DETAILED ACTION
Reason(s) for Reopening Prosecution
The rejection statement for one of the rejections was incorrect, which created confusion with respect to marking the subject matter of claim 2 allowable. The Section 112, 2nd paragraph rejections and the marking of allowable subject matter will also be clarified.
Response to Amendment
The Section 112, 2nd paragraph rejections made in the Office action mailed August 8th, 2025 have been maintained due to Applicant’s amendments/arguments being unpersuasive.
The Section 103 rejections over Bassler as the primary reference made in the Office action mailed August 8th, 2025 have been maintained due to Applicant’s amendments/arguments being unpersuasive.
The Section 103 rejections over Manabe as the primary reference made in the Office action mailed August 8th, 2025 have been maintained due to Applicant’s amendments/arguments being unpersuasive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 10th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the indefiniteness issues, while Applicant’s amendments do some to clarify the issues raised by the Examiner, the repeated similar terminology and counteracting claim limitations continue to cause confusion. For instance, how can a “straight area” have “a vertical area and a horizontal area” as set forth in lines 9-10 but a “straight area be a vertical side wall or the horizontal base” as set forth in lines 13-14 when “the vertical area is the vertical side wall” and “the horizontal area is the horizontal base” as set forth in lines 15-17?
Furthermore, it is unclear what an “upright plate” is in relation to “the plate” of claim 1, line 1. What is a main upright surface of an upright bowl shape? What is it upright in relation to?
However, based on the discovered prior art, a modified form of claim 2 may be allowable as recited below.
Regarding Bassler and Manabe, Applicant argues the added process-by-process limitations as critical to the structural limitations of the curved area having a thickness greater than the straight area. The Examiner disagrees.
The structural limitations of a core/skin molding merely having a curved area and a straight area with a curved area having a greater thickness are not complex enough to warrant this style of consideration. A sandwich style molding having a straight area having a lower thickness than that of a curved area may be entirely inadvertent or an obvious design choice, such as that set forth in Fig. 1 of Furuya (JP 09-085780 A) or Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979).
While simultaneous sandwich co-injection molding may require this feature (more on that later) to prevent breakthrough/exposure (more on that later), it is not exclusive to that particular style of dual injection molding wherein the coating covers the entire molded part as set forth in Bassler [0010] and Manabe (col. 1, lines 20-25), wherein the curved portion having a greater thickness would have been anticipated by the inherent structure (or more generally obvious in view of the secondary references) as set forth.
Moreover, the term “breaking through” is not taught by the specification but merely the core “not being exposed” as related to the thickness considerations, which is less obviously relatable to the type of molding process [0025].
Also, Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) teach a simultaneous injection of the skin layer and core, wherein the skin layer is metallic in appearance due to the added and oriented metallic materials with the core layer completely covered with no visible/exposed/broken through core (col. 5, line 58 – col. 6, line 17) wherein the molded object comprises walls that meet at a substantially perpendicular corner/curved area having a greater thickness than the walls, wherein the relationship between a metal surface layer and a recycled core would be taught by Wagenblast as previously recited.
Alternatively, further in view of Battenfield (Resource-saving production with the sandwich technology…) which teaches a shape wherein the walls and base are thinner than a perpendicular corner/curved area and prevents exposure of the core material (which appears to drift inward at corners), it would have been obvious to reference known and similar sandwich moldings for geometric relationships. Furthermore, Wantanbe et al. (The Flow Behavior of Core Material and Breakthrough Phenomenon in Sandwich Injection Molding…) teach that breakthrough/exposure of the core is more likely when the core expands and is delayed when the thickness of the mold cavity increases, wherein Moldex3D teaches that core expansion/increased pressure is more likely to occur at sharper corners.
However, as related to the more specific structural and thickness relations of the recessed bowl portion of Fig. 3 as part of a protruding three-dimensional plate portion (or even for the protruding three-dimensional plate portion of Fig. 2) with a flange plate portion for directional reference, the particular relationship of the non-exposed recycled core/metallic skin to the the simultaneous co-injection molded product-by-process relationship as claimed in combination with the the more particular geometry/structure of the flanged three-dimensional plate portion as recited below would be persuasive regarding an allowance.
Reapplied/Maintained Rejections
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 2-3 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.
Regarding claim 2, it is unclear what an “upright plate” is and how it relates to “the plate” of claim 1, line 1. What is “a main upright surface” of an “upright bowl shape”? What is it upright in relation to, i.e. what is the reference point for vertical, horizontal, and upright? This is missing which makes their use as modifiers in relation to each other confusing.
Furthermore, how can a “straight area” have “a vertical area and a horizontal area” as set forth in lines 9-10 but a “straight area be a vertical side wall or the horizontal base” as set forth in lines 13-14 when “the vertical area is the vertical side wall” and “the horizontal area is the horizontal base” as set forth in lines 15-17? How can a straight area simultaneously have either and both of each feature. If this is confusing, If (A) has (B) and (C), and (B) is (D) and (C) is (E), then how can (A) also be either (D) or (E). Why not just combine the terminology of vertical sidewall/area and horizontal base/area?
The repeated similar terminology and counteracting claim limitations continue to cause confusion, and the issues are not clarified by the disclosure. The proposed Examiner’s amendment as recited below is believed to resolve these issues.
Claim 3 is rejected for being dependent on indefinite claim 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 4, & 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bassler et al. (WO 2010/043626 A1) (hereinafter “Bassler”).
Regarding claims 1 and 11-12, Bassler teaches a molded part/plate for installation in a household appliance, such as a handle or other fitting and/or decorative element attached to the front of a household appliance (dispenser) like a refrigerator [0002-0003, 0016-0017] comprising a non-visible preform (core) layer (All Figs. [2]) formed from injection molding [0012] having thereon a visible decorative (skin) layer/coating (All Figs. [3]) formed by injection molding that covers the preform entirely (not exposed) [0013], wherein the preform is produced from (second) regranulate/recycled resin material [0012] and the decorative coating is designed in particular as a decorative (first) resin having metal particles such that it produces a metallic gloss effect (continuity of color with a metal) [0014, 0039], wherein the straight areas are demonstrated/depicted to be thinner in a stacking direction than the curved areas (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, the “sandwich” injection molding process set forth in claim 4 is not taught. However, this is a product-by-process type limitation. Absent a showing to the contrary, it is Examiner's position that the article of the applied prior art is identical to or only slightly different than the claimed article. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The burden has been shifted to Applicant to show unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product. In re Marosi, 218 USPQ 289 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Claim 12 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bassler as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kim (KR 20120084214 A) (hereinafter “Kim”) and/or The Grok Shop (LG Refrigerator Ice Dispenser Repair: Ice Dispenser Flap Not Closing) (hereinafter “Grok”).
Alternatively, regarding claim 12, in the event that a “dispenser” is not taught as claimed:
Kim teaches that a dispenser for a refrigerator dispenser that improves the appearance for a door, wherein molded parts such as a door handle and an ice/water dispenser having a cavity/recessed portion forming a discharge space demonstrated as having a vertical area/sidewall and horizontal area/base connected by a curved/corner translation surface in a known configuration (Fig. 1 [7]) [0006, 0038-0040], wherein the ice/water dispenser is mounted within the same cavity as the door handle [0028, 0032, 0056-0058].
AND/OR
Grok teaches an LG fridge comprising an ice/water dispenser that is made of metallic-appearing plastic that provides a continuity of metal color with the remainder of the device, wherein a plate portion further comprises a recess forming a discharge space demonstrated as having a vertical area/sidewall and horizontal area/base connected by a curved/corner transition surface, wherein the vertical side surface of the recess is demonstrated to comprise reinforcing ribs that are thinner in width/thickness than the surface to which they are connected (~@1:35-2:25):
PNG
media_image1.png
768
1420
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
594
890
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
606
566
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
470
353
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to and motivated for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention form an appliance part/panel, specifically a refrigerator dispenser, comprising a fitting attached to the front of a refrigerator using Bassler’s process for accomplishing the formation of appliance parts/housing/panels.
Claims 1, 4, & 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”).
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 11-12, Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) teach a simultaneous injection of the skin layer and core, wherein the skin layer is metallic in appearance due to the added and oriented metallic materials with the core layer completely covered with no visible/exposed/broken through core (col. 5, line 58 – col. 6, line 17) wherein the molded object comprises walls that meet at a substantially perpendicular corner/curved area having a greater thickness than the walls.
Further regarding claim 1, however the core layer (second) resin is not taught to be recycled.
Wagenblast teaches an injection molded plastic part comprising a core layer and surface/skin layer, wherein the core is formed from recycled plastic, wherein legal requirements oblige manufacturers to use a minimum proportion of recycled materials, which have usable mechanical properties but not particularly desirable as visible/surface materials [0015], and the surface/skin preferably comprises metallic pigments to achieve a metallic effect that is preferably color-matched to surfaces coated in metallic paint [0002, 0018].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a non-visible, enclosed core having skin layer with a metallic resin having a metallic effect equivalent to metal paint as comprising a recycled resin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form a legally-required and environmentally-friendly product within the desirable confines of the non-exposed core.
Further regarding claims 1 and 11-12, while the molded article is not taught to be “for a home appliance/refrigerator/dispenser” as claimed, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Claims 1, 4, & 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”) and in view of Diamantakos et al. (U.S. Pub. 2009/0285929 A1) (hereinafter “Diamantakos”) OR Clarke (U.S. Patent No. 6,402,725 B1) (hereinafter “Clarke”)
The discussion of claims 1, 4, and 11-12 as taught by Easterlow and Wagenblast is incorporated herein. Further regarding claim 1, in the event the thickness of the curved portion(s)/corner transition is/are not inherently greater than the straight portion(s) comprising the vertical area/sidewall and/or horizontal area/base:
Diamantakos teaches a reduced thickness injection molded part design for box-like containers having large flat surfaces [0004], wherein the walls of the both the horizontal and vertical portions comprise thinner portions and thicker portions [0017], wherein the transition area comprising the corners/bent portions comprise entirely thicker sections, wherein the benefit from the increase in strength exceeds the benefit of weight reduction and act as flow leaders (areas having a greater thickness) that help fill the corners [0003, 0020].
OR
Clarke teaches an injection molded article comprising a skin and core layers usable in automobiles and kitchenware (col. 11, lines 60-67), wherein improvements on entirely thin plates comprise thickened portions being preferred at areas such as corner/bent/curved portions to provide relief from vestigial traces in the skin and increased strength/stiffness, especially in conjunction with a flange (col. 7, lines 15-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the at the time of invention to provide a curved area as greater in thickness than a portion of (Diamantakos) or the entirety of (Clarke) a straight area in a recessed feature. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the flow rate of a skin resin more easily transitions to benefit from the increase in strength, exceeding the benefit of weight reduction, and act as flow leaders that help fill the corners [Diamantakos; 0003, 0020] OR to provide relief from vestigial traces in the skin and increased strength/stiffness, especially in conjunction with a flange [Clarke; col. 7, lines 15-42].
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”) as applied to claim 1 above further in view of Schmidt (U.S. Patent No. 4,029,841) (hereinafter “Schmidt”) and The Grok Shop (LG Refrigerator Ice Dispenser Repair: Ice Dispenser Flap Not Closing) (hereinafter “Grok”).
OR
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”) in view of Diamantakos et al. (U.S. Pub. 2009/0285929 A1) (hereinafter “Diamantakos”) OR Clarke (U.S. Patent No. 6,402,725 B1) (hereinafter “Clarke”) as applied to claim 1 above further in view of Schmidt (U.S. Patent No. 4,029,841) (hereinafter “Schmidt”) and The Grok Shop (LG Refrigerator Ice Dispenser Repair: Ice Dispenser Flap Not Closing) (hereinafter “Grok”).
In the event that a refrigerator dispenser is not taught by Easterlow/Wagenblast or Easterlow/Wagenblast/Diamantakos or Easterlow/Wagenblast/Clark:
Schmidt teaches a sandwich molding process comprising an entirely enclosed core and a skin layer, particularly useful in articles of manufacture that have a relatively large surface area in relation to the thickness of their walls in a wide variety of shapes and forms such as sheets, panels, containers, which are commonly employed in among other choices motor vehicles and refrigerators (col. 4, lines 11-28).
AND
Grok teaches an LG fridge comprising an ice/water dispenser that is made of metallic-appearing plastic that provides a continuity of metal color with the remainder of the device, wherein a plate portion further comprises a recess forming a discharge space demonstrated as having a vertical area/sidewall and horizontal area/base connected by a curved/corner transition surface, wherein the vertical side surface of the recess is demonstrated to comprise reinforcing ribs that are thinner in width/thickness than the surface to which they are connected (~@1:35-2:25):
It would have been obvious to and motivated for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a refrigerator panel/container having a relatively large area in relation to its thickness as sandwich injection molded component, wherein Grok demonstrates an exemplary shaped plastic metallic plate.
Claims 1, 4, & 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”) and Battenfield (Resource-saving production with the sandwich technology…) (hereinafter “Battenfield”) and/or Wantanbe et al. (The Flow Behavior of Core Material and Breakthrough Phenomenon in Sandwich Injection Molding…) (hereinafter “Wantanabe”) and Moldex3D (Co-Injection Molding) (hereinafter “Moldex3D”)
The discussion of claims 1, 4, and 11-12 as taught by Easterlow and Wagenblast is incorporated herein. Further regarding claim 1, in the event the thickness of the curved portion(s)/corner transition is/are not inherently greater than the straight portion(s) comprising the vertical area/sidewall and/or horizontal area/base:
Battenfield teaches a simultaneously co-injection sandwich molding comprising a cross-sectional shape wherein the walls and base are thinner than a perpendicular corner/curved area and prevents exposure of the core material (which appears to drift inward at corners).
It would have been obvious to and motivated for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to reference known and similar sandwich moldings for structural molding thickness relationships.
Furthermore, Wantanbe teaches that breakthrough/exposure of the core is more likely when the core expands and is delayed when the thickness of the mold cavity increases, wherein Moldex3D teaches that core expansion/increased pressure is more likely to occur at sharper corners.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a thickened region at curved areas comprising sharper corners/transitions in direction. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to delay breakthrough/exposure of the core via core expansion.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Schmidt (U.S. Patent No. 4,029,841) (hereinafter “Schmidt”) and The Grok Shop (LG Refrigerator Ice Dispenser Repair: Ice Dispenser Flap Not Closing) (hereinafter “Grok”).
OR
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Easterlow et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,562,979) (hereinafter “Easterlow”) in view of Wagenblast (DE 19722551 A1) (hereinafter “Wagenblast”) and Battenfield (Resource-saving production with the sandwich technology…) (hereinafter “Battenfield”) and/or Wantanbe et al. (The Flow Behavior of Core Material and Breakthrough Phenomenon in Sandwich Injection Molding…) (hereinafter “Wantanabe”) and Moldex3D (Co-Injection Molding) (hereinafter “Moldex3D”) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Schmidt (U.S. Patent No. 4,029,841) (hereinafter “Schmidt”) and The Grok Shop (LG Refrigerator Ice Dispenser Repair: Ice Dispenser Flap Not Closing) (hereinafter “Grok”).
In the event that a refrigerator dispenser is not taught by Easterlow/Wagenblast/Battenfeld and/or Wantanbe and Moldex3D:
Schmidt teaches a sandwich molding process comprising an entirely enclosed core and a skin layer, particularly useful in articles of manufacture that have a relatively large surface area in relation to the thickness of their walls in a wide variety of shapes and forms such as sheets, panels, containers, which are commonly employed in among other choices motor vehicles and refrigerators (col. 4, lines 11-28).
AND
Grok teaches an LG fridge comprising an ice/water dispenser that is made of metallic-appearing plastic that provides a continuity of metal color with the remainder of the device, wherein a plate portion further comprises a recess forming a discharge space demonstrated as having a vertical area/sidewall and horizontal area/base connected by a curved/corner transition surface, wherein the vertical side surface of the recess is demonstrated to comprise reinforcing ribs that are thinner in width/thickness than the surface to which they are connected (~@1:35-2:25):
It would have been obvious to and motivated for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a refrigerator panel/container having a relatively large area in relation to its thickness as sandwich injection molded component, wherein Grok demonstrates an exemplary shaped plastic metallic plate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 3 is dependent on claim 2 and is therefore would be allowable, but does not contain allowable subject matter in isolation.
The following claims were drafted by the Examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, at least some of the following claims (claims 13-20, claims 21-28 were added upon further consideration) were presented to Applicant for consideration in an interview that took place on December 16th, 2026:
13. (New) A component for a home appliance, comprising:
a flanged three-dimensionally shaped plate comprising a flange plate portion at least partially surrounding a three-dimensionally shaped plate portion, the flanged plate portion defining a plane and the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion at least partially protruding from the plane in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the plane, a cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion having a first surface and a second surface defining a thickness therebetween and having a cross-section taken perpendicular to the plane and extending along a vertical direction parallel to the plane,
the flanged three-dimensionally shaped plate comprising a skin layer made of a first material and a core layer made of a second material different from the first material and enclosed within the skin layer, the skin and the core layer are formed by co-injection molding in which the first material and second material are simultaneously injected, such that the cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion consists of a first skin layer portion, the core layer, and a second skin layer portion stacked in order and defining the thickness, wherein the first material is a metallic resin containing a metal material to provide continuity of color with a metal and the second material is a recycled resin,
wherein the cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion comprises a plurality of straight areas substantially parallel to the vertical and/or horizontal directions and at least one curved area connecting two or more of the straight areas, wherein the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion further comprises:
a recessed portion further protruding in the horizontal direction forming an upright bowl shape facing the plane, a cross-section of the recessed portion along the vertical direction comprising a vertical recessed portion straight area substantially parallel to the vertical direction, a horizontal recessed portion straight area substantially parallel to the horizontal direction, and a recessed portion curved area connecting the vertical recessed portion straight area and the horizontal recessed portion straight area, wherein a minimum thickness of the recessed portion curved area is greater than a maximum thickness of each of the vertical and horizontal recessed portion straight areas and a minimum thickness of the vertical recessed portion straight area is greater than a maximum thickness of a horizontal recessed portion straight area, the cross-sectional thickness being adjusted to prevent exposure of the core layer.
14. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 13, wherein the recessed portion further comprises at least one rib protruding from a first or second surface, wherein a thickness of the rib is a width measured along a direction parallel to the first or second surface from which it protrudes.
15. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 14, wherein the minimum thickness of the recessed portion curved area, the minimum thickness of the recessed portion straight area substantially parallel to the vertical direction, and a minimum thickness of the horizontal portion substantially parallel to the horizontal direction are each greater than a maximum thickness of the rib.
16. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 13, wherein the simultaneous co-injection molding comprises the simultaneous injection of the first and second layer into a mold and stopping the injection of the second material, and then stopping the injection of the first material.
17. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 16, wherein the simultaneous injection comprises second material being injected following a preset or predetermined amount of the first material being injected.
18. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 16, wherein the first material is injected from a first nozzle and the second material is injected from a second nozzle different from the first nozzle.
19. (New) A home appliance comprising the component of claim 13, wherein the home appliance is a refrigerator, wherein the metal is a material of the refrigerator door.
20. (New) The home appliance of claim 19, wherein the component comprises a dispenser module.
21. (New) A component for a home appliance, comprising:
a flanged three-dimensionally shaped plate comprising a flange plate portion at least partially surrounding a three-dimensionally shaped plate portion, the flanged plate portion defining a plane and the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion at least partially protruding from the plane in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the plane, a cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion having a first surface and a second surface defining a thickness therebetween and having a cross-section taken perpendicular to the plane and extending along a vertical direction parallel to the plane,
the flanged three-dimensionally shaped plate comprising a skin layer made of a first material and a core layer made of a second material different from the first material and enclosed within the skin layer, the skin and the core layer are formed by co-injection molding in which the first material and second material are simultaneously injected, such that the cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion consists of a first skin layer portion, the core layer, and a second skin layer portion stacked in order and defining the thickness, wherein the first material is a metallic resin containing a metal material to provide continuity of color with a metal and the second material is a recycled resin,
wherein the cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion forms an upright bowl shape facing the plane, a cross-section of the three-dimensionally shaped plate portion along the vertical direction comprising a vertical plate portion straight area substantially parallel to the vertical direction, a horizontal plate portion straight area substantially parallel to the horizontal direction, and a plate portion curved area connecting the vertical plate portion straight area and the horizontal plate portion straight area, wherein a minimum thickness of the plate portion curved area is greater than a maximum thickness of each of the vertical and horizontal plate portion straight areas and a minimum thickness of the vertical plate portion straight area is greater than a maximum thickness of a horizontal plate portion straight area, the cross-sectional thickness being adjusted to prevent exposure of the core layer,
wherein the vertical plate portion straight area further comprises a recessed portion further protruding in the horizontal direction forming an additional upright bowl shape facing the plane.
22. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 21, wherein the recessed portion further comprises at least one rib protruding from a first or second surface, wherein a thickness of the rib is a width measured along a direction parallel to the first or second surface from which it protrudes.
23. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 22, wherein the minimum thickness of the recessed portion curved area, the minimum thickness of the recessed portion straight area substantially parallel to the vertical direction, and a minimum thickness of the horizontal portion substantially parallel to the horizontal direction are each greater than a maximum thickness of the rib.
24. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 21, wherein the simultaneous co-injection molding comprises the simultaneous injection of the first and second layer into a mold and stopping the injection of the second material, and then stopping the injection of the first material.
25. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 24, wherein the simultaneous injection comprises second material being injected following a preset or predetermined amount of the first material being injected.
26. (New) The component for the home appliance of claim 24, wherein the first material is injected from a first nozzle and the second material is injected from a second nozzle different from the first nozzle.
27. (New) A home appliance comprising the component of claim 21, wherein the home appliance is a refrigerator, wherein the metal is a material of the refrigerator door.
28. (New) The home appliance of claim 27, wherein the component comprises a dispenser module.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Engel (Sequential injection moulding for food packaging) teaches simultaneous sandwich co-injection molding, like Battenfield , and the thickness of the corner/curved portion is demonstrated to be equal to or greater than the thickness of any straight portions.
Eckardt (U.S. Patent No. 5,667,819) teaches a similar apparatus to that of Easterlow except that the skin/lacquer material is continuously co-injected with no intermediate stopping point to provide a more uniform coating without any transitional regions/periods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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, Frank J Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 July 8th, 2026
Prosecution Insights