DETAILED ACTION
This non-final Office action is in response to Applicant’s patent application filed on 8/30/2025. An action on the merits follows.
Claims 1-5 are pending in the application.
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 under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed.
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 limitation “a base insertion assembly for positioning a base element of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature" of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 limitation “a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly" of claim 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show device for “embossing or indenting a region of the side wall” device for “folding a portion of the side wall” (see para 0338 of PGPub)” as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). No new matter should be entered.
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. No new matter should be added.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
means for forming a limit feature on an inner surface of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element in claim 1
a base insertion assembly for positioning a base element of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature of claim 1
a mechanism to move each shaping block between a retracted position in which there is a gap between each of the shaping blocks and an extended position in which each of the shaping blocks contacts and applies a force to a part of the neck and shoulder portions of the outer shell of claim 2
a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly of claim 3
means for pressing inner neck panels around a former of claims 4-5
means for pressing outer neck panels around a former of claims 4-5
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function is the following:
means for forming a limit feature on an inner surface of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element = applicator for applying a line of adhesive (see para 0335 of PGPub) or something for embossing or indenting a region of the side wall, or something for folding a portion of the side wall (see para 0338 of PGPub). Examiner could not find any corresponding structure in Applicant’s specification for embossing or indenting a region of the side wall, or for folding a portion of the side wall
a base insertion assembly for positioning a base element of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature = an apparatus for positioning the base element (see para 0342 of PGPub). Examiner could not find any corresponding structure in Applicant’s specification for the apparatus
a mechanism to move each shaping block between a retracted position in which there is a gap between each of the shaping blocks and an extended position in which each of the shaping blocks contacts and applies a force to a part of the neck and shoulder portions of the outer shell = a linear actuator (see para 0315 of PGPub)
a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly = Examiner could not find any corresponding structure in Applicant’s specification for performing this function.
means for pressing inner neck panels around a former = inner neck press assemblies 180 comprising finger 182, push rod 186, press elements 192, 194 (see para 0213 0221, 0223, 0227 of PGPub)
means for pressing outer neck panels around a former = outer neck press mechanism 274 comprising clamp units 276, alignment plates 302, outer neck press system 324 (see 0274, 0276, 0283 of PGPub)
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 3, claims 1 and 3 fail to comply with the written description requirement because the specification does not provide the relevant structure for “means for forming a limit feature on an inner surface of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element” in claim 1, “a base insertion assembly for positioning a base element of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature” in claim 1, and “a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly” in claim 3, as required under 35 USC 112(f). See below 35 USC 112(b) rejection.
Any remaining claim(s) are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
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 1-5 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.
In claim 1, the claim limitation “means for forming a limit feature on an inner surface of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element” 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. Specifically, Examiner could not find any corresponding structure in Applicant’s specification for embossing or indenting a region of the side wall, or for folding a portion of the side wall in the written description. 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.
In claim 1, the claim limitation “a base insertion assembly for positioning a base element of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature” 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. Specifically, para 0342 of PGPub states “an apparatus for positioning a base element 22 with respect to the end of the side wall 24 and inserting the base element 22 into an opening defined by the end of the side wall 24. The base element 22 is inserted such that the first surface 27 of the base element 22 faces in a direction away from the neck portion 10 of the shell 4”. However, Examiner could not find any corresponding structure for “the apparatus” in the written description. The term apparatus itself does not impart any specific structure. 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.
In claim 3, the claim limitation “a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly” 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. Specifically, Examiner could not find any corresponding structure for the claimed mechanism that moves the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly in the written description. Additionally, the term mechanism itself does not impart any specific structure. 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.
Regarding claims 4-5, the limitation “an inner neck press assembly comprising means for pressing inner neck panels around a former; and an outer neck press assembly comprising means for pressing outer neck panels around a former” is vague and unclear because it is unclear if the two formers are the same or different. In order to prosecute the application, Examiner assumes the two former limitations are the same.
Regarding claims 4-5, the limitation “an inner neck press assembly comprising means for pressing inner neck panels around a former; and an outer neck press assembly comprising means for pressing outer neck panels around a former” in combination with claim 1’s (claim 4 depends on claim 1) “a side wall of the outer shell being formed from a paperboard blank having… a plurality of neck panels” is vague and unclear because it is unclear if the neck panels of claim 1 are the same or different from inner neck panels and outer neck panels of claims 4-5. According to figs. 4-5, the inner neck panel 36 and outer neck panels 38 appear to be part of the neck panels of claim 1. Therefore, in order to prosecute the application, Examiner is interpreting the above limitation as “an inner neck press assembly comprising means for pressing inner neck panels of the plurality of neck panels around a former; and an outer neck press assembly comprising means for pressing outer neck panels of the plurality of neck panels around a former”.
Regarding claims 4-5, the limitation “means for pressing inner neck panels around a former” is vague and unclear because as shown in figs. 4-5 of the instant application, there is exactly one panel 36 on each sidewall 30 or 32. Therefore, in order to prosecute the application, Examiner is interpreting the above limitation as “means for pressing inner neck panel around a former”.
Regarding claims 4-5, the limitation “an outer neck press assembly comprising means for pressing outer neck panels around a former” in combination with claims 2’s (on which both claims 4 and 5 depend) “a shaping assembly for shaping the neck portion of the bottle comprising: four shaping blocks” is vague and unclear because it is unclear if the shaping assembly of claim 2 is the same as the outer neck press assembly. As shown in figs. 40-41 and as described in para 0274-0283, the shaping assembly with four shaping blocks appears to be the same as the outer neck press assembly 274. In order to prosecute the application, Examiner assumes the four shaping blocks are the same or part of the outer neck shaping assembly.
Any remaining claim(s) are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
Since all claims are rejected under 112 section, all claims are as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as anticipated by USPGP# 20170015480 of Slack et al. (henceforth Slack) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over USP# 2,642,784 of Wittkuhns et al. (henceforth Wittkuhns).
Regarding claim 1, Slack teaches
An apparatus (heated tools in para 0115, 0117 and unheated/cold tools in para 0129) for manufacturing a bottle (1), the bottle comprising a paperboard outer shell (12, para 0081) and an inner pouch (14), a side wall (18) of the outer shell being formed from a paperboard blank (para 0081) having a main body panel (42) for forming a cylindrical main body portion (see fig. 5) of the bottle and a plurality of neck panels (58, 60, 62) for forming a cylindrical neck portion of the bottle (see fig. 5), the cylindrical main body portion having a first, larger diameter (see fig. 5 and the relative diameter of main body portion 42 compared to neck portion 58, 60, 62), and the cylindrical neck portion having a second, smaller diameter (see fig. 5 and the relative diameter of main body portion 42 compared to neck portion 58, 60, 62), and the apparatus comprising:
means (any mechanism for applying adhesive 103) for forming a limit feature (adhesive as described in para 0112-0113) on an inner surface (103) of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element (distance from top end 94 to 103); and
a base insertion assembly (tools described in para 0129 for bonding 18, 20 and 22) for positioning a base element (22) of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening (30) defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature (para 0112-0113 and para 0125-0129).
Should the applicant contend that Slack does not teach
means for forming a limit feature on an inner surface of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element; and a base insertion assembly for positioning a base element of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region of the base element contacts the limit feature.
Wittkuhns also teaches
An apparatus (apparatus in fig. 1) for manufacturing a bottle (container shown in fig. 1), the bottle comprising a paperboard outer shell (abstract), a side wall of the outer shell being formed from a paperboard blank having a main body panel (a) for forming a cylindrical main body portion of the bottle (see fig 5) and a plurality of neck panels (d) for forming a cylindrical neck portion (see fig. 5) of the bottle, the cylindrical main body portion having a first, larger diameter (see fig. 5), and the cylindrical neck portion having a second, smaller diameter (see fig. 5), and the apparatus comprising: means (station E esp. 175) for forming a limit feature (h) on an inner surface of the side wall element at a distance from an end of the side wall element (distance between the top of the bottle and the point h as shown in fig. 5, see c. 24, l. 70+ and c. 30, l. 65+ and c. 31, l. 1-12); and a base insertion assembly (station F, esp. element 396) for positioning a base element (s) of the shell with respect to the end of the side wall and inserting the base element into an opening (hole for s as shown in fig. 8) defined by the end of the side wall until an edge region (3’) of the base element contacts the limit feature (c. 45, l. 50-66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Slack with the addition of means for forming the limit feature and a base insertion assembly, as taught by Wittkuhns in order to provide the predictable result of controlled, accurate and automated positioning and of the base into the bottle. This makes the apparatus more reliable, since human error (such as mis-positioning) is reduced, and makes the device more user friendly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slack, or in the alternative, Slack in view of Wittkuhns in further view of USP# 1,192,202 of Johnson et al. (henceforth Johnson).
Regarding claim 2, as shown in claim 1, Slack, or in the alternative, the combination of Slack and Wittkuhns teaches
the apparatus further comprising
a shaping assembly (Slack: para 0115, “tools”) for shaping the neck portion of the bottle.
Slack, or in the alternative, the combination of Slack and Wittkuhns does not teach
a shaping assembly comprising: four shaping blocks, each shaping block including a shaping surface including a first portion corresponding in shape and profile to a shape and profile of a part of the neck portion of the bottle and a second portion corresponding in shape and profile to the shape and profile of a part of a shoulder portion of the bottle between the neck portion and the main body portion of the bottle, and a mechanism to move each shaping block between a retracted position in which there is a gap between each of the shaping blocks and an extended position in which each of the shaping blocks contacts and applies a force to a part of the neck and shoulder portions of the outer shell, wherein a first one of the shaping blocks is opposite a second one of the shaping blocks and the shaping surface of said first shaping block faces the shaping surface of said second shaping block, and a third one of the shaping blocks is opposite a fourth one of the shaping blocks and the shaping surface of said third shaping block faces the shaping surface of said fourth shaping block.
Johnson teaches
An apparatus (device in figs. 1-2) for manufacturing a bottle (pg. 1, l. 12-16), the bottle comprising a paperboard outer shell (pg. 1, l. 12-16), a side wall (18) of the outer shell being formed from a paperboard blank (pg. 1, l. 12-16) having a main body panel (X) for forming a cylindrical main body portion (see fig. 7) of the bottle and a plurality of neck panels (Y) for forming a cylindrical neck portion of the bottle (see fig. 7), the cylindrical main body portion having a first, larger diameter (see fig. 7 and the relative diameter of main body portion X compared to neck portion Y), and the cylindrical neck portion having a second, smaller diameter (see fig. 7 and the relative diameter of main body portion X compared to neck portion Y), the apparatus comprising
a shaping assembly (C, D) for shaping the neck portion of the bottle comprising:
four shaping blocks (C, D in fig. 3), each shaping block including a shaping surface (4 and the outer surface of D in fig. 3) including a first portion (4) corresponding in shape and profile to a shape and profile of a part of the neck portion (pg, l. 98-112) of the bottle and a second portion (5, which acts on the throat of the bottle) corresponding in shape and profile to the shape and profile of a part of a shoulder portion (throat 2, pg, l. 98-112) of the bottle between the neck portion and the main body portion of the bottle (pg, l. 98-112), and
a mechanism (E, F, please note F moves linearly) to move each shaping block between a retracted position (position shown in fig. 1) in which there is a gap between each of the shaping blocks and an extended position (position shown in fig. 2) in which each of the shaping blocks contacts and applies a force to a part of the neck and shoulder portions of the outer shell (pg. 3, l. 1-13),
wherein a first one of the shaping blocks (see annotated fig. 3) is opposite a second one of the shaping blocks(see annotated fig. 3) and the shaping surface of said first shaping block faces the shaping surface of said second shaping block(see annotated fig. 3), and a third one of the shaping blocks (see annotated fig. 3) is opposite a fourth one of the shaping blocks (see annotated fig. 3) and the shaping surface of said third shaping block faces the shaping surface of said fourth shaping block (see annotated fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the shaping assembly of Slack, or in the alternative, the combination of Slack and Wittkuhns, with the addition of four shaping blocks and a mechanism for moving the shaping blocks, as taught by Johnson in order to provide the predictable result of reliably form the bottle into a bottles shape having separate body, shoulder and neck portions. Additionally, Because both Slack and Johnson teach devices for forming bottle, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one device (unknown forming tools of Slack) for the other (shaping blocks of Johnson) to achieve the predictable result of forming bottles from paperboard. KSR Int'l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
PNG
media_image1.png
672
1156
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Slack and Johnson, or in the alternative, the combination of Slack, Wittkuhns and Johnson does not teach
a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between the shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly.
Wittkuhns teaches
a mechanism (50, 70) for moving the partially formed outer shell between a shaping assembly (1) and the base insertion assembly (station F).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Slack and Johnson, or in the alternative, the combination of Slack, Wittkuhns and Johnson with the addition of a mechanism for moving the partially formed outer shell between a shaping assembly and the base insertion assembly, as taught by Wittkuhns in order to provide the predictable result of seamless, reliable and automated movement of the partially formed bottle through various stations for forming the bottle. This makes the apparatus more reliable, since human error (such as mis-positioning) is reduced, and makes the device more user friendly.
Regarding claim 4, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Slack and Johnson, or in the alternative, the combination of Slack, Wittkuhns and Johnson teaches
an inner neck press assembly (Johnson’s C, D that corresponds inner panel 36 of Slack) comprising means (shaping blocks 4) for pressing inner neck panels around a former (B): and an outer neck press assembly (Johnson’s C, D that corresponds outer panels 38 of Slack) comprising means for pressing outer neck panels around a former (B), so that the outer neck panels overlap the inner neck panels (see fig. 7 of Slack).
Regarding claim 5, as shown in claim 3, the combination of Slack, Wittkuhns and Johnson teaches
an inner neck press assembly (Johnson’s C, D that corresponds inner panel 36 of Slack) comprising means (shaping blocks 4) for pressing inner neck panels around a former (B): and an outer neck press assembly (Johnson’s C, D that corresponds outer panels 38 of Slack) comprising means for pressing outer neck panels around a former (B), so that the outer neck panels overlap the inner neck panels (see fig. 7 of Slack).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOBEEN AHMED whose telephone number is (571) 272-0356. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (8:30 am to 5 pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anna Kinsaul can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M. A./
Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/VERONICA MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731