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 .
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 1-10 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 1, “N products” and “N-1 products” is indefinite because it is unclear what N and N-1 refer to. Does N and N-1 refer to a type of product? A number of products? For examination purposes, “N products” and “N-1 products” are being interpreted as “products” and “subsequent products”, respectively. Additionally, “the groups of products” lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claims 2-6, claims 2-6 are rejected because they depend from rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, “N products” and “N-1 products” is indefinite because it is unclear what N and N-1 refer to. Does N and N-1 refer to a type of product? A number of products? For examination purposes, “N products” and “N-1 products” are being interpreted as “a number of products” and “a subsequent number of products”, respectively. Examiner recommends clarifying the claim language to align with Applicant’s desired interpretation. Additionally, “the groups of products” lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claims 8-10, claims 8-10 are rejected because they depend from rejected claim 7.
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 1-3, 5-7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baumann (US 2013/0212982), hereinafter Baumann.
Regarding claim 1, Baumann discloses a method for packaging products (Para. 0026-0028), comprising:
- feeding in a transport direction (Fig. 1, arrow along conveyor 1) a first array of products (Fig. 1, item 3) aligned with each other in the transport direction (Para. 0026-0028) via a feed conveyor (Fig. 1, item 1);
- for each sequence of N products in the first array of products (Para. 0026-0028), cyclically picking up N-1 products (Para. 0026-0028) that precede or follow a first product (Para. 0026-0028) in the sequence of N products (Para. 0026-0028);
- depositing the N-1 products on the feed conveyor (Para. 0026-0028) aligned with the first product in a transverse direction (Para. 0026-0028) orthogonal to the transport direction (Fig. 1, containers are organized and sorted such that multiple containers are in a row, orthogonal to the transport direction) to form successive groups of products (Fig. 1), each group of products comprising N products aligned with each other in the transverse direction (Fig. 1) (Para. 0026-0031), thereby forming on the feed conveyor N arrays of products (Para. 0026-0031) aligned with each other (Para. 0026-0031) and parallel to the transport direction (Para. 0026-0031); and
- feeding the groups of products in the transport direction (Para. 0026-0031) to a packaging unit (Para. 0026-0031) via the feed conveyor (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 2, Baumann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the N-1 products of each sequence of N products are moved by a manipulator (Fig. 1, item 4) provided with a gripping element (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 3, Baumann discloses the method of claim 2, wherein said N-1 products of each sequence of N products are picked up in succession by a single gripping element (Fig. 1, item 4) (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 5, Baumann discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising controlling the manipulator based on information (Para. 0026-0031) provided by a vision system (Fig. 1, item 2) (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 6, Baumann discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising compacting the groups of products together (Fig. 3, products 3 are compacted using stacking bridges 5, 6) (Para. 0026-0031) in the transport direction (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 7, Baumann discloses a system for packaging products (Fig. 1, item 3), comprising:
- a feed conveyor (Fig. 1, item 1) configured to transport a first array of products (Para. 0026-0031) aligned with each other in a transport direction (Fig. 1, transport direction is direction of arrow on conveyor 1) (Para. 0026-0031);
- at least one manipulator (Fig. 1, item 4) configured to cyclically pick up N-1 products (Para. 0026-0031) that precede or follow a first product (Para. 0026-0031) in each sequence of N products (Para. 0026-0031) in the first array of products (Para. 0026-0031) and to deposit the N-1 products on the feed conveyor (Para. 0026-0031) aligned with the first product in a transverse direction (Fig. 1, containers are organized and sorted such that multiple containers are in a row, orthogonal to the transport direction) orthogonal to the transport direction (Fig. 1) to form successive groups of products (Para. 0026-0031), each group of products comprising N products (Para. 0026-0031) aligned in the transverse direction (Para. 0026-0031), thereby forming N arrays of products (Para. 0026-0031) aligned with each other (Para. 0026-0031) and parallel to the transport direction (Para. 0026-0031); and
- a packaging unit (Fig. 1, item 8, 9) configured to receive the groups of products (Para. 0026-0031) transported in the transport direction (Para. 0026-0031) from the feed conveyor (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 9, Baumann discloses the system of claim 8, further comprising a vision system (Fig. 1, item 2) (Para. 0026-0031) and a control unit (Para. 0026-0031) configured to control the at least one manipulator based on data (Para. 0026-0031) from the vision system (Para. 0026-0031).
Regarding claim 10, Baumann discloses the system of claim 7, further comprising a compacting device (Fig. 3, item 5, 6) (Para. 0026-0031) configured to bring the groups of products closer together (Para. 0026-0031) in the transport direction (Para. 0026-0031).
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.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumann in view of Takai et al (US 2023/0027134), hereinafter Takai.
Regarding claim 4, Baumann does not expressly disclose the method of claim 2, wherein said gripping element picks up said products by suction.
However, Takai teaches gripping elements (Takai, Fig. 2, item 23b) picking up products by suction (Takai, Para. 0051).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention having the teachings of Baumann and Takai to modify the gripping elements of Baumann to include the suction cups of Takai. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such change in order to reduce damage to the products during the gripping and transportation process.
Regarding claim 8, Baumann discloses the system of claim 7, wherein the at least one manipulator comprises a gripping element (Fig. 1, item 4) configured to pick up the N-1 products (Para. 0026-0031).
Baumann does not expressly disclose the gripping element picking up the products by suction.
However, Takai teaches gripping elements (Takai, Fig. 2, item 23b) picking up products by suction (Takai, Para. 0051).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention having the teachings of Baumann and Takai to modify the gripping elements of Baumann to include the suction cups of Takai. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such change in order to reduce damage to the products during the gripping and transportation process.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Takai et al (US 2023/0027134) teaches conveying products in a transport direction on a conveyor, picking up products and depositing products on another conveyor in a transverse direction orthogonal to the transport direction.
Elsperger (EP 2792626 A1) teaches conveying products on a conveyor in a transport direction, transporting a group of products onto another conveyor, and conveying that group of products on the other conveyor in the transport direction.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERONICA MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-6:00.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571)270-1926. 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.
/VERONICA MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
