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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 18-30 and 32-35 in the reply filed on 6-16-25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that 2012/0100241 does not teach the special technical feature of a ducting system formed between the body and the liner. This is not found persuasive because CN1049093534 teaches a ducting system that is formed between the body and the liner, therefore the common technical feature does not make a contribution over the prior art.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 31, 36-37 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 6-16-25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 18-30 and 32-35 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 18 recites the limitation "the compression moulding" in line 1 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 19-30 and 32-35 are rejected for depending from claim 18.
Regarding claim 30, the claim depends from cancelled claim 1. It’s not clear if it’s intended to depend from claim 18.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "the contact surface" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "the second portion of the body" in line 3-4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 18-20, 24, 26-27, 30, 32-33, 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Penazzi (2015/0044323).
Regarding claim 18, Penazzi discloses a male element 2 of a mould 1 for the compression moulding of a parison 5 from a previously prepared charge of thermoplastic material, wherein the male element is associable with a female element of the mould to delimit a forming cavity intended for forming the parison (par 76-77, fig. 1), and comprises:
A die 604, extending along a longitudinal axis Z3(fig. 15, para 251-252);
A ducting system 627 located inside the die to allow a cooling fluid to flow in the male element (fig. 15, para 258-259),
Wherein the die includes:
A body 608 having an outside surface; and
A liner 607 fitted round the body and having an outside surface, acting in conjunction with the female element of the mould to delimit the forming cavity, and an inside surface in contact with the outside surface of the body (fig. 15, para 255-257); and
Wherein the ducting system is formed between the body and the liner (fig. 15, para 255-287, claim 1, abstract).
Regarding claim 19, Penazzi discloses wherein the outside surface of the body is grooved, so as to create a hollowed surface 620 acting in conjunction with a corresponding portion of the inside surface of the liner to delimit the ducting system (para 259, 267, fig. 15).
Regarding claim 20, Penazzi discloses wherein the ducting system comprises a plurality of grooves (see fig. 15, para 271-272, 287).
Regarding claim 24, Penazzi discloses wherein the ducting system comprises a delivery duct 622 for circulating the cooling fluid towards one end of the die and a return duct 623 for circulating the cooling fluid returning from the end of the die, wherein at least one of the delivery duct and the return duct defines a plurality of passages around the longitudinal axis (fig. 15, para 261-272).
Regarding claim 26, Penazzi discloses a delivery manifold 606, connected to the delivery duct, and a return manifold 606, connected to the return duct, wherein the delivery manifold and the return manifold extend in parallel with the longitudinal axis (fig. 15, para 274-282).
Regarding claim 27, Penazzi discloses a delivery duct 622, formed inside the body of the die for circulating the cooling fluid towards one end of the die, wherein the ducting system, formed between the body and the liner, defines a return duct 623 for circulating the cooling fluid returning from the end of the die (fig. 15, para 261-272).
Regarding claim 30, Penazzi discloses wherein the ducting system 627 comprises a duct delimited by portions of the outside surface of the body 608 and of the inside surface of the liner 607 (fig. 15, para 255-287, claim 1, abstract).
Regarding claim 32, Penazzi discloses wherein the ducting system is delimited by respective portions of the body and the liner in mutual contact (fig. 15, para 255-287, claim 1, abstract).
Regarding claim 33, Penazzi discloses wherein either one or both of the inside surface of the liner and the outside surface of the body is grooved, to form the ducting system (para 259, 267, fig. 15).
Regarding claim 35 Penazzi discloses wherein the ducting system comprises one or more channels 627 which interrupt the contact surface between the inside surface of the liner and the outside surface of the body, this contact surface being provided also in the second portion of the body, and wherein the ducting system is configured for generating a circulation of fluid in the channels, whereby a flow of refrigerating liquid flows through the channels according to a predetermine flow path (fig. 15, para 255-287, claim 1, abstract).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 21-23, 25, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penazzi as applied to claim 20, 19, 24 or 18 above, and further in view of Wegmann et al. (English translation of EP3666493).
Regarding claim 21, Penazzi does not teach wherein the outside surface of the body includes a plurality of support zones where it is in contact with the inside surface of the liner, wherein the support zones of the plurality of support zones are alternated with the grooves of the plurality of grooves. However, Wegmann et al. teaches that internal cooling means for cores with helical channel arrangements are well known to the skilled person (see fig. 1-5, para 44-56). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Penazzi with the teaching of Wegmann et al. since Wegmann et al. teaches an alternate design of the cooling circuit.
Regarding claim 22, Wegmann et al. teaches wherein an entire portion of the outside surface of the body, external with respect to the hollowed surface, is in contact with the liner (see fig. 1-5, para 44-56).
Regarding claim 23, Wegmann et al. teaches wherein the ducting system defines a helix wound around the longitudinal axis (see fig. 1-5, para 44-56).
Regarding claim 25, Wegmann et al. teaches wherein the delivery duct is shaped as a first helix wound around the longitudinal axis and the return duct is shaped as a second helix wound around the longitudinal axis, wherein at least one coil of the first helix is interposed, along the longitudinal axis, between a first and a second coil of the second helix (fig. 1-5, para 44-56).
Regarding claim 34, Wegmann et al. teaches wherein the body 6 extends along the longitudinal direction to a body tip, the body tip being operatively oriented towards the female element of the mould, and wherein the body has a first portion, with a first diameter, and second portion, with a second diameter smaller than the first diameter, wherein the second portion is proximal to the body tip and the first portion is distal from the body tip, and wherein the outside surface of the body 7, in contact with the corresponding inside surface 20 of the liner 2, is provided both in the first portion and in the second portion of the body (fig. 1-5, para 44-56).
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penazzi as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Uhlig (US 4,087,227).
Regarding claim 28, Penazzi does not teach a support structure, wherein the die is retractile relative to the support structure so it can move between a retracted position where, together with the support structure, it contributes to delimiting the forming cavity, and an extracted position where it is configured for stretching the parison. However, Uhlig teaches a blow mold 134 comprising a core member 142, which includes a carrier 148 in which the core shell 143 and the central member 144 are telescopically mounted. The outer core shell 143 of the core member 142 can advance telescopically through the sleeve 149 to stretch the shape 133 of the preform 130 into an extended shape (see fig. 15-16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Penazzi with the teaching of Uhlig in order to stretch the parison into a finished bottle.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penazzi as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Parinello et al. (2012/0100241).
Regarding claim 29, Penazzi does not teach wherein the die, inside it, has a longitudinal cavity, extending along the longitudinal axis and, at one end of it, a socket in communication with the longitudinal cavity, and wherein the male element also comprises a stretching rod, slidably inserted in the longitudinal cavity and including a terminal portion at one end of it, the stretching rod being movable relative to the die between a retracted position, in which the terminal portion is housed inside the socket to contribute, together with the die, to delimiting the forming cavity, and an extracted position, in which the terminal portion is extracted from the socket so it stretches the parison. However, Parinello et al. teaches a mould for manufacturing containers has a punch 7, the punch 7 further comprising a stretching rod 50 movable along the longitudinal axis A and arranged for stretching the container preform 8 (see fig. 7, para 132, claim 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecting filing date of the claimed invention to modify Penazzi with the teaching of Parinello et al. in order to expand the preform to obtain a container.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUE H LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-5522. The examiner can normally be reached 1PM - 10PM.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 5702721176. 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.
/X.H.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1742 /CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742