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 . 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beskitt et al (U.S Patent 10773912B2) and Meckelein et al (U.S Patent 10717258B2).
Regarding claims 1 & 12, Beskitt, drawn also to the art of an alignment apparatus which transports a document (Abstract), discloses a roller assembly (58) that translates and is driven by a motor (Column 11, lines 35-52; Column 12, lines 12-35; Column 13, lines 40-56) (Figures 16A-16B & Figures 7-8). Beskitt discloses sensors that 167 & 168 that are on the front end of the first frame (plate 158), and that are used to appropriately move the idler wheels 160/161 and thus the first frame and roller assembly in predefined setpoints based on sensor readings (Column 12, lines 12-35; Column 13, lines 40-56). Beskitt has disclosed a translatable and pivotable first frame (Figure 16B – plate 158). Beskitt has not explicitly disclosed the roller assembly being pivotable and translatable. However, a roller assembly being pivotable and translatable is disclosed in the art by Meckelein.
Meckelien, drawn also to the art of a laminating machine with an alignment device (imbricating device for arranging unlaminated sheets in an imbricated manner) (Abstract), discloses a roller assembly (roll holders 321 & 322) which is able to pivot and translate ((Columns 9-10, lines 56-67 & 1-8; figures 1-2a). Meckelien discloses a pivoting axis and pivoting movement and a motor (Columns 9-10, lines 56-67 & 1-8; Column 22, lines 30-32). Meckelien discloses the roller assembly being pivotable about a pivot axis that intersects the roller axis and being translatable such that it is parallel to the roller axis (Columns 9-10, lines 56-67 & 1-8; figures 1-2a).
It would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan to have modified the alignment apparatus of Beskitt, with the roller assembly being pivotable and translatable, as disclosed by Meckelien, to arrive at the instant invention, in order to obtain a rapid and trouble-free lamination (Column 3, lines 10-12).
Regarding claims 2-3, Beskitt has disclosed a translatable first frame (Figure 16B – plate 158). Beskitt discloses actuators (CDS from translate/rotate idler wheels 160 & 161) which translate the first frame (Abstract; Column 12, lines 12-35). Beskitt discloses a second frame (210) which is not designed to move (Column 16, lines 7-10), thus disclosing a first frame that is translatable and pivotable with respect to the second frame and independently so, and wherein the second frame and first frame and vice versa are fixed in translation relative to one another.
Regarding claim 5, Beskitt discloses a rail (114 & 62) that is parallel to the roller assembly (58) and that constrains translation of the roller assembly (see figures 7-8).
Regarding claims 8-9, Beskitt has disclosed actuators (CDS front translate/rotate idler wheels 160 & 161) for the first frame that can translate and pivot the first frame (Abstract; Column 12, lines 12-35). Meckelien has also disclosed motors (actuators) for the roller assembly (Column 22, lines 30-60).
Regarding claims 10-11, Beskitt as modified by Meckelien disclose a pivot axis being substantially centered with respect to the roller assembly (see claim 1 rejection above and figures 5-6 of Meckelien). However, Beskitt and Meckelien have not explicitly disclosed the pivot axis being offset from the roller assembly, however, this would merely involve a involve rearrangement of parts, and as such, this is held to be obvious by the courts in the absence of new and unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (C)).
Regarding claims 13, & 15-16, The combination of Beskitt and Meckelien has disclosed the instant invention. Beskitt has disclosed the alignment device as claimed in instant claim 1. Meckelien has disclosed a laminating machine comprising a first (300) and second conveyor (320) with the second conveyor being disposed above the first conveyor and having a convergent portion that follows a convergent path downward toward the first conveyor and toward an application station where top sheets conveyed along the second conveyor can be laminated backing conveyed along the first conveyor (see figures 1-2d and ensuing descriptions). As can be seen from Figure 1, the second conveyor is above the first conveyor.
It would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan to have modified the apparatus of Beskitt, with the conveyors of Meckelien, to arrive at the instant invention, in order to obtain a rapid and trouble-free lamination (Column 3, lines 10-12).
Regarding claims 14 & 17, Beskitt as modified by Meckelien discloses the instant invention. Meckelien discloses the intersection of the first and second conveyance path at a convergence point (see claim 13 rejection above) and discloses the conveyance paths to be linear (see figures 1-2d and ensuing description). With regards to the location of the alignment device being upstream (claim 14) or downstream (claim 17), this would merely involve a rearrangement of parts, and as such, this is held to be obvious by the courts in the absence of new and unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (C)).
Regarding claims 18-20, these limitations are drawn specifically to the alignment device and are the same as the limitations as recited in claims 2-3, and 5 (see claims 2-3, & 5 rejections above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not disclose the
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABHISHEK A PATWARDHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8431. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7:30am-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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571)270-5038. 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.
/ABHISHEK A PATWARDHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/MICHAEL N ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1746
