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 .
Response to Arguments
The response as filed 12/2/2025 has been considered. There were no claim amendments filed with the response. A telephone call was placed to Applicant’s representative on 2/3/2026 to confirm that no claim amendments had been filed but the representative could not be reached. As such, the response is being considered as filed.
The previous objections to the claims and specifications as well as rejections to the claims under 112 remain outstanding.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Altonen fails to discloses key features of the independent claims and describes different elements serving distinct functions and there is no unambiguous disclosure of the claimed combination as a whole. Examiner disagrees. Examiner notes that the remarks appear to be cut off in the first paragraph of page 3 and no specific features are listed as allegedly not being taught by Altonen. With respect to the second and third paragraphs on page 3 of the remarks, Altonen can describe additional elements within the disclosure and still anticipate the claim as long as the claimed elements are still anticipated.
Applicant argues with respect to claims 2 and 21 that Aase does not disclose a preacher plate with a plurality of holes. Examiner notes that Aase [0057] discloses a breaker plate. A breaker plate is a perforated metal disk. Therefore, a breaker plate would necessarily have a plurality of holes.
Applicant argues with respect to claim 28 that Shibata discloses a hot runner system not reheating a “cold runner portion.” As noted in the 112(b) section below, the term “cold runner” as used in the claims is ambiguous. Cold runners are portions of the melt distribution system that are not heated during injection molding, see [0106] of the instant specification as published. Hot runners, by contrast, are heated. The claims refer to reheating a cold runner portion. A heated runner portion is, by definition, a hot runner. Ignoring the nomenclature of hot vs cold, Shibata discloses a runner system which is reheated and meets the claim as best can be interpreted.
Specification
The amendment filed 5/12/2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
The wider shot ranges being 20-80% of the maximum capacity of the molding machine and the size of the screw being adjusted
The pressure relief valve cooperating with pressure sensors, the pressure sensor, etc.
Adjusting the barrel and screw size
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
The step f was removed but the “(f)” does not appear to have been removed. The remaining steps should also be updated to appear in a sequential order to avoid confusion.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 24 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 24 recites a step “(i)” and a step “(a)”. Examiner suggests consistent labeling using either letters or numerals.
Claims 3-20 should be listed with their status indicated as “(canceled)”. As per MPEP §714 and 37 CFR 1.121, “Each amendment document that includes a change to an existing claim, cancellation of an existing claim or addition of a new claim, must include a complete listing of all claims ever presented, including the text of all pending and withdrawn claims, in the application. The claim listing, including the text of the claims, in the amendment document will serve to replace all prior versions of the claims, in the application. In the claim listing, the status of every claim must be indicated after its claim number by using one of the following identifiers in a parenthetical expression: (Original), (Currently amended), (Canceled), (Withdrawn), (Previously presented), (New), and (Not entered).”
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 1-2 and 21-28 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.
Claim 1 describes “measuring the pressure a first position of the extruding plasticizing screw” and “measuring the pressure a first position of the extruding plasticizing screw”. While the specification describes measuring the pressure at various points, there is no disclosure of measuring the pressure at a first position of the screw or a second position of the screw. This limitation is not supported by the specification and is new matter. Dependent claims 2 and 21-23 are also rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
Claim 21 describes “to identify difference in the melt pressure to generate a melt-pressure variation value, further wherein the adjusting of the constant melt pressure is performed by varying the geometry and sizes of the plurality of the holes of the breaker plate of the screen breaker plate assembly based on the melt-pressure variation value” which is not supported by the original specification. Although the specification describes varying the geometry or sizes of the holes on a breaker plate, the specification does not describe any “melt-pressure variation value” or that adjusting the constant melt pressure is performed via varying the hole geometry. This is considered new matter.
Claim 24 describes a wider range of the shot weight including 20%-80% of the maximum capacity. This limitation is not supported by the original specification and is considered new matter. Dependent claims 25-28 are also rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
Claim 26 recites the claim “an injection molding machine.” It is not clear if this is the same or a different machine as previously recited in claim 24. This is interpreted as being any machine.
Claim 27 describes the cold runner portion remaining the mold component “after the molded part ejected after every molding cycle.” This limitation is not supported by the original specification. The original specification does not describe the cold runner remaining in the mold component.
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 1-2 and 22-28 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.
Claim 1 recites “the supply and the delivery side of the molding apparatus” but it is not clear what the supply and delivery sides are as they lack antecedent basis. This is interpreted to be any parts of the apparatus. Dependent claims 2 and 21-23 are also rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
Claim 1 recites “measuring the pressure a first position of the extruding plasticizing screw” and measuring the pressure a second position of the extruding plasticizing screw”. It appears some words or claim language may have been omitted and it is not entirely clear what this means. Examiner is interpreting these limitations to mean a pressure is measured at the time when the screw is in a first or second position while rotating.
Claim 24 recites “having a substantially constant extrusion in an injection molding machine to build rotating at least one screw” which is unclear. It is not clear what “to build” is referring to in this limitation. This is being interpreted as building pressure. Dependent claims 25-28 are also rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
Claim 24 recites “enabling a given injection molding machine to have…wider range of the shot weight ranges from 20 percent – 80 percent of the maximum capacity” which is unclear. It is not clear if the claim is requiring injecting of a shot that is wider than a previous shot or if the claim is trying to describe that the capacity of the machine has increased by 20%-80%. This limitation is also not adequately described in the specification, see 112(a) section above. This is being interpreted to mean that the machine is capable of injecting anywhere from 20%-80% of its maximum shot capacity.
Claims 27-28 recite a “a hot runner module including at least one cold runner portion… that is reheated”. It is not clear how this component could be a cold runner portion that is being heated. Cold runners are portions of the injection molding manifolds that are not heated. Hot runners are manifolds which are heated. For the purposes of examination, this is being interpreted as being any runner portion which is heated.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
Claims 1 and 22-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altonen (US 2015/0115491).
Regarding claim 1, Altonen meets the claimed, A method of molding a plastic material at substantially constant and relatively low melt pressure, (Altonen [0062]-[0063] describe a low pressure injection molding machine) wherein the method comprising:(a) introducing a pressurized molten thermoplastic material into a mold using an extruding plasticizing screw delivering the molten thermoplastic material into at least one mold cavity of a molding apparatus; (Altonen [0062]-[0063] describe adding thermoplastic pellets 16 to an injection system and injecting into a mold 28) (b) rotating at least one screw to set a pressurized heating profile the extruding plasticizing screw turning and holding a substantial constant pressure within the molding apparatus keeping the molten thermoplastic material pressurized thereby minimizing gas release and degradation (Altonen [0062] describes a reciprocating screw, reciprocating screws turn while the pellets 16 are compressed and melted which creates a constant and pressurized heating profile of the pellets, the low constant pressure would decrease degradation and gas release) (c) measuring the first pressure a first position of the extruding plasticizing screw rotating at a first time;(d) measuring the pressure a second position of the extruding plasticizing screw rotating at a second time; (e) determining a position difference between the first position and the second position; (Altonen claim 17 and [0109] describe measuring a first position of the screw, a second position, determining a position difference, and comparing, Altonen [0065] describes measuring the pressure as the fill is completed as the screw is moving) (g) directing the molten pressurized thermoplastic material to a screen breaker plate and/or a pressure relief valve assembly controlling the pressurized thermoplastic material on both the supply and deliver side of the molding apparatus into said mold assembly for uniform melting and generating a variable back pressure within the molding assembly and adjusting pressure of the molten thermoplastic material using a pressure relief valve or varying geometry or size of the screen breaker plate assembly to pre-determined value (Altonen [0067] describes a using a pressure relief valve during molding to prevent over pressurization of the mold, using a pressure relief valve varies the pressure) while filling the at least one mold cavity with the molten thermoplastic material (Altonen [0084] describes pressure below 6,000 psi.)
Regarding claim 22, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 1,wherein the molding apparatus includes a plurality of sensors for continuously measuring either pressure, temperature, or flow of the molten thermoplastic material within the mold cavity when the molten thermoplastic material entering the mold cavity and the molten thermoplastic for automatically adjusting an extrusion molding process in an extrusion molding machine with the at least one mold cavity to compensate variations in flowability or temperature of the molten thermoplastic material (Altonen [0073] discloses using a number of sensors to monitor and adjust the injection process for variations in temperature and viscosity.)
Regarding claim 23, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 1,wherein the molding apparatus is an injection molding machine with at least one nozzle shut-off valve to interrupt flow of the molten thermoplastic material from a nozzle into a mold sprue of the injection molding machine for minimizing cut off of material flow at the nozzle and provide the capability to plasticize and pressurize the molten thermoplastic material during mold opening and closing period. (Altonen [0037] describes a valve gate used to shut off flow of material between the nozzle and a gate of a hot runner system.)
Regarding claim 24, Altonen meets the claimed, A method of plastic molding at a substantially constant and relatively low pressure, the method comprising:(a) having a substantially constant extrusion in an injection molding machine to build rotating at least one screw to set a pressurized heating profile the extruding plasticizing screw turning and holding a substantial constant pressure within the molding apparatus keeping the molten thermoplastic material pressurized thereby minimizing gas release and degradation back pressure needed to keep a constant low pressure; (Altonen [0062] and [0085] describes maintaining a low constant pressure and [0103] describes a proportional valve for maintaining pressure on the reciprocal screw) and,(b) while maintaining the melt pressure substantially constant and enabling a given injection molding machine to have a wider range of shot weight without the degeneration of the material in the injection unit, wherein the wider shot range of the shot weight ranges from 20 percent – 80 percent of maximum capacity of the injection molding machine (Altonen [0084] describes low constant pressure promotes a uniform and consistent product, [0085]-[0086] describes the shot sizes capable.)
Regarding claim 25, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 24 further including a nozzle shut-off valve employed to interrupt the flow of molten material from the nozzle into the mold sprue for minimizing cut off of material flow at the nozzle and provide the capability to plasticize and pressurize the molten thermoplastic material during mold opening period. (Altonen [0037] describes a valve gate used to shut off flow of material between the nozzle and a gate of a hot runner system. When the valve is closed the machine is capable of plasticizing even if the mold is open.)
Regarding claim 26, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 24 further including at least one nozzle shut-off valves placed in the mold sprue employed to interrupt the flow of molten material, further wherein each of the at least one nozzle shut-off valves is positioned art individual one or more cavities in a valve gate hot runner module in an injection molding machine with multiple cavities (Altonen [0037] describes a valve gate used to shut off flow of material between a nozzle and a gate of a hot runner system. Altonen [0063] discloses multiple mod cavities.))
Regarding claim 27, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 24 further including a hot runner module including at least one cold runner portion in a mold component that is reheated during every molding cycle before injection of the next portion of molten plastic material the cold runner portion stays in the mold component after the molded part ejected after every molding cycle and further reheated at a following cycle during subsequent plastic molding cycle of a work-piece. (Altonen [0046] and [0117] describe the low pressure system includes a heated runner or feed system that is heated during injection.)
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 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.
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 2 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altonen modified by Aase (US 2011/0182460.)
Regarding claim 2, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 1, a manifold including a heated runner module in fluid communication with the at least one mold cavity, to the heated runner module (Altonen [0046] and [0117] describe the low pressure system includes a heated runner or feed system that is heated during injection.)
Altonen does not describe a screen breaker plate and does not meet the claimed, wherein the screen breaker plate and/or a pressure relief valve assembly includes one or more screen for filtering the thermoplastic material, further wherein each of the one or more screen is reinforced with a breaker plate positioned on at least one side of the each of the one or more screens, further the breaker plate includes a plurality of holes for generating a variable back pressure for uniform melting and mixing of the thermoplastic material by varying numbers of the plurality of holes and geometry of the plurality of holes further wherein the screen breaker plate and/or a pressure relief valve plate assembly is positioned in a manifold including a heated runner module in fluid communication with the at least one mold cavity, further wherein the melt pressure of the molten thermoplastic material is maintained substantially constant while the molten thermoplastic material is transported from an entry point through the breaker plate to the heated runner module.
Analogous in the field of injection molding Aase describes an injection molding process and meets the claimed, wherein the screen breaker plate and/or a pressure relief valve assembly includes one or more screen for filtering the thermoplastic material, (Aase [0057] describes a screen 230) further wherein each of the one or more screen is reinforced with a breaker plate positioned on at least one side of the each of the one or more screens, further the breaker plate includes a plurality of holes for generating a variable back pressure for uniform melting and mixing of the thermoplastic material by varying numbers of the plurality of holes and geometry of the plurality of holes , (Aase [0057] describes a breaker plate combined with the screen to provide back pressure for uniform mixing in the barrel and that the pressure can be adjusted by changing the number of screens or size of the openings) further wherein the screen breaker plate and/or a pressure relief valve plate assembly is positioned in a manifold including in fluid communication with the at least one mold cavity, (Aase [0057]-[0058] describe the breaker plate is located within a feedpipe) further wherein the melt pressure of the molten thermoplastic material is maintained substantially constant while the molten thermoplastic material is transported from an entry point through the breaker plate (Aase [0057]-[0058] describes back pressure is maintained during passage through the breaker plate.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the method of pushing material through a pressure relief valve as described in Altonen with the method of filtering the material through a breaker plate and screen and altering the geometry of the screens as disclosed in Aase in order to prevent contaminants and avoid defects caused by rotational stresses, see Aase [0057]-[0058].
Regarding claim 21, Altonen meets the claimed, The method of claim 1,wherein the adjusting of the pressure of the molten thermoplastic material for maintaining the constant melt pressure includes monitoring of a melt pressure of the molten thermoplastic material upon entering into the at least one mold cavity and the melt pressure of the molten thermoplastic material during molding of the molten thermoplastic material within the at least one mold cavity to identify difference in the melt pressure to generate a melt-pressure variation value (Altonen [0073] discloses using a sensor in the mold cavity to monitor the melt pressure and any changes).
Altonen does not describe the breaker plate and does not meet the claimed, further wherein the adjusting of the constant melt pressure is performed by varying the geometry and sizes of the plurality of the holes of the breaker plate of the screen breaker plate assembly based on the melt-pressure variation value.
Analogous in the field of injection molding Aase describes an injection molding process and meets the claimed, further wherein the adjusting of the constant melt pressure is performed by varying the geometry and sizes of the plurality of the holes of the breaker plate of the screen breaker plate assembly based on the melt-pressure variation value (Aase [0057] describes a breaker plate combined with the screen to provide back pressure for uniform mixing in the barrel and that the pressure can be adjusted by changing the number of screens or size of the openings).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the injection molding method of Altonen with the method of filtering the material through a breaker plate and screen and altering the geometry of the screens as disclosed in Aase in order to prevent contaminants and avoid defects caused by rotational stresses, see Aase [0057]-[0058].
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altonen modified by Shibata (US 2001/0000402.)
Regarding claim 28, Altonen discloses a heater runner system but does not disclose induction heating and does not meet the claimed, The method of claim 27 further including reheating of the at least one cold runner portion in a work piece using either inductive heating or a short heating process.
Analogous in the field of injection molding, Shibata meets the claimed, The method of claim 27 further including reheating of the at least one cold runner portion in a work piece using either inductive heating or a short heating process (Shibata [0012] describes heating a hot runner system by induction heating.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the hot runner system of Altonen with the step of heating the hot runners using induction heating as described in Shibata for uniform heating over the entire length of the runner, see Shibata [0012].
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 VICTORIA BARTLETT whose telephone number is (571)272-4953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
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 Zhao can be reached on 571-270-5343. 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.
/V.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/XIAO S ZHAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744