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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 05/26/2023. These drawings are accepted.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 13 are currently amended, Claims 2-6, 11, 12, and 14-16 are as originally filed, Claims 7-10 and 17-20 are canceled, and Claims 21-28 are new.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hunt (790,435).
Hunt is applied as discussed in the office action mailed 10/17/2025.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 21-28 are allowed.
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding Claims 1-6, 11, and 12, the amendment filed 03/05/2026 to the claims incorporated the subject matter of cancelled Claim 8, which was addressed in the office action mailed 10/17/2025. Regarding Claim 16, Hunt does not suggest a screw and pin, wherein the pin is positioned between the screw and the deformable wall portion as claimed. The screw, represented by 13, does not include a pin, and only the ejector and aperture, represented in the annotated drawings in the office action mailed 10/17/2025, contact the surface of the metal ingot. Regarding Claims 21-28, the aforementioned amendment incorporated the subject matter of cancelled Claim 9, which was addressed in the office action mailed 10/17/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Hunt fails to disclose a body having a sidewall and a deformable wall portion positioned between a cavity an ejector, and the cap 8 of Hunt is not part of the sidewall of the mold 3. However, Claim 13 does not recite that the deformable wall portion is part of the sidewall portion. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues the cap 8 is not positioned between the cavity and the ejector and the filler or pressure-bar B extends through a central opening in the cap 8. The operation of the system in Hunt does lead to the ejector extending into the cap 8, but Hunt teaches in Fig. 2 the filler or pressure-bar B is above the cavity. Nonpreferred and alternative embodiments constitute prior art. Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. See MPEP § 2123 II.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tima M. McGuthry-Banks whose telephone number is (571)272-2744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 am to 4:00 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, Keith D. Hendricks can be reached at (571) 272-1401. 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.
Tima M. McGuthry-Banks
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1733
/TIMA M. MCGUTHRY-BANKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733