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 04/15/2025.
Applicant’s cancelation of claims 21-33 is acknowledged and require no further examining. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following features(s) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The jaws as stated in claim 18; and
The block former as stated claim 18.
The drawings are objected to because the figures need to consist of solid black lines of uniform thickness. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. [MPEP 608.02 V(I)]
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 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 9 and 18-20 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 9, the phrase “wherein the bags are provided in a tray” renders claim 9 vague and indefinite because it is unclear how the bags are retained in a tray and a holder. Claim 9 is dependent of claim 1, and claim 1 disclose the bags are retained in a bag holder. It is unclear the bags are retained in a bag holder and in a tray. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “wherein the holder comprises a tray for retaining the plurality of bags”.
Regarding claim 18 line 2, the phrase “envelopes the jaws” renders claim 18 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. Claim 18 is dependent of claim 17 which is dependent of claim 1. Claim 1 does not disclose a jaw. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “envelopes a set of jaws”.
Regarding claim 19 line 2, the phrase “to retract its starting” renders claim 19 vague and indefinite because it is unclear what feature the term “it” is referring to. Claim 19 is dependent of claim 1, and claim 1 discloses several features. It is unclear which feature the term “it” is referring to. For examining purpose, the phrase is interpreted as “to retract to the spreader assembly’s starting”.
Regarding claim 19 line 2, the phrase “envelopes the jaws” also renders claim 1 vague and indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. Claim 19 is dependent of claim 1, and claim 1 does not disclose a jaw. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “envelopes a jaw”.
Regarding claim 20 line 11, the phrase “into the open bag to hold it” renders claim 20 vague and indefinite because it is unclear what feature the term “it” is referring to. Prior to the quoted phrase, several features are disclosed. It is unclear which feature the term “it” is referring to. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “into the open bag to hold the bag”.
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 1, 3, 5-6, 8-9, 13-15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Thierig et al. (8,528,307) in view of reference Brinkman (6,308,501).
Regarding claim 1, Thierig et al. disclose a system for packaging a product (11), the system comprising a rotatable drum (24), wherein the rotatable drum (24) includes:
a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (34 in the 35 region) positioned on a first portion of the drum (24); and
a second plurality of vacuum suction cups (34 in the 36 region) positioned on a second portion of the drum (24).
(Figure 6, 14 and Column 3 lines 63-66, Column 4 lines 56-67, Column 5 lines 9-12)
However, Thierig et al. do not disclose a holder, a third plurality of vacuum suction cups, and a spreader assembly.
Brinkman discloses a system for packaging a product, wherein the system comprises:
a holder (72) for retaining a plurality of bags;
a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (80);
a second plurality of vacuum suction cups (303);
a third plurality of vacuum suction cups (82); and
a spreader assembly (76) configured to hold the bag open.
(Figure 2A and Column 8 lines 1-4, Column 10 lines 14-22, 39-44)
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 system of Thierig et al. by incorporating the holder, the third plurality of vacuum suction cups, and the spreader assembly as taught by Brinkman, since column 2 lines 1-7 of Brinkman states such a modification would allow the system to package semi rigid blocks of product fed through an outlet.
When modifying Thierig et al. in view of Brinkman, the third plurality of vacuum suction cups are interpreted to be positioned opposite the first plurality of vacuum suction cups, and therefore interpreted to be above a surface the rotatable drum.
Regarding claim 3, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the first plurality of vacuum suction cups (Thierig et al. – 34) are arranged in a generally linear arrangement. (Thierig et al. – Figure 14)
Regarding claim 5, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the first plurality of vacuum suction cups (Thierig et al. – 34) are configured to grab one end of a bag. (Thierig et al. – Column 5 lines 9-12)
Regarding claim 6, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the second plurality of vacuum suction cups (Thierig et al. – 34) are arranged in a generally linear arrangement. (Thierig et al. – Figure 14)
Regarding claim 8, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the second plurality of vacuum suction cups (Thierig et al. – 34) are in a fixed position on the rotatable drum (Thierig et al. – 24). (Thierig et al. – Column 5 lines 9-12)
Regarding claim 9, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the holder comprises a tray (Brinkman – 72) for retaining the plurality of bags. (Brinkman – Column 8 lines 1-4)
Regarding claim 13, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose each of the plurality of vacuum suction cups comprise four suction cups. (Thierig et al. – Figure 14 and Column 5 lines 9-12)
Regarding claim 14, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose each of the plurality of vacuum suction cups comprise three suction cups. (Thierig et al. – Figure 14 and Column 5 lines 9-12)
Regarding claim 15, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose each of the plurality of vacuum suction cups comprise more than four suction cups. (Thierig et al. – Figure 14 and Column 5 lines 9-12)
Regarding claim 17, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the spreader assembly (Brinkman – 76) is configured for spread open the bag. (Brinkman – Column 10 lines 52-59)
Regarding claim 18, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the spreader assembly (Brinkman – 76) is configured to extend the bag so the bag envelopes a jaw of a block former (Brinkman – 6). (Brinkman – Column 10 lines 52-59)
Regarding claim 19, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the spreader assembly (Brinkman – 76) is configured to retract to the spreader assembly’s (Brinkman – 76) staring position after the bag envelopes a jaw of a block former (Brinkman – 6). (Brinkman – Column 10 lines 52-63)
Claims 4, 7, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Thierig et al. (8,528,307) in view of reference Brinkman (6,308,501) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Darby, Jr. et al. (3,750,365)(referred Darby).
Regarding claim 4, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the claimed invention as stated above, but do not disclose the first plurality of vacuum suction cups extend out from a surface of the rotatable drum.
Darby disclose a vacuum suction cup (40) comprising: a shroud member (300); a resilient cup member (306); and a spring (314). (Figure 10 and Column 9 lines 15-36)
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 first plurality of vacuum suction cups of Thierig et al. by incorporating the vacuum suction cups as taught by Darby, since column 10 lines 1-7 of Darby disclose such a modification would help pull the bag out of the holder.
When modifying Thierig et al. in view of Darby, the vacuum suction cups in interpreted to extend out form the surface of the rotatable drum in order to allow the resilient cup member to compress the spring.
Regarding claim 7, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the claimed invention as stated above, but do not disclose the second plurality of vacuum suction cups extend out from a surface of the rotatable drum.
Darby disclose a vacuum suction cup (40) comprising: a shroud member (300); a resilient cup member (306); and a spring (314). (Figure 10 and Column 9 lines 15-36)
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 second plurality of vacuum suction cups of Thierig et al. by incorporating the vacuum suction cups as taught by Darby, since column 10 lines 1-7 of Darby disclose such a modification would help pull the bag out of the holder.
When modifying Thierig et al. in view of Darby, the vacuum suction cups in interpreted to extend out form the surface of the rotatable drum in order to allow the resilient cup member to compress the spring.
Regarding claim 20, Thierig et al. disclose a method for packaging a product (11), the method comprising the steps of:
providing a plurality of bags (10) each having an open end (16) and a closed end (12);
securing a first end of a single bag (10) with a rotatable drum (24) including a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (34 in the 35 region) positioned on a first portion of the drum (24);
rotating the drum (24) and securing a second end of the bag (10) with a second plurality of vacuum suction cups (34 in the 36 region) positioned on a second portion of the drum (24); and
rotating the drum (24) so that the closed (12) of the bag (10) is on the bottom and the open end (16) of the bag (10) is on top.
(Figure 6, 14 and Column 3 lines 63-66, Column 4 lines 56-67, Column 5 lines 9-12)
However, Thierig et al. do not disclose the vacuum suction cups extending, and do not disclose a third plurality of vacuum suction cups and a spreader assembly.
Darby disclose a vacuum suction cup (40) comprising: a shroud member (300); a resilient cup member (306); and a spring (314). (Figure 10 and Column 9 lines 15-36)
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 first and second plurality of vacuum suction cups of Thierig et al. by incorporating the vacuum suction cups as taught by Darby, since column 10 lines 1-7 of Darby disclose such a modification would help pull the bag out of the holder.
When modifying Thierig et al. in view of Darby, the vacuum suction cups in interpreted to extend out form the surface of the rotatable drum in order to allow the resilient cup member to compress the spring.
Brinkman discloses a system for packaging a product, wherein the system comprises:
a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (80);
a second plurality of vacuum suction cups (303);
a third plurality of vacuum suction cups (82); and
a spreader assembly (76) configured to hold the bag open.
(Figure 2A and Column 8 lines 1-4, Column 10 lines 14-22, 39-44)
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 system of Thierig et al. by incorporating the third plurality of vacuum suction cups and the spreader assembly as taught by Brinkman, since column 2 lines 1-7 of Brinkman states such a modification would allow the system to package semi rigid blocks of product fed through an outlet.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Thierig et al. (8,528,307) in view of reference Brinkman (6,308,501) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Fukeda et al. (8,245,485).
Regarding claim 10, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the claimed invention as stated above, but do not disclose a printer.
Fukeda et al. disclose a system (1) for packaging a product, the system comprising a printer (9) for labeling each bag (B). (Column 5 lines 11-13)
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 system of Thierig et al. by incorporating the printer as taught by Fukeda et al., since column 5 lines 11-13 of Fukeda et al. states such a modification would allow information about the product to be put on the bag.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Thierig et al. (8,528,307) in view of reference Brinkman (6,308,501) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Gmür (4,320,615).
Regarding claim 11, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman disclose the claimed invention as stated above, but do not disclose the first plurality of vacuum suction cups are configured to extend and retract.
Gmür discloses a system for packaging a product, the system comprising a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (9), wherein the first plurality of vacuum suction cups (9) are configured to extend towards a holder of bags (3), secure to the bag (40), and retract. (Figure 2b, 2c, 2d and Column 5 lines 21-30)
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 first plurality of vacuum suction cups of Thierig et al. by incorporating the process of extending and retracting as taught by Gmür, since column 2 lines 36-40 of Gmür states such a modification would allow for effective and quick separation of the topmost bag from the holder.
Regarding claim 12, Thierig et al. modified by Brinkman and Gmür disclose first plurality of vacuum suction cups (Thierig et al. – 34) are configured to extend, secure to the bag, and retract. (Gmür – Column 5 lines 21-30)
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Passoni (8,590,280) in view of reference Brinkman (6,308,501).
Regarding claim 1, Passoni disclose a system for packaging a product (), the system comprising a rotatable drum (17), wherein the rotatable drum (17) includes:
a holder (12) for retaining a plurality of bags (13);
a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (see figure 2A below) positioned on a first portion of the drum (17); and
a second plurality of vacuum suction cups (see figure 2A below) positioned on a second portion of the drum (17).
(Figure 2A and Column 3 lines 35-38, 48-58, Column 4 lines 25-30)
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Vacuum Suction Cups)][AltContent: textbox (Second Vacuum Suction Cups)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect][AltContent: textbox (Passoni)]
PNG
media_image1.png
495
664
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Passoni do not disclose a third plurality of vacuum suction cups and a spreader assembly.
Brinkman discloses a system for packaging a product, wherein the system comprises:
a first plurality of vacuum suction cups (80);
a second plurality of vacuum suction cups (303);
a third plurality of vacuum suction cups (82); and
a spreader assembly (76) configured to hold the bag open.
(Figure 2A and Column 8 lines 1-4, Column 10 lines 14-22, 39-44)
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 system of Thierig et al. by incorporating the third plurality of vacuum suction cups and the spreader assembly as taught by Brinkman, since column 2 lines 1-7 of Brinkman states such a modification would allow the system to package semi rigid blocks of product fed through an outlet.
When modifying Passoni in view of Brinkman, the third plurality of vacuum suction cups are interpreted to be positioned opposite the first plurality of vacuum suction cups, and therefore interpreted to be above a surface the rotatable drum.
Regarding claim 2, Passoni modified by Brinkman disclose the rotatable drum (Passoni – 17) comprises a half-cylinder. (Passoni – Figure 2A)
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Passoni (8,590,280) in view of reference Brinkman (6,308,501) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Gmür (4,320,615).
Regarding claim 16, Brinkman disclose the spreader assembly may comprise any suitable device whereby the spreader assembly can be moved between the various positions.
However, Passoni modified by Brinkman do not disclose the spreader assembly is pneumatically controlled.
Gmür discloses a system for packaging a product, the system comprising pneumatically controlled devices. (Column 3 lines 42-46)
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 spreader assembly as taught by Brinkman by incorporating the pneumatic control as taught by Gmür, since column 3 lines 42-46 of Gmür states such a modification would prevent jerky movement.
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 May 16, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights