DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 Feb. 18, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1,3-9, 12-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the controller is configured to control the resistive heating elements to heat the glass materials during cooling of the glass element. The specification does not appear to offer support for the literal step of heating the glass material during cooling of the glass element. Instead, the specification suggests controlling the resistive heating elements to control the cooling rate of the glass element in the cooling step or controlling the resistive heating elements to control the gradient of the glass material during cooling. While paragraph [0026] recites:
“resistive heating elements may be utilized to control the gradient of the glass material during gradual cooling. This is achieved by a combination of (1) cooling with a flow of an inert gas and (2) heating with resistive heating elements”,
it does not fully support the limitation of heating the glass material. In fact, it is not explicit whether the glass material is actually being heated, but rather the rate of cooling is controlled.
Claim 1 also recites the controller is configured to control an inert gas flow to the glass material during cooling. The specification does not offer support for this. Applicant points to paragraph [0029] for support. This paragraph recites a cooling plate with channels, and controlling the inert gas flow rate through each channel of the cooling plate during cooling. Controlling an inert gas flow rate through each channels is different from controlling an inert gas flow to the glass material. On the other hand, paragraph [0027] recites an inert gas environment in the processing chamber during molding, which is not during cooling, nor is it being controlled by the controller.
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, 3-9, 12-13 and 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.
Claim 1 recites the controller controls the resistive heating element to heat the glass material during cooling of the glass elements. There is a disjunction between heating of the glass material and cooling of the glass element, as they mark different steps at different time. The glass material (the “before”) is heated and is molded into the glass element (the “after”), which is cooled after forming. Thus, it is unclear how the controller can control heating of the glass material during cooling of the glass element, since the “before” and the ”after” cannot occur at the same time.
In further regards to this limitation, it is unclear how heating of the glass can occur while cooling the glass. They appear to contradict each other.
Claim 1 also recites controlling “an inert gas flow to the glass material during cooling of the glass element” and creating “a temperature profile in the glass material during cooling of the glass element”. In the same manner as discussed above, there is a disjunction between controlling an inert gas flow to the glass material and cooling of the glass element, as they mark different steps at different time. Similarly, there is a disjunction between creating a temperature profile in the glass material and cooling of the glass element, as they mark different steps at different time. The glass material (the ”before”) is heated and is molded into the glass element (the “after”), which is cooled after forming. Thus, it is unclear how the controller can control an inert gas flow on the glass material during cooling of the glass element, since the “before” and the ”after” cannot occur at the same time. Similarly, it is unclear how the temperature profile can be created in the glass material during cooling of the glass element, since the “before” and the ”after” cannot occur at the same time.
Claim 4 recites channels for “the inert gas flow”. It is unclear how the same inert gas flow can contact the glass material and be in the channels. Please clarify.
Claims 3, 5-9, 12-13 and 16 are also indefinite, by virtue of their dependencies on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 4, and 7-8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al. (JP 2010116292 machine translation provided) in view of Moriya et al. (KR 20140078617 machine translation provided) and Ashida et al. (2017/0057856). Nakagawa discloses a molding apparatus comprising an upper mold 33, a lower mold 36, a radiant heating module comprising a plurality of radiant heating elements (lamps heater 22, 3rd – 4th passages on page 4), an upper resistive heating module in contact with the upper mold and comprising a first plurality of resistive heating elements (cartridge heaters 37, 7th passage on page 4), and a lower resistive heating module in contact with the lower mold and comprising a plurality of resistive heating elements (cartridge heaters 38, 7th passage on page 4, figure 1). Nakagawa discloses the upper mold and lower mold are configured to press one or more glass material therebetween to form one or more glass elements (6th passage on page 4). However, Nakagawa doesn’t specify the plurality of resistive heaters are independently controlled.
Like Nakagawa, Moriya also discloses a molding apparatus (abstract) comprising an upper resistive heating module comprising a first plurality of resistive heating elements and a lower resistive heating module comprising a plurality of resistive heating elements. Moriya further teaches the first plurality of resistive heating elements are independently controlled, and the second plurality of resistive heating elements are independently controlled (3rd-4th passages on page 4, figure 4). Moriya teaches providing for uniform heating of the glass material to prevent cracking during molding (9th-10th passages on page 5). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have employed independent control of the plurality of resistive heating elements in each of the upper and lower heating modules, so as to provide uniform heating of the glass article to be molded, as taught by Moriya.
Moriya further teaches a temperature monitoring device configured to monitor a temperature of the upper mold and a temperature of the lower mold. Although a controller for performing control of the resistive heating elements is not specified, it is suggested in order to provide the disclosed independent control of the heating elements (last passage on page 3 to top passage on page 4). Like Nakagawa, Ashida discloses a molding apparatus comprising an upper mold, a lower mold, an upper resistive heating module in contact with the upper mold and comprising a first plurality of resistive heating elements, and a lower resistive heating module in contact with the lower mold and comprising a plurality of resistive heating elements, wherein the upper mold and lower mold are configured to press a glass material therebetween ([0029], [0031]). Like Moriya, Ashida further teaches a temperature monitoring device configured to monitor a temperature of at least one of the upper mold, the lower mold, or the glass material ([0032]). Ashida also teaches a controller connected to the temperature monitoring device, the controller configured to control an operation of the plurality of radiant heating elements, the first plurality of resistive heating elements, and the second plurality of resistive heating element to control a temperature gradient in the glass material based on the temperature monitored by the monitoring device ([0035]). Ashida teaches controlling the radiant heaters separately from the mold heaters allows for separate control of the heating of the glass material from the heating of the molds, allowing for an improvement in the shape accuracy and surface accuracy in the molded glass material ([0018]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have further provided for a controller connected to a temperature monitoring device and that is configured to control the operation of the first and second plurality of independently controlled resistive heating elements, and the plurality of radiant heating elements based on temperature measurements in the apparatus of Nakagawa and Moriya, so as provide separate heating for the molds and the glass material, thereby allowing for improved shaping and surface accuracy of the molded glass material, as taught by Ashida.
Furthermore, Ashida teaches the controller is configured to control the atmosphere around the glass material during molding to be inert and pressurized ([0033]-[0035]), which suggests controlling the flow rate of the inert gas so as to provide for the desired pressure. Since the controller controls the atmosphere during all aspects of the process (i.e. heating, molding, and cooling), it is configure to control the flow of the inert gas during the cooling step. Ashida additionally teaches the resistive heaters (which are controlled by the controller) are operated to gradually cool the glass material by heating of the molds ([0031]). Naturally, gradual cooling would prevent stress and shock to the molded glass element during the cooling. Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have further provided for the controller to control an inert gas flow to the glass material and to control the resistive heaters to provide heat to the molds during cooling so as to provide for gradual cooling of the glass material, thereby preventing stress and shock to the glass element.
Regarding claim 4, Nakagawa further teaches each of the upper and lower heating modules are in contact with a plate having one or more channels that can flow inert gas (“cooling pipes” in 8th passage on page 4, figure 1).
Regarding claim 7-8, the glass materials are considered material to be worked upon by the apparatus, which do not provide further structural limitations to the apparatus. Thus, they are not given patentable weight. Nonetheless, the apparatus of Nakagawa is capable of molding glass materials (2nd passage of page 4).
Regarding claim 16, Nakagawa teaches applying the radiant heaters to heat the glass material to the molding temperature (4th passage on page 10), which suggests heating is not necessary once the molding temperature is reached. Nakagawa further teaches cooling starts immediately at the molding start point A (figure 5, 7th passage on page 8), which further suggests halting of heating from the radiant heaters, so as to allow for the cooling. Since the controller controls the radiant heaters, as discussed in claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have further configured the controller to halt operation of the radiant heaters during cooling of the glass material as the glass is molded and will not require further heating, and to allow for cooling of the formed glass element.
Claims 3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al. (JP 2010116292 machine translation provided) in view of Moriya et al. (KR 20140078617 machine translation provided) and Ashida et al. (2017/0057856) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Komiyama et al. (JP 3832986 machine translation provided). Regarding claim 3, Nakagawa teaches the molding apparatus comprises an upper mold and a lower mold, but doesn’t specify mold pins. Like Nakagawa, Komiyama teaches a molding apparatus comprising radiant heaters 55 ([0022], [0024]), an upper mold, and a lower mold ([0022]). Komiyama further teaches the upper mold comprises a plurality of mold pins 13 arranged in a mold plate 12 and the lower mold comprises a plurality of mold pins 23 arranged in a mold plate 22 ([0026], [0027], [0029]). Komiyama teaches such an arrangement provides for the molding of multiple glass article simultaneously ([0031]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided for a plurality of pins on a mold plate for each of the upper and lower molds of Nakagawa so as mold a plurality of glass articles simultaneously, thereby increasing the efficiency of the process.
Regarding claim 5, Nakagawa teaches the molding apparatus comprise an upper mold and a lower mold (5th passage on page 4) and a driving means for displacing the upper mold relative to the lower mold, but doesn’t specify a ram (6th passage on page 4). Komiyama further teaches moving the upper mold relative to the lower mold a ram, wherein the ram comprises a motor and screw ([0015]). Komiyama teaches such a driving mechanism can be controlled via feedback from a load detection device, thus providing for controlling movement of the upper mold during pressing ([0020]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have employed a ram comprising a motor and a screw for displacing the upper mold of Nakagawa, as it provides for controlled movement and pressing of the upper mold during molding, as taught by Komiyama. Furthermore, figure 1 depicts the drive shaft 44 connected to the ram for moving the upper mold is movably engaged with a bracket 52 by what appears to bearings. Although bearings are not specified, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided bearings as they are well known means used between sliding parts that provides for smooth and efficient movements.
Regarding claim 6, Nakagawa doesn’t specify a sealed processing chamber. Komiyama further teaches a sealed processing chamber 54 for molding a glass element, wherein inert gas is supplied to provide for an inert gas atmosphere ([0018]- [0020]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have further provided for a sealed processing chamber so as to provide an inert atmosphere for the desired molding of the glass article, as taught by Komiyama.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al. (JP 2010116292 machine translation provided) in view of Moriya et al. (KR 20140078617 machine translation provided) and Ashida et al. (2017/0057856) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nomura (JP 3826090 machine translation provided). Nakagawa teaches individual radiant heaters 22 for the upper mold and for the lower mold (figure 1) but does not specify independent control of them. Nomura also teaches a molding apparatus comprising a plurality of radiant heaters, wherein the plurality of radiant heaters heat an upper mold, a lower mold, and a molding material. Nomura teaches providing independent control for the radiant heaters so as to allow efficient heating of the molding material molds, separate from the molding material, without being affected by the temperature of the mold ([0017], [0019], [0021],[0066]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided for independently controlled radiant heaters to provide separate and controlled heating of the molding material, without being affected by the temperature of the molds, as taught by Nomura.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al. (JP 2010116292 machine translation provided) in view of Moriya et al. (KR 20140078617 machine translation provided) and Ashida et al. (2017/0057856) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Yoneda et al. (CN 1533995 machine translation provided). Moriya teaches temperature monitoring device comprising TC gauges and Ashida teaches the temperature monitoring device comprising a radiation thermometer 52 that is directed at a processing chamber formed at least partially by the upper mold and the lower mold (figure 1), but do not specify an infrared camera. Yoneda discloses an apparatus for molding glass materials comprising an upper mold and a lower mold (bottom of page 3) and a temperature monitoring device configured to monitor a temperature of the glass material. Yoneda teaches while temperature thermocouples are known, they are error prone, and suggests measuring by non-contact methods, wherein known non-contact methods include radiation thermometer or infrared cameras (4th passage on page 14). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided for an infrared camera as a known alternative to the temperature monitoring device in the apparatus of Nakagawa, Moriya, and Ashida as it provides for a more accurate temperature measurement of glass material, and Yoneda teaches infrared cameras are a known alternative to a radiation thermometer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed February 18, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under Nakagawa, Moriya, and Ashida have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Ashida controlling the atmosphere around the glass material to be inert and pressurized, which suggests controlling the flow rate of the inert gas to the glass material. Since the controller controls the atmosphere during all aspects of the process (i.e. heating, molding, and cooling), it is configure to control the flow of the inert gas during the cooling step. Ashida also teaches controlling the resistive heating element to provide heat in order to provide a gradual cooling of the glass material. Thus, it is fairly suggested to configure the controller to control heating of the resistive heating elements (and hence, the glass material) during the cooling step.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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 at 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 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.
/QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights