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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on (8 – 11 – 2025) has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and remarks filed (8 – 11 – 2025) have been fully considered but they are not persuasiveApplicant argues…
Regarding claim 1 & 6, Ott does not teach the newly amended feature of "the upper and lower flange pieces make full contact along their lengths with, and be fully supported by, the framework and the shoes respectively”.
Regarding Claim 4, Ott does not teach that the structural upright [where] each of the plurality of plungers is thicker than the flange pieces.
Regarding Claim 10, Ott does not provide for each of the upper and lower flange pieces, further including an inside- angle edge between the upper and lower flange pieces and the interposed structural upright defined by a first finite radius of curvature wherein the inside-angle edge between the upper and lower flange pieces and the interposed structure upright is also defined by a second radius of curvature adjacent the first finite radius of curvature
Applicant further argues that none of the other applied references make up for the deficiency of Ott / Ott as modified.
This is not found to be persuasive because…
Ott discloses on ([0050]) that in particular the arrangement illustrated in (Fig. 4 & 10), the upper and lower attachment portions 15, 17, have a right angle. As a
PNG
media_image1.png
436
184
media_image1.png
Greyscale
result, a common closed surface is formed by the outer surfaces of the respective upper and lower fastening sections 15, 17. This is especially for the uniform power transmission from the top plate 3 on the lower part 7 and thus on the punch 9 (not shown) during operation of the concrete block molding machine advantage. Highlighting, that the arrangement illustrated in (Fig. 4) provides for a central webs 13 with the upper and lower flange pieces such that the upper and lower flange pieces make full contact along their lengths with and be fully supported by the framework and the shoes, respectively.
(Fig. 4 & 10) shows a pressure transmission device with a C-shaped profile. As detailed, the upright portion of the pressure transmission device is thicker than that of the flange piece. Adding, that in the arrangement of (Figs. 4 – 5) a pressure transmission device which are lined up with the backs of the respective center webs 13. This alignment doubles the thickness of the of the structural upright component while having the flange pieces remain the same thickness. Highlighting, that if Ott does not anticipate a pressure transmission device with structural upright portion that are thicker than the flange portion then the case law for change of size may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled, see In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976). Additionally, the combination of implementing two plungers are combined to form an I-beam structure may be seen / treated as a single plunger with shape desired, i.e, the structural upright of each of the plurality of plungers is thicker than the flange pieces while still forming an outside right angle between the structural upright and the flange pieces
Applicant notes that a rounded inside corner is provided by such that this inside corner defines a first radius, which acts as applicant’s a second radius of curvature adjacent the first finite radius of curvature. . Highlighting, that the central web itself i.e, upright or vertical central web provides for its own radius that is found to act as applicant’s structural upright defined by a first finite radius of curvature. As argued by applicant, Ott (Fig. 18) the “bevel in the central web itself and is NOT between the upper flange and structural upright”. As illustrated the bevels are found connected to the central upright portion 13 and the respective upper and lower flange pieces 15, 17. As such, the bevels is found between the upper / lower flange and structural upright.
This is unpersuasive because as explained above there was not found to be deficiency in Ott / Ott as modified.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
A.) Claim(s) ) 1, 4 – 6, 10 – 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Josef Ott (EP 3321051 hereinafter Ott)
Regarding claim 1,
A head assembly for use on a concrete products forming machine (CPM) comprising:
a framework configured to be secured to a vertically displaceable compression beam on a CPM;
an array of shoes sized to be fully received within complimentary mold cavities within a mold box of the CPM; and
an array of plungers interposed between the framework and array of shoes,
with at least a plurality of the plungers of the array of plungers secured at one end to the framework and at another end to a single one of the array of shoes,
wherein the plurality of plungers are configured with a C-shaped webbing comprised of upper and lower substantially parallel flange pieces connected via a structural upright forming an outside right-angle corner with each of the upper and lower flange pieces such that the upper and lower flange pieces make full contact along their lengths with, and be fully supported by the framework and the shoes, respectively,
wherein each of the shoes in the array of shoes include a plurality of associated plungers coupled thereto that are spaced from one another and
wherein the plurality of associated plungers for each of the shoes includes a pair of plungers coupled in spaced relation to one another such that the C-shaped webbing of each of the plungers in the pair of plungers face inwards toward one another.
Ott teaches the following:
([0078]) teaches each stamp 9 or each lower part 7 is connected to the head plate 3.
([0016]) teaches it is ensured that the punch attached to the pressure transmission device can move or dip precisely into the mold cavity in order to compact the concrete block by applying force from above. Highlighting as shown in (Fig. 25) an array of stamps are found.
([0010]) teaches at least one pressure transmission means connecting the head plate to the base
(Fig. 25) shows the arrangement with the pressure transmission device found between the punches on one end and the top plate on the other.
(Figs. 1, 4, 10, 13 & 25) shows the arrangement with the pressure transmission device found. ([0010]) teaches that wherein the upper fastening section and the lower fastening section are each formed substantially at right angles to the central web. ([0038]) teaches that the at least one pressure transmission means may preferably have a C-profile. ([0050]) notes that in particular the arrangement illustrated in (Fig. 4 & 10), the upper and lower attachment portions 15, 17, have a right angle. As a result, a common closed surface is formed by the outer surfaces of the respective upper and lower fastening sections 15, 17. This is especially for the uniform power transmission from the top plate 3 on the lower part 7 and thus on the punch 9 (not shown) during operation of the concrete block molding machine advantage. Highlighting, that the arrangement illustrated in (Fig. 4 & 10) provides for a central webs 13 with the upper and lower flange pieces such that the upper and lower flange pieces make full contact along their lengths with and be fully supported by the framework and the shoes, respectively.
PNG
media_image1.png
436
184
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Fig. 25) illustrates an array include a plurality of associated plungers coupled thereto that are spaced from one another. Highlighting, while Ott is understood to disclose an upper and lower flange pieces such that the upper and lower flange pieces make full contact along their lengths with and be fully supported by the framework and the shoes. The case law for change of shape may be recited regarding the upper and lower flange pieces that provide for full contact along their lengths with and be fully supported by the framework and the shoes. Recalling, that ([0050]) notes that by providing a right angle. As a result, a common closed surface is formed by the outer surfaces of the respective upper and lower fastening sections 15, 17. This is especially for the uniform power transmission from the top plate 3 on the lower part 7 and thus on the punch 9 (not shown) during operation of the concrete block molding machine. Accordingly, the case law for result effective variable may be recited regarding the shape implemented due to the impact of providing uniform power transmission. Where, A particular parameter must first be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.
As illustrated in (Fig. 1 & 7 – 8) illustrates an arrangement in which the plungers are coupled in spaced relation to one another such that the C-shaped webbing of each of the plungers in the pair of plungers face inwards toward one another.
Regarding claim 4 as applied to claim 1,
PNG
media_image1.png
436
184
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wherein the structural upright of each of the plurality of plungers is thicker than the flange pieces.
Ott teaches the following:
(Fig. 4 & 10) shows a pressure transmission device with a C-shaped profile. As detailed, the upright portion of the pressure transmission device is thicker than that of the flange piece. Adding, that in the arrangement of (Figs. 4 – 5) a pressure transmission device which are lined up with the backs of the respective center webs 13. This alignment doubles the thickness of the of the structural upright component while having the flange pieces remain the same thickness. Accordingly, while Ott is found to teach a pressure transmission device with a structural upright portion that are thicker than the flange portion. However, if it is determined that Ott does not anticipate a pressure transmission device with structural upright portion that are thicker than the flange portion then the case law for change of size may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled, see In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976). Additionally, the combination of implementing two plungers are combined to form an I-beam structure may be seen / treated as a single plunger with shape desired, i.e, the structural upright of each of the plurality of plungers is thicker than the flange pieces while still forming an outside right angle between the structural upright and the flange pieces
Regarding claim 5 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the framework includes a plurality of grooves disposed in parallel on an underside thereof, with the array of plungers received within the grooves to mitigate twisting of the plungers with respect to the framework.
Ott teaches the following:
([0043]) teaches (Fig. 3) shows a front view of a pressure transmission device 11, which is arranged on a groove 5 of the head plate 3. This is also shown in (Figs. 25 – 26) with the pressure transmission device the head plate comprising grooves 5. ([0079]) noting that the pressure transmission means 11 has a pin 23 on the upper fastening section 15 and the head plate 3 has a corresponding hole 21.
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the upper flange pieces make full contact with the framework on first sides and the lower flange pieces make full contact with the shoes on second sides from terminal edges to the right-angle corners of each of the flange pieces so that a moment of pressure is translated along the structural upright.
Ott teaches the following:
(Figs. 1 – 2 & 25 – 27) shows upper flange pieces make full contact with both the head plate and the punch. ([0065]) adding that depending on the known lateral force introduction, the pressure transmission device can be arranged in such a way that a higher stability with respect to the lateral force introduction is provided.
Regarding claim 10,
A head assembly for use on a concrete products forming machine (CPM) comprising:
a framework configured to be secured to a vertically displaceable compression beam on a CPM;
an array of shoes sized to be fully received within complimentary mold cavities within a mold box of the CPM; and
an array of plungers interposed between the framework and array of shoes,
with at least a plurality of the plungers of the array of plungers secured at one end to the framework and at another end to a single one of the array of shoes,
wherein the plurality of plungers are configured with a C-shaped webbing comprised of upper and lower substantially parallel flange pieces connected via a structural upright forming an outside right-angle edge with each of the upper and lower flange pieces,
further including an inside-angle edge between the upper and lower flange pieces and the interposed structural upright defined by a first finite radius of curvature
wherein the inside-angle edge between the upper and lower flange pieces and the interposed structure upright is also defined by a second radius of curvature adjacent the first finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
([0078]) teaches each stamp 9 or each lower part 7 is connected to the head plate 3.
([0016]) teaches it is ensured that the punch attached to the pressure transmission device can move or dip precisely into the mold cavity in order to compact the concrete block by applying force from above. Highlighting as shown in (Fig. 25) an array of stamps are found.
([0010]) teaches at least one pressure transmission means connecting the head plate to the base
(Fig. 25) shows the arrangement with the pressure transmission device found between the punches on one end and the top plate on the other.
(Figs. 1 & 25) shows the arrangement with the pressure transmission device found. ([0010]) teaches that wherein the upper fastening section and the lower fastening section are each formed substantially at right angles to the central web. ([0038]) teaches that the at least one pressure transmission means may preferably have a C-profile.
PNG
media_image2.png
208
148
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Figs. 4-5) illustrate two different types of inside radius that can be provided namely, one that is rounded and one that is planar / sharp. With (Figs. 16-20) giving different combinations of both types of radius paired together. As shown in (Fig. 16 & 18) a first radius is found comprising the curved portion of the pressure transmission device.
PNG
media_image3.png
206
147
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Figs. 4-5) illustrate two different types of inside radius that can be provided namely, one that is rounded and one that is planar / sharp. With (Figs. 16-20) giving different combinations of both types of radius paired together. As shown in (Fig. 16 & 18) a second radius is found comprising the flat portion of the pressure transmission device. It should be noted that a third radius exist at the flat portion where the holes are found.
Regarding claim 11 as applied to claim 10,
Wherein the first finite radius of curvature is adjacent the upper and lower flange pieces and
the second finite radius of curvature, and the second finite radius of curvature is adjacent the structural upright and the first finite radius of curvature, and
wherein the first finite radius of curvature is smaller than the second finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
208
148
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
206
147
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As detailed in the first image provided, the first radius is adjacent the upper and lower flange pieces and the second radius.
As detailed in the second image provided, the second radius is adjacent the structural upright and the first radius
As detailed (Figs. 4 – 5) illustrate two different types of inside radius that can be provided namely, one that is rounded and one that is planar / sharp. With (Figs. 16-20) giving different combinations of both types of radius paired together. Highlighting, while Ott does not illustrate a first radius is smaller than the second radius. The case law for change of size or shape may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled, In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976), MPEP 2144. Additionally, it has been held that a mere change in shape without affecting the functioning of the part would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47; Eskimo Pie Corp. v, Levous et aI., 3 USPQ 23, MPEP 2144.
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 11,
Wherein the upper and lower flange pieces include a rolled edge on a distal section of the upper and lower flange pieces of a third finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
([0057]) teaches the pressure transmission means 11 with such rounded edges can be produced, for example, by means of rolling and/or bending from a flat and rectangular or square workpiece made of, for example, steel. This is best shown in (Fig. 4 & 7).
Regarding claim 13 as applied to claim 12,
Wherein the upper and lower flange pieces include a second rolled edge on the distal section of the flange pieces of a fourth finite radius of curvature,
wherein the third and fourth finite radius of curvature are different from one another.
Ott teaches the following:
& b.) ([0057]) teaches the pressure transmission means 11 with such rounded edges can be produced, for example, by means of rolling and/or bending from a flat and rectangular or square workpiece made of, for example, steel. This is best shown in (Fig. 4 & 7). With (Fig. 4) showing the curved corner and a flat corner providing different radius. In particular (Fig. 7) has a wedge portion cut in the distal section of the flange pieces giving a radius that changes linearly with the slop of the cut. As such, the third and fourth radius are different from one another
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 13,
Wherein the third finite radius of curvature is greater than the fourth finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
([0057]) teaches the pressure transmission means 11 with such rounded edges can be produced, for example, by means of rolling and/or bending from a flat and rectangular or square workpiece made of, for example, steel. This is best shown in (Fig. 4 & 7). With (Fig. 4) showing the curved corner and a flat corner providing different radius. In particular (Fig. 7) has a wedge portion cut in the distal section of the flange pieces giving a radius that changes linearly with the slop of the cut. As such, the third radius is greater than the fourth radius. Accordingly, while it is understood that found that Ott discloses a flange with a rolled edge having a third radius is greater than the fourth radius. However, if it is determined that Ott does not anticipate a flange with a rolled edge having a third radius is greater than the fourth radius, the case law for change of size may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled. See In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the flange pieces each include an aperture formed therethrough that are each configured to receive a fastener for fixing the plunger between the shoe and framework.
Ott teaches the following:
([0049]) teaches the side edges of the upper fastening section 15 are in a form-fitting manner at two opposite edges of the groove 5, so that the longitudinal axes of the openings 19. ([0054]) teaches the opening 19 can be found on the upper and/or lower fastening section 15, 17.
Regarding claim 16 as applied to claim 15,
Wherein the aperture through the upper flange is laterally offset relative to the lower flange so that fasteners receive within the apertures are parallel but not axial to one another.
Ott teaches the following:
(Figs. 16-23) show various arrangements for the pressure transmission devices. (Fig. 20) in particular comprises openings that are found upper flange is laterally offset relative to the lower flange so that fasteners within the apertures are parallel but not axial to one another.
B.) Claim(s) 10 – 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ott in view of Braungardt et al. (WO 2004065089 A1, hereinafter Braungardt)
Regarding claim 10,
A head assembly for use on a concrete products forming machine (CPM) comprising:
a framework configured to be secured to a vertically displaceable compression beam on a CPM;
an array of shoes sized to be fully received within complimentary mold cavities within a mold box of the CPM; and
an array of plungers interposed between the framework and array of shoes,
with at least a plurality of the plungers of the array of plungers secured at one end to the framework and at another end to a single one of the array of shoes,
wherein the plurality of plungers are configured with a C-shaped webbing comprised of upper and lower substantially parallel flange pieces connected via a structural upright forming an outside right-angle edge with each of the upper and lower flange pieces,
further including an inside-angle edge between the upper and lower flange pieces and the interposed structural upright defined by a first finite radius of curvature
wherein the inside-angle edge between the upper and lower flange pieces and the interposed structure upright is also defined by a second radius of curvature adjacent the first finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
([0078]) teaches each stamp 9 or each lower part 7 is connected to the head plate 3.
([0016]) teaches it is ensured that the punch attached to the pressure transmission device can move or dip precisely into the mold cavity in order to compact the concrete block by applying force from above. Highlighting as shown in (Fig. 25) an array of stamps are found.
([0010]) teaches at least one pressure transmission means connecting the head plate to the base
(Fig. 25) shows the arrangement with the pressure transmission device found between the punches on one end and the top plate on the other.
(Figs. 1 & 25) shows the arrangement with the pressure transmission device found. ([0010]) teaches that wherein the upper fastening section and the lower fastening section are each formed substantially at right angles to the central web. ([0038]) teaches that the at least one pressure transmission means may preferably have a C-profile.
Regarding Claim 10, Ott is silent on details regarding the framework comprising a second radius adjacent to the first. .In analogous art for a concrete block molding machine that comprises an upper mold part and punches, the upper mold part and punches are attached via force transmission devices, Braungardt suggest details regarding implementing upper and lower flange comprising a second radius and, in this regard, Braungardt teaches the following:
PNG
media_image4.png
256
943
media_image4.png
Greyscale
& g.) (Figs. 4-5) (Pg. 6, lines 224-225) teaches (Fig. 3) shows a further essential element, a stamp ST, which in the example sketched consists of a tube with an essentially rectangular cross-section. (Pg. 12, lines 507-509) teaches that the tubular shape for the stamps chosen in the previous embodiments, these can also be made from profiles with a different cross-section. Angle shape, H-shape, U-shape, T-shape and/or arched shape. As recreated here, (Fig. 28) shows a second radius adjacent the first radius.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing concrete block comprising a mold of Ott. By modifying the upper and lower flange to comprising a second radius, as taught by Braungardt, due to the fact due to the fact it would amount to nothing more than a use of a known design for structural parts utilized as a pressure transmission device, for its intended use, in a known environment, to accomplish entirely expected result, as suggested by Braungardt. Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results allows for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). Additionally, the change of shape case law may be recited. Where, it has been held that a mere change in shape without affecting the functioning of the part would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47; Eskimo Pie Corp. v, Levous et aI., 3 USPQ 23.Regarding claim 11 as applied to claim 10,
Wherein the first finite radius of curvature is adjacent the upper and lower flange pieces and
the second finite radius of curvature, and the second finite radius of curvature is adjacent the structural upright and the first finite radius of curvature, and
wherein the first finite radius of curvature is smaller than the second finite radius of curvature.
PNG
media_image4.png
256
943
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11, Ott is silent on details regarding the upper and lower flange comprising a second radius. In analogous art as applied above, Braungardt suggests details regarding implementing upper and lower flange comprising a second radius and, in this regard, Braungardt teaches the following:
, b.) & c.) As recreated here, (Fig. 28) shows a second radius adjacent with the first radius. With the first radius being adjacent the flange pieces and the first radius is smaller than the second radius.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 10, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 11,
Wherein the upper and lower flange pieces include a rolled edge on a distal section of the upper and lower flange pieces of a third finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
([0057]) teaches the pressure transmission means 11 with such rounded edges can be produced, for example, by means of rolling and/or bending from a flat and rectangular or square workpiece made of, for example, steel. This is best shown in (Fig. 4 & 7).
Regarding claim 13 as applied to claim 12,
Wherein the upper and lower flange pieces include a second rolled edge on the distal section of the flange pieces of a fourth finite radius of curvature,
wherein the third and fourth finite radius of curvature are different from one another.
Ott teaches the following:
& b.) ([0057]) teaches the pressure transmission means 11 with such rounded edges can be produced, for example, by means of rolling and/or bending from a flat and rectangular or square workpiece made of, for example, steel. This is best shown in (Fig. 4 & 7). With (Fig. 4) showing the curved corner and a flat corner providing different radius. In particular (Fig. 7) has a wedge portion cut in the distal section of the flange pieces giving a radius that changes linearly with the slop of the cut. As such, the third and fourth radius are different from one another
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 13,
Wherein the third finite radius of curvature is greater than the fourth finite radius of curvature.
Ott teaches the following:
([0057]) teaches the pressure transmission means 11 with such rounded edges can be produced, for example, by means of rolling and/or bending from a flat and rectangular or square workpiece made of, for example, steel. This is best shown in (Fig. 4 & 7). With (Fig. 4) showing the curved corner and a flat corner providing different radius. In particular (Fig. 7) has a wedge portion cut in the distal section of the flange pieces giving a radius that changes linearly with the slop of the cut. As such, the third radius is greater than the fourth radius. Accordingly, while it is understood that found that Ott discloses a flange with a rolled edge having a third radius is greater than the fourth radius. However, if it is determined that Ott does not anticipate a flange with a rolled edge having a third radius is greater than the fourth radius, the case law for change of size may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled. See In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Vincent Ishler (US 20060022112 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) that the present invention includes an assembly for stripping a medium from a mold cavity. The assembly may include at least one stripper shoe, a head structure, and a flexible plunger connecting the head structure and the at least one stripper shoe. The flexible plunger may include cutouts or openings along the length of the plunger to induce increased flexibility.
Llewellyn L. Johnston (US 20180021979 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) a compression shoe for use on a concrete products forming machine comprises a main body and a plated layer overlaid on the main body. The main body is configured to be slidingly received within a mold cavity of a concrete products mold. The plated layer overlaid on the main body of the compression shoe comprises a uniform electroless nickel (Ni), phosphorus (P), and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) nano dispersion coating to effect enhanced material release characteristics by preventing the build-up of material on the compression shoes and enhancing their wear characteristics.
Robert MacDonald (US 20150097312 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) a block, block system and method of making a wall block. A block with multiple embodiments of a visually exposed surface having three dimensional shaped areas and three-dimensional angular valleys or joints that can be used to construct a patio, wall, fence or the like; the multiple embodiments creating a more random and natural appearance.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrés E. Behrens Jr. whose telephone number is (571)-272-9096. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30 AM-5:30 PM.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on (571)-270-7001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866)-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800)-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571)-272-1000.
/Andrés E. Behrens Jr./Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/JaMel M Nelson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743