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, 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863).
Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) disclose an extrusion molding machine and a method for
producing a molded body 8 by extruding a molding material using the extrusion molding machine
comprising a molding portion (fig. 1; 64, 3, 65, 4 and unlabeled element in fig. 1 housing/holding
elements 65 and 4 and thus the unlabeled element defining a die holding member) having one end and
other end, the one end having a die 4, the other end being connected to an extrusion port of an
extrusion portion (2, 21; fig. 1), the molding portion also comprising a screen 63 arranged therein,
wherein the molding portion comprises: a temperature controlling member 30 between the
screen 63 and the die 4 (fig. 1); and
wherein the extrusion molding machine is used for producing a ceramic honeycomb molded
body 8 (figs. 1, 3; [0050]-[0086]).
However, Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) does not disclose the temperature controlling
members being two or more temperature controlling members, and a heat insulating member arranged
between the two or more temperature controlling members.
Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1) comprising a
molding portion 10, 24, 26 having one end and other end, the one end having a die 26, the other end
being connected to an extrusion port of 22 an extrusion portion 18, wherein the molding portion
comprises: two or more temperature controlling members 10a, 10b, 10c; and a heat insulating member
56 arranged between the two or more temperature controlling members (figs. 1-3; col. 3, line 51, to col.
6, line 7; the seals 56 serve to thermally insulate the temperature controlling members (die spools or
drums) 10a-10c from one another enabling more accurate control to be exercised over individual ones
of the temperature controlling members 10a-10c and thus facilitate a desired temperature profile along
the length of the molding portion defined by the temperature controlling members).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the temperature controlling member of Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) to be two
or more temperature controlling members with a heat insulating member arranged between the two or
more temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a
modification is known in the extrusion art and would provide an alternative configuration for controlling
the temperature of the molding portion capable of facilitating a desired temperature profile along the
length of the molding portion. In other words, a single temperature controlling member controls to one desired temperature, whereas multiple temperature controlling members control to multiple desired temperatures (temperature profile) along the length of the molding portion.
As to claim 4, Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) further discloses that the temperature controlling
members can be defined by die spools (drums) 10a-10c and jackets 72a, 72b, 72c through which through which a fluid can flow (figs. 1-3; col. 4, line 22, to col. 6, line 2, jackets 72a-72c may be heating or cooling jackets in which a suitable heat exchange fluid circulates). 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 controlling members to be drums, as recited by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the temperature controlling members known to be operable in the art.
As to claim 6, Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) further discloses the method including controlling
the two or more temperature controlling members to different temperatures (col. 5, lines 56-60,
decreasing temperature gradient achieved by the die spools having decreasing (different)
temperatures). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention
was made, to further modify the method by controlling the two or more temperature controlling
members to different temperatures, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a
modification is known in the art and would enable differential temperature gradients in the extrusion
material.
Claim(s) 2 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) as applied to claims 1, 4 and 6 above, and
further in view of Orsini (US 2,897,541).
Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) and Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) do not disclose the
limitations of claim 2 and 7. Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) discloses a die holding member, as
mentioned above.
Orsini US 2,897,541) disclose an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1) and a method for producing
a molded body by extruding a molding material using the extrusion molding machine (col. 3, lines 41-64)
comprising a molding portion 28, 35, 36, 40 having one end and other end, the one end having a die 40
(broadest reasonable interpretation is a downstream element of the molding portion from which
extrudate is discharged; instant fig. 1 shows the die 21 being a downstream element of the molding
portion 20 from which extrudate is discharged), the other end being connected to an extrusion port of
an extrusion portion 12, the molding portion also comprising a screen 25 arranged therein, wherein the
molding portion comprises: two or more temperature controlling members 38 between the screen 25
and the die 40 (see fig. 1);
wherein the molding portion further comprises a die holding member (fig. 1; the downstream
end of element 35 which holds the die 40) that holds the die 40 and can control a temperature (fig. 1
shows a temperature controlling member (heating strip) 38 in the die holding member that is adjacent
the die 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the die holding member with a temperature controlling member to be able to
control a temperature, as disclosed by Orsini (US 2,897,541), because such a modification is known in
the art and would enable the temperature of the die to be controlled.
As to claim 7, Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) further discloses that the temperature
controlling member is used to control the extrusion material to be at a desired processing condition
dependent upon the temperature of the extrusion material ([0073]-[0085], the temperature controlling
member is heated or cooled to control the extrusion material to be at a desired shape which is dependent upon the extrusion material flow velocity distribution which is dependent upon the
temperature of the extrusion material). Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose the temperature
controlling members are used to facilitate a desired temperature profile along a length of the molding
portion, as mentioned above, and Orsini (US 2,897,541) further discloses controlling all the temperature
controlling members to control the extrusion material to be at a desired processing condition
dependent upon the temperature of the extrusion material (col. 2, lines 59-61, all the temperature
controlling members heat the molding portion to keep the extrusion material in a substantially fluid
state). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the method wherein the die holding member is controlled to the same
temperature as that of the temperature controlling member located at the most downstream of the two
or more temperature controlling members because such control would have been found in view of the
teachings of Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102), Orsini (US 2,897,541) and Burrafato et al. (US
4,913,863), above. While Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) discloses controlling the temperature of
the extrusion material by a temperature controlling member before the die, it is also known in the
extrusion art to control the temperature of the extrusion material before the die and within the die with
a plurality of temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Orsini (US 2,897,541). Thus, depending
upon the desired extrusion material processing condition which is dependent upon the temperature of
the extrusion material, as mentioned in the prior art above, the temperatures of the temperature
controlling members can be controlled to be the same or different depending upon the actual
processing condition. If the desired material processing condition is maintained, then the temperatures
would be the same. If not maintained, then the temperatures would be different in order to change the
actual material processing condition to the desired material processing condition. In other words, it
would be further obvious that the temperatures of the temperature controlling members along the
length of the molding portion can be the same or different depending upon the desired material
processing condition along the length of the molding portion.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) as applied to claims 1, 4 and 6 above, and
further in view of Tajima et al. (US 2016/0001460).
Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) and Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) do not disclose the
limitations of claim 3.
Tajima et al. (US 2016/0001460) discloses an extrusion molding machine for producing a
ceramic molding body [0001] including a molding portion 30 having a diameter increased part 32
between an end of the molding portion 30 connected to an extrusion port of an extrusion section 10, 20
AND a screen 34.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the molding portion with a diameter increased part, as disclosed by Tajima et
al. (US 2016/0001460), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative
configuration for the machine known to be operable in the art. As to the diameter increased part being
provided with a temperature controlling member, Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose placing
temperature controlling members along the length of the molding portion to enable temperature
control of the extrusion material in the molding portion prior to extrusion, as mentioned above.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) and CN 110103350.
Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) disclose an extrusion molding machine and a method for
producing a molded body 8 by extruding a molding material using the extrusion molding machine
comprising a molding portion (fig. 1; 64, 3, 65, 4 and unlabeled element in fig. 1 housing/holding
elements 65 and 4 and thus the unlabeled element defining a die holding member) having one end and
other end, the one end having a die 4, the other end being connected to an extrusion port of an
extrusion portion (2, 21; fig. 1), the molding portion also comprising a screen 63 arranged therein,
wherein the molding portion comprises: a temperature controlling member 30 between the
screen 63 and the die 4 (fig. 1); and
wherein the extrusion molding machine is used for producing a ceramic honeycomb molded
body 8 (figs. 1, 3; [0050]-[0086]).
However, Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) does not disclose the temperature controlling
members being two or more temperature controlling members, and a heat insulating member arranged
between the two or more temperature controlling members.
Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1) comprising a
molding portion 10, 24, 26 having one end and other end, the one end having a die 26, the other end
being connected to an extrusion port of 22 an extrusion portion 18, wherein the molding portion
comprises: two or more temperature controlling members 10a, 10b, 10c; and a heat insulating member
56 arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members (figs. 1-3; col. 3, line 51, to col.
6, line 7; the seals 56 serve to thermally insulate the temperature controlling members (die spools or
drums) 10a-10c from one another enabling more accurate control to be exercised over individual ones
of the temperature controlling members 10a-10c and thus facilitate a desired temperature profile along
the length of the molding portion defined by the temperature controlling members).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the temperature controlling member of Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) to be two
or more temperature controlling members with a heat insulating member arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would provide an alternative configuration for controlling the temperature of the molding portion capable of facilitating a desired temperature profile along the length of the molding portion.
As to the heat insulating member having a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m∙K or less, such
thermal conductivity would have been found by an artisan of ordinary skill in finding operable thermal
conductivities for the heat insulating member to thermally insulate (prevent heat transfer) in an
extrusion apparatus as taught by Burrafato. CN 110103350 discloses an extrusion apparatus including a
heat insulating member having a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m∙K or less (See English translation
[0095], a thermal conductivity of at most 1 W/m∙K, preferably at most 0.6 W/m∙K, in particular 0.1
W/m∙K). 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 have a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m-K or
less, as disclosed by CN 110103350, because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would
provide a thermal conductivity for the heat insulating member known to be operable in extrusion
apparatus.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orsini (US 2,897,541) in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) and CN 110103350.
This is an alternative rejection of claim 8.
Orsini (US S 2,897,541) disclose an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1) and a method for producing a molded body by extruding a molding material using the extrusion molding machine (col. 3, lines 41-64) comprising a molding portion 28, 35, 36, 40 having one end and other end, the one end having a die 40 (broadest reasonable interpretation is a downstream element of the molding portion from which extrudate is discharged; instant fig. 1 shows the die 21 being a downstream element of the molding portion 20 from which extrudate is discharged), the other end being connected to an extrusion port of an extrusion portion 12, the molding portion also comprising a screen 25 arranged therein, wherein the molding portion comprises: two or more temperature controlling members 38 between the screen 25 and the die 40 (see fig. 1).
However, Orsini (US 2,897,541) does not disclose a heat insulating member arranged between
the two or more temperature controlling members.
Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) disclose an extrusion molding machine (fig. 1) comprising a
molding portion 10, 24, 26 having one end and other end, the one end having a die 26, the other end
being connected to an extrusion port of 22 an extrusion portion 18, wherein the molding portion
comprises: two or more temperature controlling members 10a, 10b, 10c; and a heat insulating member
56 arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members (figs. 1-3; col. 3, line 51, to col. 5, line 26; the seals 56 serve to thermally insulate the die spools 10a-10c from one another enabling more accurate control to be exercised over individual ones of the die spools 10a-10c).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the machine of Orsini (US 2,897,541) with a heat insulating member arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a modification is known in the art and would enable more accurate control to be exercised over individual ones of the temperature controlling members. It should be noted that the molding portions of both Orsini (upper part 35 and lower part 36; figs. 1-2) and Burrafato (upper parts 34a-34c and lower parts 36a-36c; col. 4, lines 38-47) have upper and lower parts. The upper and lower parts 35, 36 of Orsini are continuous in the longitudinal direction, and thus, as shown in fig. 1 of Orsini, each heating strips 38 primarily heats its respective longitudinal section of the upper and lower parts, but heat from a first longitudinal section can transfer to a second longitudinal section because the upper and lower parts are continuous in the longitudinal direction. The upper and lower parts of Burrafato are separated to define die spools (i.e., separated longitudinal sections) with a heat insulating member (seal 56) between the die spools which allow more accurate temperature control to be exercised over individual ones of the die spools (i.e., die sections) and thus facilitate the creation of the desired temperature profile defined by the die spool cavities (col. 5, lines 12-26). The heat insulating member 56 prevents heat transfer between the die spools which enables more accurate temperature control of a respective die spool by its respective temperature controlling member. Thus, there is motivation to modify the continuous upper and lower parts of Orsini to be separated with a heat insulating member therebetween, as disclosed by Burrafato, because such a modification is known in the art and would allow more accurate temperature control to be exercised over individual ones of separated upper and lower parts (i.e. over individual separated die spools) and thus facilitate the creation of the desired temperature profile defined by the die spool cavities.
As to the heat insulating member having a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m∙K or less, such
thermal conductivity would have been found by an artisan of ordinary skill in finding operable thermal
conductivities for the heat insulating member to thermally insulate (prevent heat transfer) in an
extrusion apparatus as taught by Burrafato. CN 110103350 discloses an extrusion apparatus including a
heat insulating member having a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m∙K or less (See English translation
[0095], a thermal conductivity of at most 1 W/m∙K, preferably at most 0.6 W/m∙K, in particular 0.1
W/m∙K). 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 have a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m∙K or
less, as disclosed by CN 110103350, because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would
provide a thermal conductivity for the heat insulating member known to be operable in extrusion
apparatus.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not
patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 is fully encompassed by claim 9 of U.S. Patent No.
12,097,638.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 3 and 6, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 in view of Yamaguchi al.
(US 2002/0167102). Claims 3 and 6, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 substantially disclose
the machine, as recited by instant claims 2 and 3, except wherein the extrusion molding machine is used
for producing a ceramic honeycomb molded body. Yamaguchi et al. (US 2002/0167102) is applied as
above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the machine of claims 3 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 wherein the extrusion
molding machine is used for producing a ceramic honeycomb molded body, as disclosed by Yamaguchi
et al. (US 2002/0167102), because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would enable
production of a ceramic honeycomb molded body.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863). Claim 9 of U.S. Patent
No. 12,097,638 substantially discloses the machine except for a drum as recited claim 4. Burrafato et al.
S 4,913,863) is applied as above. 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 controlling members of claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 to be drums and jackets, as recited by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the temperature controlling members known to be operable in the art.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 in view of Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863)CN 110103350. Claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 substantially discloses the machine except for the heat insulating member being arranged directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members OR for a thermal conductivity as recited claim 8. Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863) and CN 110103350 are applied as above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the heat insulating member of claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 to be arranged directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Burrafato et al. (US 4,913,863), because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would provide an alternative configuration for controlling the temperature of the molding portion capable of facilitating a desired temperature profile along the length of the molding portion AND to further modify the heat insulating member of claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,097,638 to have a thermal conductivity of 0.5 W/m∙K or less, as disclosed by CN 110103350, because such a modification is known in the extrusion art and would provide a thermal conductivity for the heat insulating member known to be operable in extrusion apparatus.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 12, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that, as an initial matter, Applicant respectfully disagrees with the PTO's asserted position that the die spools (10a, 10b, 10c) would have corresponded to the claimed
temperature controlling members. To the contrary, a person of ordinary skill in the art
would have recognized that the electrical resistance jackets (70a, 70b, 70c) would
have corresponded to the claimed temperature controlling members, as evidenced by
the disclosure in Col. 5, lines 56-60 of Burrafato.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The instant specification [0025] discloses that the temperature controlling members 23a and 23b may be “temperature controlling drums” whose temperature can be adjusted by heating/cooling fluid. Burrafato discloses that the die spool assembly 10 (i.e., die spools (drums) 10a, 10b, 10c) “gradually cools the extrudate as it is conveyed through the die cavity” and that the temperature of the die spool (drums) are adjusted by electrical resistance or by heating/cooling fluid (col. 5, line 44, to col. 6, line 7). Thus, the die spools (drums) 10a, 10b, 10c read on the limitations of the instantly claimed temperature controlling members as defined by the instant specification.
Applicant argues that, nonetheless, the PTO's attempt to modify Yamaguchi based on the teachings of Burrafato, is incorrect because the annular (ring-shaped) seal (56) (asserted heat insulating member) disclosed in Burrafato is disposed between each of the coaxially mated adjacent die spools (10a, 10b, 10c) to provide thermal insulation between adjacent die spools. However, the portion of the molding portion disclosed in Yamaguchi that includes the temperature controlling member (i.e., the portion between the metal net support (64) and the regulating plate (65) is formed from a single, uninterrupted piece.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. While Yamaguchi appears to disclose a temperature controlling member 3 formed from a single, uninterrupted piece, there is no disclosure in Yamaguchi that ONLY a single, uninterrupted piece defining a temperature controlling member can be used in the apparatus. As mentioned in the prior art rejections above, it is known in the prior art that a molding portion can include a single temperature controlling member, as disclosed by Yamaguchi, OR can include multiple temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Burrafato, wherein multiple temperature controlling members would facilitate a desired temperature profile along the length of the molding portion. In other words, a single temperature controlling member controls to one desired temperature, whereas multiple temperature controlling members enable control to multiple desired temperatures (temperature profile) along the length of the molding portion.
Applicant argues, further, the temperature controlling member disclosed in Yamaguchi includes a fluid circulation passage (30), and an inlet port (31) and a discharge port (32) that allows the circulation of the fluid heat medium (7), which may be heated or cooled, through the fluid circulation passage (30) (see Yamaguchi, paragraphs [0056]-[0058], and Fig. 1. The temperature controlling member also includes a temperature sensor (551) that regulates the heating and cooling of the fluid heat medium (7) (see Yamaguchi, paragraph [0061] and Fig. 10).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. These arguments appear to be moot because they are not commensurate in scope to instant claim 1. Instant claim 1 does not require fluid circulation or a temperature sensor. While Yamaguchi discloses fluid circulation, note that Burrafato ALSO discloses fluid circulation (col. 5, line 65, to col. 6, line 7).
Applicant argues that, in light of the above, there would have been no reason for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have considered modifying Yamaguchi based on the teachings of Burrafato, because doing so would have required replacing the single unit temperature controlling member with the plurality of temperature controlling members (i.e., electrical heating jackets 70a, 70b, 70c) disclosed in Burrafato, and disposing the disclosed heat insulting member therebetween. The disclosures in Yamaguchi and Burrafato fail to fairly teach or suggest such a complicated modification. Moreover,
there is nothing in the record to teach or suggest that modifying Yamaguchi to include the individual electrical heating jackets disclosed in Burrafato would have provided more accurate temperature control, as compared to the temperature controlling member already disclosed in Yamaguchi.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, it is known in the prior art that a molding portion can include a single temperature controlling member, as disclosed by Yamaguchi, OR can include multiple temperature controlling members, as disclosed by Burrafato, wherein multiple temperature controlling members would facilitate a desired temperature profile along the length of the molding portion. In other words, a single temperature controlling member controls to one desired temperature, whereas multiple temperature controlling members enable control to multiple desired temperatures (temperature profile) along the length of the molding portion. Thus, there is motivation to use multiple temperature controlling members because such a modification would have provided more accurate temperature control (temperature profile) along the length of the molding portion.
Applicant argues that independent claim 8 has been amended to recite, in relevant part, that the heat insulating member is arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more
temperature controlling members. Amended independent claim 8 is distinguishable over the applied prior art because Burrafato discloses that the temperature controllers (70a, 70b, 70c) and heat insulating members (56) are separated from each other by the bodies of the die spools (10a, 10b, 10c) (see Burrafato, Fig. 2, for example). As such, modifying Yamaguchi based on the teachings of Burrafato would not have resulted in an extrusion molding machine that includes a heat insulating member is arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members, as now recited in independent claim 8.
The Examiner respectively disagrees. As mentioned above relative to instant claim 8, Burrafato discloses two or more temperature controlling members 10a, 10b, 10c; and a heat insulating member 56 arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members (figs. 1-3). Applicant’s assertion that the temperature controllers of Burrafato are defined by elements 70a, 70b, 70c is incorrect. As mentioned above, the instant specification [0025] discloses that the temperature controlling members 23a and 23b may be “temperature controlling drums” whose temperature can be adjusted by heating/cooling fluid. Burrafato discloses that the die spool assembly 10 (i.e., die spools (drums) 10a, 10b, 10c) “gradually cools the extrudate as it is conveyed through the die cavity” and that the temperature of the die spool (drums) are adjusted by electrical resistance or by heating/cooling fluid (col. 5, line 44, to col. 6, line 7). Thus, the die spools (drums) 10a, 10b, 10c read on the limitations of the instantly claimed temperature controlling members as defined by the instant specification. Again, as particularly shown in figs. 1-2 of Burrafato, a heat insulating member 56 is arranged between and directly in contact with the two or more temperature controlling members 10a, 10b, 10c.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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