group of products to fold against each side a portion of the flaps of paper wrapping sheet, thus forming a bottom fold.
Attention is brought to Gorrieri which teaches another packaging machine for a group of products (P; Figure 1) comprising a wrapping station comprising:
- a front side folding device (9) and a back side folding device (13) for each of two sides of the group of products to fold against each side a portion of the flaps (204, 204’) of a wrapping sheet, thus forming a front and back fold (of 204, 204’; see end of Para. 0016-“the vertical folding flaps 204 of these projecting parts of the wrapping, cooperating with the folding devices 9, 9' of the drum 7, are folded on the lateral faces of the product P” and Para. 0018-“the lateral flaps with vertical folding 204' of the wrapping sheet are folded on the lateral faces of the product P by the folding device 13”);
- a top side folding device (17) and a bottom side folding device (16) for each of the two sides of the group of products to fold against each side a portion of the flaps of paper wrapping sheet, thus forming a top fold and bottom fold (Para. 0018-“the packed product is once again moved forward by the conveyors 11, 11', while the lateral folding devices 16 and subsequent folding devices 17 fold, on the lateral faces of the product, first said flaps 304 as illustrated in FIG. 6 and then the corresponding upper flaps 304' also with horizontal folding, which are placed reciprocally over each other and over the flaps with vertical folding 204, 204', as illustrated in FIG. 7”).
In order to form the package shown in Figure 3 of Nordstrom, one can readily imply such folding devices as taught by Gorrieri but regardless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have incorporated such folding devices as taught by Gorrieri into the machine of Nordstrom to effectively form such folded sides of the package.
Claims 51 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of Fincke (US Patent 2,114,833)
Regarding Claims 51 and 52, Nordstrom discloses several features of the claimed invention including the sealing station comprises a feeding channel (between belts 212, 214) and a pair of sealing members (belts 212, 214) provided opposite each other on two sides of the feeding channel (as shown in Figure 2), each sealing member of the pair of sealing members being flexible and having a uniform sealing surface (as shown) and each sealing members (212, 214) being driven between-at least two return members (pulleys thereof; see Col 7, line 62 through Col 8, line 3).
However, Nordstrom does not disclose the sealing surfaces are made of ferromagnetic material or containing paramagnetic material and each sealing member being respectively associated with an electromagnetic inductor.
Attention can be brought to Fincke which outlines a sealing station comprising a feeding channel formed by two flexible sealing members (belts 23; Figure 2) comprising sealing surfaces are made a metal material (wire mesh or sheet metal; Page 2, lines 5-13) and each sealing member (23) being respectively associated with an electromagnetic inductor (56, 57; Figure 6; Page 2, Col 2, lines 15-25).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have embodied the sealing members of Nordstrom to of materials heated by an electromagnetic inductor as taught by Fincke in order to allow for efficient and controllable heat sealing of the ends of the packaging. Further, although Fincke doesn’t explicitly teach using ferromagnetic material or paramagnetic material it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use such materials since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, page applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations. It is also noted that use of magnetic (i.e. ferromagnetic) materials would render the heating more efficient from an induction source.
Claim 54 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordstrom (US Patent 5,575,135), in view of Johnson (US Patent 1,946,697), and in further view of Starcevic (US PGPUB 2022/0185522).
Alternatively regarding Claim 54, as outlined above Nordstrom, in view of Johnson, discloses several features of the claimed invention but does not readily disclose a channel being formed between a surface of the cooling device and the web material.
Attention is brought to Starcevic which outlines packaging machine comprising a dispensing device (12; Figure 3) for applying glue to a web (5; Figure 2) and a cooling device (formed by fans 13 and surfaces of consoles 11) comprising a cooling fan (13) and surfaces (of 11) which form a channel with the web material (5; see Figures 3, 5, 7; abstract and Para. 0024).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have utilized such surfaces as taught by Starcevic with the cooling device as incorporated into Nordstrom in order to effectively direct the cooling air to the glue to gain efficient drying thereof.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. see “Notice of References Cited”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA G KOTIS whose telephone number is (571)270-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6am-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, 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.
/JOSHUA G KOTIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 2/11/2026