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 1 is amended. Claim 10 is canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that retainer (70) of Hickok (20120235325) does not join the center section (39) with the peripheral sections (49). Instead, as shown in Fig. 5, the retainer (70) of Hickok abuts and/or contacts moulded part (15) so that, for example, as collapsible core (39) collapses and/or moves away from moulded part (15), as shown between Figs. 1 and 2, retainer (70) interferes with and/or contacts at least a portion of molded part (15). Then as shown in Fig. 3, molded part (15) can be ejected or otherwise discharged away from collapsible core (39).
Examiner maintains that retainer as defined by Hickok is can be a sleeve with a through opening within or through which the collapsible core is mounted. Figure 1-2 showing collapsible core/center section being- 39 which has side plates-49. As drawn similarity with US 8033810. The center section of the ‘810 patent is ref.-45 which is equivalent of ref-39 of Hickok and the peripheral sections are shown as ref-49 in ‘810 patent which are equivalent to slide plate-49 of Hickok. In ‘810 dovetail grooves-48 are used to interlock the slides of the peripheral sections-49 to the center sections-45. There are two separate components in ‘801 patent that are interlock together and fit with each other. The requirement for the claim limitation is said center section and peripheral sections do not have two different components which interlock with each other. In Hickok as shown in Figures 1-3, the side plate-49 and centre section/core-39 are not two different components as also disclosed that slide plate-39 is also part of the core-39 ([0018]).
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-9,11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Hickok (US 20120235325).
Regarding Claim Hickok discloses collapsing core mould for forming a moulded part (abstract, moulded part-15), said core mould comprising: - a center section (Figures 1-3, [0019], center section-39 ); - a plurality of peripheral sections having a base portion opposing a top portion (Figures 1-5, [0019], [0025], Figure 4 showing -peripheral potions-70, base portion -75 and top portion -75; peripheral portions 23 and 24 with base and top portion), said plurality of peripheral sections surrounding said center section (Figures 1-3); -said center section being longitudinally moveable to withdraw from between said peripheral sections (Figures 1-3 showing center section is longitudinally moveable); - said peripheral sections being laterally moveable to allow said peripheral sections to move toward each other ([0019], Figure 1 to 2 showing that some peripheral portions are laterally moveable to allow said peripheral sections to move toward each other with slide plate-49 ); - at least some of the peripheral sections further being longitudinally moveable to withdraw from the remaining peripheral sections (Figure 1 to 2 showing peripheral sections 23 and 24 being longitudinally moveable); - the longitudinal withdrawal of said center section enabling lateral movement of at least some of the peripheral sections toward each other (Figure 2 showing that the longitudinal movement of the center position is enabling lateral movement of at least some of the peripheral sections toward each other); and - the longitudinal withdrawal of said at least some of the peripheral sections enabling a distinct subsequent lateral movement of the remaining peripheral sections toward each other to allow removal of the moulded part (Figure 1-3 showing that stripper plate-23 is moved in longitudinal direction resulting in bringing the other peripheral sections closer to each other with respect to the moulded part-15, [0019], [0020]). Hickok discloses center section and peripheral sections do not have components which interlock with each other ([0018]).
Regarding Claim 2 Hickok discloses said center section has a generally tapered profile (Figures 1-3).
Regarding Claim 3 Hickok discloses peripheral sections further comprising: - a front section opposite a rear section with said center section disposed there between (Figure annotated); and - a first side section opposite a second side section with said center section disposed there between ( Figure 2, first and second side section-23, 24).
PNG
media_image1.png
708
316
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4 Hickok discloses wherein said front section and said rear section are each longitudinally moveable (Figures 2-3 front section a rear section are longitudinally moveable with the moveable side sections 23, 24 ), and wherein the first side section and the second side section form the remaining peripheral sections (Figure 2-3 showing first and second side section-23, 24 ).
Regarding Claim 5 Hickok discloses the longitudinal withdrawal of the center section allows the front section and the rear section to move toward each other (Figure annotated above).
Regarding Claim 6 Hickok discloses wherein said front section and said rear section each has an angled interior face to abut at least a portion of the tapered profile of the center section (Figure 2 front section and said rear section each has an angled interior face to abut at least a portion of the tapered profile of the center section ).
Regarding Claim 7 Hickok discloses . wherein said first side section and said second side section each has a flat interior face to allow the flat interior face of the first section to contact the flat interior face of the second side section (Figure 1-2, first and second side section-23, 24) .
Regarding Claim 8 Hickok discloses wherein said peripheral sections together form a generally cylindrical external profile to form a molded part having a corresponding cylindrical internal profile.
Regarding Claim 9 Hickok discloses wherein said base portion of said peripheral sections is defined by an indentation corresponding to an inwardly extending ledge of the moulded part ([0027]).
Regarding Claim 11 Hickok discloses being insertable into a cavity part for forming the moulded part ([0028]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBJANI ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-8019. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 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 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.
/DEBJANI ROY/ Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights