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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-4, 6-8,12-16 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.
With regards to claims 1 and 12, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 1 and 16 recites the broad recitation “the plurality of stages comprises first to N-th (where N is a natural number of 2 or more), and the claim also recites the plurality of stages includes a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
With regards to claims 1 and 12, the claims state “the plurality of stages comprises first to N-th stages (where N is a natural number of 2 or more)”, this renders the claim indefinite since when the selection of N being 2 is selected it contradicts the previous recited limitation that states that the “plurality of stages includes a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage”. Therefore it is unclear how the plurality of stages can include first through third stages and also first to N-th stages with N being 2. Clarification and/or correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-8 and 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al (JP 2007-130661A; cited by Applicant) in view of Kasai (JP 2000-254752; cited by Applicant), Sudo (JP10-315289; cited by Applicant) and Robbins (US 2013/0074568).
In reference to claim 1, Ito et al discloses an extrusion nozzle apparatus comprising
an inlet (upper opening) for inputting a material (M) [see figure 3],
an outlet (lower opening) for discharging the material (M) [see figure 3], and
a discharge pipe (32) having a multi-stage shape including a plurality of stages (D1-D6), wherein the material (M) is pressurized inside the discharge pipe (32) and moves in a first direction from the inlet toward the outlet [see figure 3],
wherein a cross-sectional area of the plurality of stages (D1-D6) in a direction perpendicular to the first direction progressively decreases from the inlet to the outlet, as seen in figure 3 [see 2nd paragraph on pg. 5 of translation],
wherein the plurality of stages (D1-D6) includes a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage, and a cross-section area of the first to third stages in a direction perpendicular to the first direction are different from each other [see figure 3; each stage decreases in cross-section area], and
wherein the plurality of stages comprises the first to third stages, which are positioned from the inlet to the outlet, and
wherein a grain orientation direction of thermoelectric material discharged from the outlet is the same as the first direction [it is noted that as the material is passed through the nozzle the grain orientation will inherently align within the pressing direction which is the same as the first direction].
Ito et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein the lengths of the inner surfaces of the first to third stages meet the following expression: L1 < L2 < L3.
However, Kasai teaches of an extrusion nozzle having a plurality of stages, wherein the first stage has a first length and the second stage has a second length, wherein the stages are sequentially positioned from the inlet to the outlet and the first stage length is less than the second stage length.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle of Ito et al, such that length of the stages increase from first to third, as taught by Kasai, since where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Ito et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein a heating portion for heating each of the plurality of stages and a plurality of temperature sensors respectively positioned in each of the plurality of stages is provided.
However, Sudo teaches of providing a molding nozzle with a plurality of stages wherein each stage has a heater (4a, 4b, 9a, 9b) on an outer surface thereon and a temperature sensor (10a, 10b) contacted to a discharge pipe at each stage and associated with each heater (4a, 4b, 5a, 5b, 9a, 9b) for the purpose of measuring and controlling the temperature of the material to produce a uniform product [see abstract; figure 1 shows heaters 4a & 4b on first stage, heater 9a on second stage and 9b on third stage].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle of Ito et al to include heaters and temperature sensors at each stage, as taught by Sudo, in order to maintain the temperature of the material to be uniform during the extruding process.
The combination of Ito et al and Sudo discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein each temperature sensor is spaced apart from its respective heating device.
However, Robbins teaches of providing a heating device (146) and a respective temperature sensor (162a) within an extrusion device in order to measure and control the temperature within the cavity of the extrusion device, wherein the temperature sensor is spaced apart from the heating device to prevent interference between the heating device and sensor [see paragraph 0044; figure 8].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heating device and temperature sensor such that they are spaced apart, as taught by Robbins, in order to prevent interference between the heating device and temperature sensor.
The combination further discloses temperatures of the first to third stages are respectively denoted as T1, T2 and T3, and the heating portion heats each of the stages to respective temperatures according to the expression T1<T2<T3 [it is noted that given each stage has its own designated heating device the apparatus is capable of heating each stage independently].
In reference to claim 2, Ito et al the plurality of stages include in the discharge pipe comprises interfaces, and
an angle (α) between the interface of each of the stages and the first direction is greater than 0 degrees and is less than or equal to 90 degrees [see figure 3].
In reference to claim 3, it is noted that the limitation starting with “when…” is considered to be optional since the use of the term when implies it is only required if that condition is met.
In reference to claim 4, Ito et al further discloses the plurality of stages included in the discharge pipe (32) comprises inner surfaces, and the inner surfaces of each of the stages is formed to be parallel to the first direction, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 6, Ito et al further discloses a cross-sectional are of the outlet is smaller than a cross-sectional area of the inlet, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 7, Ito et al further discloses a cross-section of the outlet has a shape of a circle, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 8, Ito et al further discloses a cross-section of each of the plurality of stages perpendicular to the first direction has a shape of a circle, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 12, the combination further teaches the heating portion heats each of the stages, based on the temperatures of each of the stages measured by the plurality of temperature sensors.
In reference to claim 13, Sudo further teaches that the heaters (9a, 9b) are individually formed for individually heating sections of the nozzle [see abstract]. Thus the combination discloses the heating portion comprises a heating device (9a) individually formed for each of the stages for individually heating the temperature of each of the stages of the discharge pipe.
In reference to claim 14, Sudo further teaches the heaters comprises a heating block (4a, 4b, 5a, 5b, 9a, 9b) formed along an outer surface of the nozzle [see figure 1]. Thus the combination further discloses the heating device comprises a heating block formed along an outer surface of each of the stages of the discharge pipe.
In reference to claim 15, Ito et al further discloses a flange part (38) formed on an outer surface of the discharge pipe (32) in which the inlet is positioned, and including a plurality of holes [see figure 3].
In reference to claim 16, Ito et al discloses a method for extruding a thermoelectric material using an extrusion nozzle apparatus, the method comprising
inputting the thermoelectric material (M) into an inlet (upper opening),
pressurizing a piston (36) in a direction from the inlet to an outlet (lower opening) and moving the input thermoelectric material in a discharge pipe (32) including a plurality of stages (D1-D6) whose cross-sectional areas are progressively decreased from the inlet to the outlet, and
extruding the input thermoelectric material to the outlet [see figure 3; 2nd paragraph on pg. 5 of translation],
wherein the plurality of stages (D1-D6) includes a first stage, a second stage, and a third stage, and a cross-section area of the first to third stages in a direction perpendicular to the first direction are different from each other [see figure 3; each stage decreases in cross-section area],
wherein the plurality of stages comprises the first to third stages, which are sequentially positioned from the inlet to the outlet, and
wherein a grain orientation direction of thermoelectric material discharged from the outlet is the same as the first direction [it is noted that as the material is passed through the nozzle the grain orientation will inherently align within the pressing direction which is the same as the first direction].
Ito et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein the lengths of the inner surfaces of the first to third stages meet the following expression: L1 < L2 < L3.
However, Kasai teaches of an extrusion nozzle having a plurality of stages, wherein the first stage has a first length and the second stage has a second length, wherein the stages are sequentially positioned from the inlet to the outlet and the first stage length is less than the second stage length.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle of Ito et al, such that length of the stages increase from first to third, as taught by Kasai, since where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Ito et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein a heating portion for heating each of the plurality of stages and a plurality of temperature sensors respectively positioned in each of the plurality of stages is provided.
However, Sudo teaches of providing a molding nozzle with a plurality of stages wherein each stage has a heater (4a, 4b, 9a, 9b) on an outer surface thereon and a temperature sensor (10a, 10b) contacted to a discharge pipe at each stage and associated with each heater (4a, 4b, 5a, 5b, 9a, 9b) for the purpose of measuring and controlling the temperature of the material to produce a uniform product [see abstract; figure 1 shows heaters 4a & 4b on first stage, heater 9a on second stage and 9b on third stage].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle of Ito et al to include heaters and temperature sensors at each stage, as taught by Sudo, in order to maintain the temperature of the material to be uniform during the extruding process.
The combination of Ito et al and Sudo discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein each temperature sensor is spaced apart from its respective heating device.
However, Robbins teaches of providing a heating device (146) and a respective temperature sensor (162a) within an extrusion device in order to measure and control the temperature within the cavity of the extrusion device, wherein the temperature sensor is spaced apart from the heating device to prevent interference between the heating device and sensor [see paragraph 0044; figure 8].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heating device and temperature sensor such that they are spaced apart, as taught by Robbins, in order to prevent interference between the heating device and temperature sensor.
The combination further discloses temperatures of the first to third stages are respectively denoted as T1, T2 and T3, and the heating portion heats each of the stages to respective temperatures according to the expression T1<T2<T3 [it is noted that given each stage has its own designated heating device the apparatus is capable of heating each stage independently], and
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed October 17, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 and 10-17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically the amendment directed to the lengths and temperatures of the stages overcome the previous 10 rejection, therefore the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the combination of Ito et al with Kasai, Sudo and Robbins.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Debra Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)272-1904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm 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, Chris Templeton can be reached on (571) 270-1477. 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.
/Debra M Sullivan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725