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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 3, and 6-8 are pending. Claims 2, 4-5, and 9-12 are canceled. Claims 6-8 remain withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, filed 12/26/2025, the following rejections are withdrawn from the previous Office Action mailed 09/30/2025:
Claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
Prior art rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103
Nonstatutory double patenting rejections
New grounds of rejection are made in response to claim amendments.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamazaki, JP H01130880 A (of record). The Espacenet machine translation of Yamazaki provided 09/30/2025 is referenced below.
PNG
media_image1.png
579
972
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Yamazaki discloses a panel manufacturing device (Fig. 3) comprising:
A transfer part (take-up conveyors 8, Fig. 3) configured to transfer a panel part (sandwich panel P0, Fig. 3) having a core member (corrugated band 1, Fig. 3) and a first faceplate (first plate 3, Fig. 3) in a transfer direction (left to right, Fig. 3), the core member having a corrugated shape (Fig. 3) and the first faceplate having a plate shape (first plate 3 is a flat plate, Fig. 3), and the first faceplate being joined to a surface on a first side of the core member (joined at bottom side of the corrugated core 1 in Fig. 3);
A supply part (either/both of rolls 40, 6, Fig. 3) configured to supply a second faceplate (second plate 4, Fig. 3) toward a surface on a second side of the core member of the panel part (toward a top side of the corrugated core 1 in Fig. 3), the second faceplate having a plate shape (second plate 4 is a flat plate, Fig. 3); and
A joining part (welding assembly including elements 64-67, Fig. 3, circled above) configured to join the core member of the panel part and the second faceplate to form a joined panel (Fig. 3),
The joining part including a pressurizing part (contacting portions of welding assembly, Fig. 3) comprising: a rod-shaped pressurizing member (rod 64, Fig. 3) configured to move in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the first faceplate (arranged vertically, Fig. 3, for insertion toward upward facing mountain of corrugated band 1, p. 3, lines 103-106) so as to extend through one of the plurality of through-holes of the first faceplate toward the core member (capable of being inserted into a corresponding through-hole of the first faceplate, appears to penetrate the flat surface of the first plate 3 in Fig. 3), the rod-shaped pressurizing member having a tip (tip of rod 64, Figs. 3-4) configured to contact the surface on the first side of the core member after extending through the one of the plurality of through-holes of the first faceplate so as to press the core member of the panel part toward a first surface of the second faceplate (presses the core member 1 joined to the first plate 3 toward the second plate 4 via insertion into the upwardly facing mountain of the corrugated band, Fig. 3, p. 3, lines 103-106), and a receiving member (element 66, Fig. 3) arranged at a second surface of the second faceplate opposite the first surface of the second faceplate (Fig. 3) so as to receive pressurization of the core member toward the second faceplate by the rod-shaped pressurizing member (Fig. 3, p. 3, lines 103-106).
Regarding the limitations of a core member/first faceplate/second faceplate “including a thermoplastic resin,” the material or article worked upon by the apparatus in its intended use does not limit an apparatus claim (MPEP 2115). In this case, the transfer part of the prior art performs the function of transferring a panel having a core member and a first faceplate, and the supply part supplies, in the same manner as presently disclosed, a second faceplate. Whether or not these materials in a given use of the apparatus include a thermoplastic resin does not require or impart any particular structure beyond that already recited by the claim, and the structures of the apparatus were capable of transporting and supplying materials including a thermoplastic resin with no further change to their structures. Regarding the limitations “wherein the first faceplate has a plurality of through-holes formed through the first faceplate to allow access to the core member,” and “the joining part is configured to form the joined panel via the plurality of through-holes of the first faceplate,” the examiner notes that the examined claims are directed to an apparatus, and neither the material or article worked upon (MPEP 2115) nor the manner of operating a device (MPEP 2114(II)) is sufficient to distinguish an apparatus claim from the prior art. Neither of the limitations recite or require any particular structure of the apparatus in addition to that already recited by the claim. In this case, the apparatus of Yamazaki was capable of working on the first faceplate whether or not it had a plurality of through-holes because this characteristic would not have changed the operation of any of the structures already intended to work on the first faceplate. Furthermore, the joining part was capable of forming the joined part via through-holes of a first faceplate since the joining part joins the core member and the second faceplate in the same manner as presently disclosed, via a rod-shaped member inserted past the first faceplate to weld the core member to the second faceplate (Fig. 3), such that the parts are joined via the stack of materials, and through-holes in the first faceplate, if they are not already present, would only appear to have facilitated the intended joining of the core and the second faceplate as depicted by Yamazaki.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki, JP H01130880 A, as applied to claim 1, in view of Welding Engineering: An Introduction, 4.3.3 Ultrasonic Welding (2016).
Regarding claim 3, Yamazaki discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the joining part includes a heating part configured to heat the panel part (conductive rod 64 and second electrode 66 perform spot welding, p. 3, lines 103-106). Yamazaki does not disclose the heating part is a vibration heating part configured to impart vibration to the pressurizing member to heat the panel part.
In the analogous art, Welding Engineering discloses that ultrasonic welding was a known type of welding technique (pp. 111-113) utilizing a vibration heating part configured to impart vibration to the welding member to heat and weld the materials (ultrasonic welding produces a weld through the localized application of high frequency vibratory energy with minimal heating, p. 111) and providing advantages such as low heat input, minimal part distortion, and fast welding speeds (p. 112).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the joining part of Yamazaki such that the heating part was a vibration heating part configured to impart vibration to the pressurizing member to heat the panel part in order to implement an ultrasonic welding configuration for the welding so as to realize the benefits including minimal part distortion and fast welding speeds, as taught by Welding Engineering.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 12-13, filed 12/26/2025, with respect to claim amendments and the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 102 as being anticipated by Swartz and Blais have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 13, with respect to claim amendments and the nonstatutory double patenting rejections over application no. 18286874 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 1 and 2 as being anticipated by Yamazaki have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues (p. 13) that Yamazaki fails to disclose a rod-shaped pressurizing member configured to move in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the first faceplate so as to extend through one of the plurality of through-holes of the first faceplate toward the core member (emphasis in original), as recited in amended claim 1.
This argument is not found persuasive. Yamazaki discloses the rod-shaped pressurizing member (rod 64, Figs. 3-4) that is inserted past/through the analogous first faceplate 3 toward the upward facing mounting of the core member to weld the core member to the analogous second plate 4 (Fig. 3, Yamazaki translation, p. 3, lines 103-106). The first faceplate 3 is arranged in a relatively horizontal direction and the rod is moved vertically toward the core/second plate for the insertion and welding, i.e., is configured to move in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the first faceplate.
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 JENNIFER L GROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 5pm ET.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/J.L.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/LARRY W THROWER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights