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 § 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) 1-3, 6-9 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US $6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893).
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) discloses an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1) for producing a
ceramic molded product ([0004], [(0023]-[0025], [0031]), comprising:
an extruding portion having a screw 7 and a barrel 2 capable of housing the screw 7;
a molding portion (not labeled but shown in fig. 1 having spaces 15, 16 therein) having one end
and an other end, the one end having a die 9, and the other end being connected to an extruding port of
the extruding portion (connected to the downstream end (i.e., the extruding port) of barrel 2 via
element 4; note that instant fig. 1 shows the molding portion 20 being connected to the extruding port
30 via element 40); and
a rectifier 4 arranged between the extruding portion 2, 7 and the molding portion,
wherein the molding portion includes an increased diameter drum having an increased diameter
portion on the other end (as shown in fig. 1, an increased diameter drum is defined by the
portion of the mold housing defining the increased diameter portion of space 15) and a straight drum
(as shown in fig. 1, a straight drum is defined by the portion of the mold housing defining the constant
diameter portions of spaces 15 and 16) connected to the increased diameter drum (fig. 1).
However, Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) does not disclose the increased diameter portion being
configured as a temperature control drum through which a fluid can flow, OR a heat insulating member
being arranged to be sandwiched directly between the molding portion and the rectifier.
Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) disclose an extrusion molding machine (figs. 1-3) for producing
a ceramic molded product (abstract) comprising:
an extruding portion having a screw 21 and a barrel 2 capable of housing the is crew;
a molding portion 3, 4 having one end and an other end, the one end having a die 4, and the
other end being connected to an extruding port of the extruding portion 2, 21 (connected to the
downstream end (i.e., the extruding port) of barrel 2 via element 64;
wherein a temperature controller is provided in the molding portion which is configured as a
temperature control drum through which a fluid can flow (fig. 1; col. 5, lines 55-61; col. 6, lines 3-55); and
wherein a temperature controller is provided in the extruding portion (col. 7, lines 23-35).
Machen (US 3,305,893) discloses an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1), comprising:
an extruding portion having a screw 14 and a barrel 19 capable of housing the screw 14; and
a molding portion 21, 28 having one end and an other end, the one end having a die 28, and the
other end being connected to an extruding port of the extruding portion (connected to the downstream
end (i.e., the extruding port) of barrel 19 via element 31);
wherein a temperature controller 22, 30 is provided in the molding portion (col. 2, lines 11-15);
wherein a temperature controller 41 is provided in the extruding portion (col. 2, lines 53-57);
wherein a heat insulating member 31 is arranged to be between the molding portion and the
extruding portion to thermally insulate the temperature controlled molding portion 17 from the
temperature controlled extruding portion (col. 2, lines 69-73).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the extrusion molding machine of Yamazaki US 2008/0102146) with temperature
controllers, as disclosed by Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US $3,305,893), because such
modifications are known in the extrusion art and would enable the molding portion and the extruding
portion to be temperature controlled; and to further modify the extrusion molding machine with a heat
insulating member between the molding portion and the extruding portion, as disclosed by
Machen(US3,305,893), because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would enable
thermal insulation between the temperature controlled molding portion and the thermally controlled
extruding portion. Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) discloses a temperature gradient between the
extrusion portion (col. 4, lines 23-30, cooling the extrusion portion) and the molding portion (col. 5, lines
55-61, heating or cooling the molding portion). And adding a heat insulating member, as disclosed by
Machen IS 3,305,893), would provide the steepest possible temperature gradient between the
extrusion portion and the molding portion contributing to the efficiency of cooling the extrusion portion and to compact length of the extruder (col. 2, lines 63-67). As mentioned above, Machen (US 3,305,893)
discloses the heat insulating member is arranged to be between the molding portion and the extruding
portion. Thus, in view of fig. 1 of Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146), the heat insulating member would be
placed somewhere between the molding portion and the extruding portion. Since the rectifier is also
arranged between the molding portion and the extruding portion as shown in fig. 1 of Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146), it would be further obvious that placing a heat insulating member between the molding
portion (having spaces 15, 16) and the extruding portion 2, 7 would be either upstream or downstream
of the rectifier 4. If the heat insulating member is placed downstream of the rectifier 4, then the heat
insulating member would be arranged to be sandwiched directly between the other end of the molding
portion and the rectifier.
While claim 1 does not require temperature controllers, claim 1 does require a heat insulating
member. As mentioned above, Machen (US 3,305,893) discloses an extrusion molding machine,
wherein a heat insulating member 31 is arranged to be between the molding portion and the extruding
portion to thermally insulate the temperature controlled molding portion 17 from the temperature
controlled extruding portion (col. 2, lines 69-73). Thus, the extrusion molding machine of Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146) is modified with temperature controllers, as mentioned above, because Machen (US
3,305,893) discloses using a heat insulating member when there are temperature controllers.
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146), Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) are
all in the same art, namely the extrusion art. While both Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen
(US 3,305,893) both disclose temperature controllers, Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) is used in the
prior art combination because Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) discloses using temperature controllers
when extruding ceramic material, as mentioned above, and because the primary reference of Yamazaki
(US 2008/0102146) discloses extruding ceramic material, as mentioned above.
As to the increased diameter drum being configured as a temperature control drum through
which a fluid can flow, Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) discloses that the molding portion includes an
increased diameter drum and a straight drum, as mentioned above, and Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341)
discloses the molding portion is configured as a temperature control drum through which a fluid can
flow, as mentioned above. Thus, it would have been further obvious to modify the molding portion of
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) to be configured as a temperature control drum through which a fluid can
flow, as disclosed by Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341), because such a modification is known in the art
and would provide an alternative configuration for the molding portion capable temperature control.
Since the molding portion includes the increased diameter drum and the straight drum, it would have
been further obvious that the increased diameter drum and/or the straight drum would be configured
as a temperature control drum through which a fluid can flow in view of the teachings of Yamaguchi et
al. (US 6,432,341) (the molding portion is configured as a temperature control drum through which a
fluid can flow) with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claims 2 and 3, Machen (US 3,305,893) discloses that the heat insulating member 31
maintains the steepest possible temperature gradient between the molding portion 21 and the
extruding portion 19 (col. 2, lines 63-68), and fig. 1 shows the heat insulating member 31 having a
thickness in the extrusion direction. The heat insulating member inherently includes a thermal
conductivity capable of providing insulation between the molding portion 21 and the extruding portion
19. Thus, it would have been further obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill to further modify the heat
insulating member to have a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m-K or less OR to modify the heat insulating
member to have a thickness of from 1 to 50 mm in an extrusion direction because such limitations
would have been found in finding operable thermal conductivities and/or operable thicknesses for the
heat insulating member which enables the steepest possible temperature gradient between the molding
portion and the extruding portion as desired by Machen (US 3,305,893).
As to claim 6, Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) disclose the extrusion molding machine:
(Claim 6) wherein the temperature controller is provided in the molding portion (col. 5, lines 55-
61; col. 6, lines 3-55), as mentioned above. Note that the limitations of instant claim 6 are already
included in the prior art combination above for claim 1. In other words, as mentioned above, it "would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the
extrusion molding machine of Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) with temperature controllers, as disclosed
by Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341), because such a modification is known in the extrusion art, as
disclosed by Yamaguchi et al. US 6,432,341) and by Machen JS 3,305,893), and would enable the
molding portion and the extruding portion to be temperature controlled".
As to claim 7, the primary reference of Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) further discloses a screen 8
being provided in the molding portion (fig. 1), and Machen (US 3,305,893) further discloses a
temperature controller (leftmost 30 in fig. 1) provided between a screen 26 and a die 28 (fig. 1). It
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to
further modify the temperature controller for the molding portion to be provided between the screen
and the die, because such a modification is known in the art, as disclosed by Machen (US $3,305,893),
and would provide an alternative configuration for the temperature controller known to be operable in
the art.
As to claim 8, the primary reference of Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) further discloses the
molding portion having an increased diameter portion (as shown in fig. 1, the increased diameter
portion defines an upstream portion of space 15 located at un upstream portion of the molding
portion). Yamaguchi et al. JS 6,432,341) further discloses the temperature controller 30 for the molding portion being located at an upstream portion of the molding portion (figs. 1 and 3). Machen
(US 3,305,893) further discloses the temperature controller 22 for the molding portion being located at
an upstream portion of the molding portion (fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the temperature controller for the
molding portion to be provided in the increased diameter portion because the increased diameter
portion is located at an upstream portion of the molding portion, as disclosed by Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146), and because both Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen S 3,305,893) disclose
locating the temperature controller for the molding portion in the upstream portion of the molding
portion.
As to claim 9, as mentioned above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art,
at the time the invention was made, to modify the extrusion molding machine of Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146) with temperature controllers, as disclosed by Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341), because
such a modification is known in the extrusion art, as disclosed by Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341) and by
Machen (US 3,305,893), and would enable the molding portion and the extruding portion to be
temperature controlled. And Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341) further disclose the extrusion molding
machine (Claim 9) wherein the temperature controller is a temperature control drum through which a
fluid can flow (col. 6, lines 3- 23, pipe 3 defines a drum through which fluid can flow in passage 30);
wherein a temperature controller is provided in the extruding portion (col. 7, lines 23-35).
As to claims 11-12, the primary reference of Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146) further discloses the
extrusion molding machine:
(Claim 11) wherein the extrusion molding machine is used for producing a ceramic molded
product [0004], [(0023]-[0025], [0031]; and
(Claim 12) further discloses a method for producing a molded product, comprising molding a
molding material using the extrusion molding machine [0004], [(0023]-[0025], [0031].
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) as applied to
claims 1-3, 6-9 and 11-12 above, and further in view of Prutton (US 2,078,509).
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146), Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) do
not disclose the limitations of claim 4.
Prutton (US 2,078,509) discloses an extrusion molding machine including a heat insulating
member 9 formed from various materials including resin (col. 2, lines 21-60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the heat insulating member to be formed of a heat insulating resin because it is
known it is known in the extrusion art that heat insulating members can be made from various materials
including resin, as disclosed by Prutton (US 2,078,509).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) as applied to
claims 1-3, 6-9 and 11-12 above, and further in view of Prutton (US 2,078,509) and Burrafato et al. (US
4,913,863).
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146), Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) do
not disclose the limitations of claim 5.
Prutton (US 2,078,509) is applied as above.
Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose an extrusion molding machine (figs. 1-2) including a heat insulating member 56, wherein a protective member for protecting the heat insulating member is arranged at a position that will be in contact with a molding material (fig. 2 shows the protective
member being integrally formed by drum members adjacent the heat insulating member 56 to prevent
the member 56 from contacting molding material; note that instant fig. 1 shows the protective member
50 being integrally formed with the drum 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the heat insulating member to be formed of a heat insulating resin because it is
known it is known in the extrusion art that heat insulating members can be made from various materials
including resin, as disclosed by Prutton (US 2,078,509); AND to further modify the extrusion molding
machine with a protective member, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a
modification is known in the extrusion art and would protect the heat insulating member from contact
with molding material.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) as applied to
claims 1-3, 6-9 and 11-12 above, and further in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863).
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146), Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) do
not disclose the limitations of claim 10.
Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose an extrusion molding machine (figs. 1-2) including a
molding portion 10a-10c, 26, wherein the outer circumference of the molding portion is covered with a
heat insulating sheet to thermally insulate the molding section (col. 5, lines 49-55; "blanket of thermal
insulation").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the extrusion molding machine wherein the outer circumference of the molding
portion is covered with a heat insulating sheet, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because
such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would enable thermal insulation of the molding
section.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US
2008/0102146) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) as applied to
claims 1-3, 6-9 and 11-12 above, and further in view of Prutton (US 2,078,509) and anyone of KR 1198-
073141, Kawabe et al. (US 5,360,829) and Yang (US 2016/0082628).
Yamazaki (US 2008/0102146), Yamaguchi al. (US 6,432,341) and Machen (US 3,305,893) do
not disclose the limitations of claim 13.
Prutton (US 2,078,509) discloses an extrusion molding machine including a heat insulating
member 9 formed from various materials including resin (col. 2, lines 21-60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the heat insulating member to be formed of a heat insulating resin because it is
known it is known in the extrusion art that heat insulating members can be made from various materials
including resin, as disclosed by Prutton (US 2,078,509).
KR 1198-073141 discloses a heat insulating resin being a polyacetal resin (See English translation
at Background Art Section).
Kawabe et al. (US 5,360,829) discloses a heat insulating resin being a polyamide resin (col. 1,
lines 18-22).
Yang (US 2016/0082628) discloses a heat insulating resin being a polyethylene resin or a
polypropylene resin [0025].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the heat insulating resin to be one selected from the group consisting of a
polyacetal resin, a polyamide resin, a polyethylene resin and a polypropylene resin because such resins are known to be heat insulating materials in the heat insulating art, as respectively recited by anyone of
KR 1198-073141, Kawabe et al. (US 5,360,829) and Yang (US 2016/0082628).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the present invention is distinguishable over the applied prior art for the
following reasons. As explained in paragraph [0014] of the present specification, kneading a molding material produces a high temperature in the interior of the extruding portion, which may dry and harden the molding material. As a result, the extruding portion is cooled in order to control the temperature of the interior of the extruding portion, which consequently cools down the rectifier. If a heat insulating member is disposed upstream of the rectifier (i.e., between the extruding portion and the rectifier), the cooled rectifier would directly contact the molding portion leading to an increase in temperature in the central portion of the molding material in a cross section perpendicular to the extrusion direction and a decrease in the temperature in the outer peripheral portion of the molding material (i.e., a non-uniform temperature distribution of the molding material) (see present specification, paragraph [0015]). Since temperature affects the extrusion rate of the molding material, the extrusion rate in the central portion is higher than the extrusion rate in the outer peripheral portion,
resulting in the inability to obtain a molded body having a desired dimensional accuracy (Ibid.).
In contrast, in the extrusion molding machine of the present invention, arranging the heat insulating member to be sandwiched directly between the other end of the molding portion and the rectifier, as claimed, effectively prevents the molding portion on the extruding portion side from being cooled by blocking the cooling impact from both the extruding portion and the rectifier itself (see present specification, paragraph [0016]). This unique arrangement provides a uniform temperature distribution across the cross-section of the molding material such that fluctuations in the extrusion rate of the molding material are suppressed, which yields the prominent effect of significantly improving dimensional accuracy of the molded body (Ibid.). Clearly, arranging the heat insulating member to be sandwiched directly between the other end of the molding portion and the rectifier, as claimed, is not a
mere design choice, but rather a non-obvious configuration driven by a specific recognition of a technical problem backed by a distinct technical concept.
However, such arguments are not commensurate in scope with the instant claims which do not include such recitations presented by the present invention argued above, such as a cooled rectifier.
Applicants argue that, in view of the above, the present invention is distinguishable over the applied prior art because Yamazaki discloses that the straightening vane 4 (asserted rectifier), which includes a first straightening vane 5 and a second straightening vane 6, is designed to prevent deformation of a formed body even if the amount of formed body to be extruded is changed (see Yamazaki, paragraph [0025], for example). Machen merely discloses that insulation 31 is used to maintain the steepest possible temperature gradient between the flange 19a of the body 19 and the flange 21a of the melting chamber 21, which contributes to the efficiency of cooling and the short compact length of the disclosed extrusion molding machine (see Machen, Col. 2, lines 63-67). However, Machen fails to teach or suggest that the extrusion molding machine includes a rectifier arranged between the extruding portion and the molding portion. As such, Yamazaki and Machen, either alone or in combination, fail to recognize the thermal impact that a rectifier has on the temperature distribution and extrusion rate of the molding material, much less the unexpected effects described above associated with an extrusion molding machine that includes a heat insulting member specifically arranged to be sandwiched directly between the other end of the molding portion and the rectifier, as recited in claim 1. Yamaguchi fails to overcome the deficiencies of Yamazaki and Machen.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The instant specification paragraph [0016] discloses
“In contrast, the extrusion molding machine 1 according to the present embodiment arranges the heat insulating member 40 between the molding portion 20 and the rectifier 30, so that the heat of the space between the extruding portion 10 and the molding portion 20 is insulated, and the effect of the cooled molding portion 10 can prevent the molding portion 20 on the extruding portion 10 side from being cooled.” There is no disclosure of the thermal impact that a rectifier has on the temperature distribution and extrusion rate of the molding material OR of the unexpected effects associated with an extrusion molding machine that includes a heat insulting member specifically arranged to be sandwiched directly between the other end of the molding portion and the rectifier. The benefit comparison is to prior art without a heat insulating member (i.e., [0015] “In the conventional extrusion molding machine, the heat insulating member 40 is not arranged between the molding portion 20 and the rectifier 30, so that the molding portion 20 on the extruding portion 10 side is also cooled by an influence of the cooled extruding portion 10”). Thus, the benefit of adding a heat insulating member is “so that the heat of the space between the extruding portion 10 and the molding portion 20 is insulated”. Providing a heat insulating member between an extruding portion and a molding portion to prevent heat transfer therebetween is known in the extrusion art, as disclosed by Machen (US 3,305,893) as mentioned above. While Machen fails to teach or suggest that the extrusion molding machine includes a rectifier arranged between the extruding portion and the molding portion, such placement would be obvious as mentioned in the prior art rejections above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH S LEYSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at 5712705343. 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.
/J.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/XIAO S ZHAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights