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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Belgium on March 6, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the BE2023./5162 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. An attempt by the Office to electronically retrieve, under the priority document exchange program, the foreign application FAILED on 04/28/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 & 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gournelle (FR 2123054) (previously cited).
With respect to claims 1, 8, 9 & 18, Gournelle discloses a separating device comprising:
a frame 1 (FIG. 1);
a stack holder 2, 2, 2, 2 (figs. 1 & 2) for receiving a stack of substrates 3; and
a two pairs of oppositely disposed disks 5, 5, 5, 5, e.g. separating elements, which is mounted on a frame so as to be rotatable (indicated generally as F1, F2 in FIG. 2) about an axis of rotation (indicated generally as 9),
a separating element being arranged such that a stack of substrates arranged in a stack holder can are supportable thereon, and
which a separating element having a holder 6, 7, 8 (61) configured to engage a substrate 3 and a sliding portion (the perimeter of disc 5; see FIG. 4 and ref. char. #5 generally indicating sliding of perimeter along bottommost substrate 3) configured to slide along a further substrate 3 of a stack of substrates upon rotation a separating element about an axis of rotation.
With respect to claim 2, Gournelle discloses that a sliding portion of a separating element comprises a circular arc.
With respect to claim 3, Gournelle discloses that a holder of a separating element has a C-shaped contour.
With respect to claim 4, Gournelle discloses that a holder of a separating element defines an interior space and an opening defined by “beaks” 6, 7, and
wherein an opening is narrower than an interior space.
With respect to claim 5, Gournelle discloses that a separating element is configured to lower substrates 31 (see FIGS. 2-5) individually vertically into an output region 17.
With respect to claim 6, Gournelle discloses that a drive unit 11, 12, 13, 14 (a motor is not shown but drives either of shafts 12, 13) arranged laterally offset from a stack holder.
With respect to claims 7 & 10, Gournelle discloses that a pair of separating elements rotate in direction F1 and a second, oppositely opposed separating elements rotate in a direction F2 which is opposite to F1; the rotations F1, F2 of separating elements about respective axes of rotation convey, one after another, a plurality of substrates 3 of a stack of substrates.
With respect to claim 11, Gournelle discloses-
a stack holder with two guides 2, 2 between which a stack of rigid substrates 3 are receivable, two guides being arranged at a first distance (see annotated FIG. 3 reproduced below) from one another; and
two separating elements mounted on a frame so as to be rotatable in opposite directions, each about a corresponding axis of rotation, which in one rotational position have a second distance from one another which is smaller than a first distance, and which have holders that are alignable with one another so that a third distance between bottoms of holders is greater than a second distance.
[AltContent: textbox (A1)][AltContent: textbox (A3)][AltContent: textbox (A2)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
272
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 12, Gournelle discloses that a third distance is equal to or greater than a first distance.
With respect to claims 13-15, Applicant is respectfully reminded that the material or article worked upon by the apparatus does not limit apparatus claims. MPEP 2115. In other words, cited prior art can work with Applicant's claimed article if the art disclosed the apparatus as claimed. In this case, as shown in claim 1 Gournelle discloses the elements for unstacking substrates. Consequently, according to the broadest reasonable interpretation under MPEP 2115 Gournelle will work with a rigid substrate comprising a label mat with a plurality of break-out identification labels.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gournelle in view of Speith (US 9,421,797) (previously cited).
Gournelle discloses a separating device of claim 1 and a conveyor 17, e.g. transport device, and does not disclose a printer. In combination with a separating device 103 Speith disclose a printing device 104 for printing information on one substrate separated from a stack of substrates and conveyed to a position proximate a printer 104. Speith teaches that it is well known to combine separators with printers in the industry of printing media such as plastic cards or mats. “In the previously known separating devices, especially metal components are moved against a stop to establish an end position. In this process, the components hit the stop without prior deceleration, frequently leading to development of noise. In addition, the components become eroded by the high mechanical stress.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Gournelle to combine a separating device with a printer, as taught by Speith, to reduce erosion and mechanical stresses.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gournelle in view of Speith and further in view of Lieder (US 3,933,255).
Gournelle discloses a transport device wherein substrates are placeable thereon. Gournelle does not disclose rails. Lieder discloses a pair of rails 43 along which a substrate that is separated from a stack is pushed “forwardly from beneath the stack 91 to other parts of the machine (not shown) where at folding and other operations are carried out on the case to form a box.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Gournelle to include a transport device that has rails, as taught by Lieder, which allows a weight of a stack to be increased without the amount of friction caused by the increased weight affecting separation accuracy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY W ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8101. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 8am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GREGORY W ADAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
