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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed April 27, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-12 remain pending in the application.
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 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.
Claims 1-7, 9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Neubauer et al. (US 2012/0248659).
Regarding claims 1, 7, Neubauer discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1-3, an apparatus for forming plastic preforms into plastic containers (ABSTRACT), having a transport device which transports the plastic preforms to be formed along a predetermined transport path, wherein the transport device has a rotatable transport carrier (ABSTRACT, lines 1-2; the blow moulding wheel ([0009], lines 5-6)) on which a plurality of forming stations is arranged, wherein said forming stations each have blow molding devices within which the plastic preforms can be formed into the plastic containers by applying a flowable medium, and the forming stations each have application devices in order to apply the flowable medium to the plastic preforms, wherein the forming stations each have stretching devices for stretching the plastic preforms in their longitudinal direction, and these stretching devices each having at least one stretching rod ([0053] (e.g., item 54 for introducing a stretching rod)) which can be moved in the longitudinal direction of the plastic preforms and introduced into the plastic preforms, and wherein the apparatus has a clean room (e.g., item 20 ([0053], [0071])) which is delimited by several walls (as shown in Fig. 3; e.g., items 17, 18, 18 ([0068], [0069], [0070])) and within which the plastic preforms are expanded to form the plastic containers, wherein the stretching devices and the forming stations are arranged on a mold carrier holder (i.e., item 6 ([0061]) as illustrated in Fig. 3 (related to claim 7); item 23 ([0073]); Specifically, as illustrated in Fig. 3 (also see attached annotated Figure I), for each mold carrier holder 6 (including item 23 (not shown)), each stretching rod is working with the corresponding blowing mould (station(s) (i.e., the shaping stations each have blowing moulds (ABSTRACT, lines 2-3))) through the opening 54) and are held thereby, so that the mold carrier holder is designed as a carrying apparatus of the apparatus and the walls of the clean room are only suitable and intended to delimit the device from an non-sterile environment.
It is noticed that, as illustrated in Figs. 2, 4, at least the blow molding devices comprise the blowing mould 4 ([0060]; Fig. 4) and the base form 8 ([0046], lines 9-11). As illustrated in Fig. 3, at least the blowing mould 4 (i.e., having two blow mold halves) is detachably arranged on the mold carrier holder (see label of mold carrier holder in attached annotated Figure I). Actually, based on the disclosure of Neubauer, the concepts of the mold carrier holder and the blowing mould carrier 6 ([0061]) should be the same one.
PNG
media_image1.png
504
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure I (based on Fig. 3 in the teachings of Neubauer)
Regarding claims 2-5, Neubauer discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1-3, the sealing device (item 25, Fig. 3 ([0075]); it is noticed that, the item 25 is provided with a circumferential channel (related to claim 5)) is provided, which seals off from one another the elements 17 and 18 which are movable relative to one another, for example, as mentioned above, using a water lock. The lower region of the wall 18 is arranged in a fixed (or non-carrying device) (related to claims 3, 4, 5).
Regarding claims 6, 11, Neubauer discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, the carrier 2 has a base wall/body 52 ([0090]) and, on a surface facing the clean chamber/room 20 ([0071]) ([0016], lines 1-3). Neubauer discloses that, a further layer is added insider, i.e., there where the clean chamber is located, for example, a further sheet metal layer of considerably lower wall thickness ([0017], lines 1-6). Neubauer discloses that, less expensive material, such as steel, can be used ([0018], lines 1-7). Neubauer discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 1, reference system 28 identifies a carrier for carrying a base form, which is likewise a constituent of the blowing mould. This carrier likewise can be moved here in the direction Y (i.e., the longitudinal direction) ([0046], lines 1-4 from bottom) (related to claim 11).
Regarding claim 9, Neubauer discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 2, the stretching device (item 5, Fig. 2 ([0045])) includes one upper portion which is arranged outside the clean room (as shown in Fig. 2).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 8, 10, 12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neubauer et al. (US 2012/0248659) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Hollriegl et al. (US 2012/0052146).
Regarding claims 8, 10, 12, Neubauer does not specify a material for the mold carrier holder. In the same field of endeavor, blow mold, Hollriegl discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1-2, two related mold support parts T1, T2 of a blow mold are illustrated for blow molding ([0036]). Here, the two related mold support parts T1, T2 of a blow mold at least can be considered as one portion of the mold carrier holder. Hollriegl discloses that, the abutments 6 serve to lock the mold support parts T1, T2 swiveled towards each other by an inserted locking element or acting locking components ([0038], lines 5-8) (related to claim 10). Hollriegl discloses that, the two related mold support parts may be employed in combination of materials such as steel casting material, also steel alloys ([0010]). For example, if casting 316 stainless steel (i.e., one type of steel alloy) is selected for the mold support parts, they will provide an H2O2 resistance (related to claim 12).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Neubauer to incorporate the teachings of Hollriegl to provide a material, such as casting 316 stainless steels, to make the mold carrier holder. Doing so would be possible to optimize weight and strength of the mold carrier holder for the blow molding, as recognized by Hollriegl ([0010]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/27/2026 have been fully considered. They are not persuasive.
Regarding arguments (as amended) in claim 1 that the base reference Neubauer does not disclose the stretching device is arranged on a mold carrier holder, it is not persuasive. As Applicant admits, the stretching bar/rod 5 has to penetrate through the cover 17 into the inside the preform via the opening 54 ([0091]) to function properly. At least, the stretching rod 5 of the stretching device(s) is arranged on the mold carrier holder.
Regarding arguments (as amended) in claim 1 that the Examiner appears to confuse the terms “mold carrier holder” and “blow mold carrier”, it is not persuasive.
In the specification of Applicant, the mold carrier holder 5 ([0053] in PGPub US 2024/0017470) is illustrated in Fig. 1. This definition of Applicant should be the equivalence to the blowing mould carrier 6 in the teachings of Neubauer ([0061]; as shown in Fig. 3).
It is noticed that, in the specification of Applicant, these blow mold halves are preferably detachably arranged on a mold carrier shell or on the blow mold carriers ([0020], lines 6-8 (PGPub US 2024/0017470)). Thus, at least Applicant considers the same functions provided by either the mold carrier shell/holder or the blow mold carriers. In other words, at least there are overlapping between the mold carrier shell/holder and the blow mold carriers.
It is noticed that, as illustrated in Figs. 2, 4, at least the blow molding devices comprise the blowing mould 4 ([0060]; Fig. 4) and the base form 8 ([0046], lines 9-11). As illustrated in Fig. 3, at least the blowing mould 4 (i.e., having two blow mold halves) is detachably arranged on the mold carrier holder (see label of mold carrier holder in attached annotated Figure I). Actually, based on the disclosure of Neubauer, the concepts of the mold carrier holder and the blowing mould carrier 6 ([0061]) should be the same one.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shibin Liang whose telephone number is (571)272-8811. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30 - 4:30.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alison L Hindenlang can be reached on (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 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).
/SHIBIN LIANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights