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 .
This is the initial Office action based on application number 18/296471 filed April 6, 2023. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 19, 2025.
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.
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 1-2, 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bian et al. (CN 213825602, attached translation used for citation) in view of Miller et al. (US 3,166,791) and Kang (CN 110434012, attached translation used for citation).
Regarding claim 1: Bian et al. discloses a ring dipping machine for coating wire-like needles (3) having a film coating ring mechanism (1) which is a ring dipping tool oriented vertically with respect to the ground, a robotic platform (21) which is an arm that transports a needle holding plate (28) which holds the needle wires (3) (paged 3-4, figures 2 and 5-7). Bian et al. fails to explicitly disclose a carousel which holds the ring dipping tool, or an optical scanner near a dipping station.
However, Miller et al. discloses a similar dipping apparatus having a turntable (10) which is a carousel, having a frame (20) which is a first platform arranged around a central axis which supports a plurality of stations including a dipping station (B), the turntable (10) itself being a second platform arranged above the first one and including a motor (86) for rotating the turntable (10) relative to the frame (20) (col. 2 lines 21+, col. 4 lines 3-35, figures 1-2). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a turntable system like that of Miller et al. to treat a plurality of the sets of wire-like needles (3) of Bian et al. in an automated production line performing whatever process steps are necessary because Miller et al. teaches that this helps reduce time and labor needs for such a dipping process (col. 1 lines 15-39). While Miller et al. teaches that the stations themselves are raised and lowered rather than the turntable (10), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try raising and lowering the turntable (10) itself to achieve the needed relative motion because trying from a finite number of solutions is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2143E).
Bian et al. and Miller et al. still fail to explicitly disclose an optical scanner near the wire to scan the position of the wire/needle (3) and coating ring mechanism (1). However, Kang discloses a similar ring coating apparatus which has an optical detector (1312) for detecting the movement and transfer of the rings relative to the receiving groove (1321) for the rings (page 4, figures 3-4). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a similar optical detector as that of Kang to detect the relative locations of the needles and rings of Bian et al. because Kang teaches that it allows for the apparatus to automatically perform the next function when the two elements are detected by the optical detector to be in the correct positions, thereby blocking the optical signal (page 4).
Regarding claim 2: Bian et al. discloses that the coating ring mechanism (1) includes a linear stage having a driving device (20) which is an actuator which connects to the linear stage and raises or lowers the rings mounted in the ring plate chuck (19) into a liquid supply container (2) which contains a coating solution (page 4, figures 2, 5-6 and 7). In the above combination the coating ring mechanism (1) would be connected to the turntable by the linear stage, which comprises most of the structure of the mechanism (1).
Regarding claim 6: Bian et al. and Kang teach that the movement of the feeding element relative to the receiving groove (1321) is determined by the detection from the optical detector (1312) such that in the combination the robotic arm is in communication with the optical detector to use the position detected thereby to determine the correct position for inserting the needle wire through the ring dipping coating mechanism (Kang page 4, figure 4 and Bian et al. figures 2 and 5-7).
Regarding claim 7: Bian et al. and Miller et al. teach a number of different stations for various processes applied to the coating object, including a cooling station (E) having a container holding water, which is a solvent (Miller et al. col. 6 lines 25-49).
Regarding claim 8: Bian et al. discloses that the needle holding plate (28) holds a plurality of spaced apart needle wires (3) (figure 6).
Regarding claim 9: Bian et al. discloses that a controller electrically controls the driving of the ring dipping system and needle wire coating system and (page 4) which would naturally be used to control the driving of the turntable of Miller et al. too.
Regarding claim 10: Bian et al. shows a plurality of the needle like wires (3) and teaches that they are inserted into the ring mechanism for each to be coated, and while Bian et al. does not explicitly disclose or show that the ring plate chuck (19) includes a plurality of rings that are dipped, it nonetheless implies that this has to be the case in order for each needle (3) to puncture a respective ring film (page 4, figures 2, 5-7).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bian et al., Miller et al. and Kang as applied to claims 1-2, 6-10 above and further in view of Boock et al. (US 2011/0027458).
Regarding claims 3-4: Bian et al. discloses that the needle platform (21) moves the needles (3) into a working position and retracts it to a holding position, but Bian et al., Miller et al. and Kang fail to explicitly disclose an automated measurement system to which the needle wires are transferred, for measuring the thickness of the wire. However, Boock et al. discloses a similar wire dipping apparatus which uses a thickness measurement station (150) at a location through which the wire is transported, and uses the readings from the thickness measurement station (150) to automatically determine when the coating is thick enough to complete the process (par. 10, 72, figure 1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a thickness measurement station like that of Boock et al. for the apparatus of Bian et al. because Boock et al. teaches that this allows for the apparatus to automatically coat the wire with the requisite number of coatings in order to achieve a desired thickness (par. 10, 21, 72). In the combination, the robotic platform (21) would clearly move the needle wires to the thickness measurement station.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bian et al., Miller et al. and Kang as applied to claims 1-2, 6-10 above and further in view of Schmitz et al. (US 2011/0135833).
Regarding claim 5: Bian et al., Miller et al. and Kang fail to explicitly disclose a gas supply tube coupled to the platform (21) with an end near the working end of the platform (21). However, Schmitz et al. discloses a similar turntable treating device which includes a blowing out station with a tube that is brought near the treated article to remove excess material thereby drying it (pars. 70-77, figure 4). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a gas tube near the platform (21) of Bian et al. to dry the treated needle wires (3) similarly to the way done in Schmitz et al. because Schmitz et al. teaches that this allows for the removal of excess material to help dry the coating and recover the excess liquid material (par. 34).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-16 are 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: dependent claim 11 introduces a significant number of additional requirements including a specific enclosure arrangement having three walls and two separate pluralities of fans, a recirculation path, a number of gas valves, vent plates and a dry gas valve meant to help control humidity in the enclosure to such an extent that each fan is controlled individually by the controller, in addition to all of the valves. Bian et al. teaches an enclosure but none of the specifics of it required by claim 11. Repko et al. (US 2021/0402654) teaches a similar dipping process with an enclosure that helps regulate humidity (pars. 13-14) but does not disclose anything specific about the housing such as arrangement of fans or valves to create a particular recirculation path.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN A KITT whose telephone number is (571)270-7681. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/S.A.K/
Stephen Kitt Examiner, Art Unit 1717
2/24/2026