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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 4-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the extrusion device comprises filling level sensors which initiate a refilling in the form of a refilling of the previous feedstock so that the filling level of the at least two supply devices does not go below a changing filling level”, which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter. In the remarks filed on June 30, 2026, Applicant states that support is found in paragraph [0028]. However, [0028] does not disclose refilling of the previous stock. As understood from [0009], “In other words, subsequent material can be refilled into the feed container as soon as the feed container is free from feedstock, while feedstock is at the same time still in the process of being discharged below the feed container. This makes it possible to provide an even further parallelization of the individual steps for changing the material, so that the time savings comes to light even more clearly in this way. A further advantage, which can be attained in addition to the time savings, by means of operating in parallel, is a reduction of the risk that the extruder drains. It is thus ensured that material is fed very quickly to the extruder again, in particular by filling subsequent material into a feed container at a particularly early point in time, in an emergency situation, which includes the risk that the extruder drains”. Thus, the refilling of paragraph [0028] is refilling using subsequent material, not previous feedstock, so that the filing level does not go below a changing filling level to prevent draining of the extruder. Furthermore, as understood from the specification, refilling of previous feedstock is not possible because the supply devices are separated from the previous feedstock to initiate discharging.
Claim 13 recites “wherein the preparation of the return hose is performed automatically and wherein a presence of the return hose for the upcoming changing of material is verified”, which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter. In the remarks filed on June 30, 2026, Applicant states that support is found in paragraph [0011]. However, [0011] does not disclose such limitations. As understood from [0011], “In the alternative or in addition, it is also conceivable that a return hose, which returns the discharged feedstock into a storage device, for example a silo, instead of the discharge container, is fastened to a corresponding container interface. It goes without saying that the preparation of the corresponding discharge container or of a return hose, respectively, can also be provided directly after the respective change, so that the discharge container or the return hose, respectively, is already present in the receptive position and embodiment for the coming change”. While [0011] discloses that “the preparation of the corresponding discharge container or of a return hose, respectively, can also be provided directly after the respective change, so that the discharge container or the return hose, respectively, is already present in the receptive position and embodiment for the coming change”, [0011] does not disclose that the preparation is performed automatically, and does not disclose that a presence of the return hose for the upcoming changing of material is verified.
Claim 14 recites “wherein the change order comprises analysis of a viscosity of the material, and wherein a rinsing time is changed depending on the viscosity of the feedstock, wherein the change order prioritizes material changes involving at least feedstock or subsequent materials associated with longer rinsing times over material changes at least involving feedstock or subsequent materials associated with shorter rinsing times”, which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter. In the remarks filed on June 30, 2026, Applicant states that support is found in paragraph [0014]. However, [0014] does not disclose such limitations. As understood from [0014], “In the case of the change strategy, it can thus for example be considered that the rinsing time experiences a reduction. Some materials can thus be rinsed more easily than other materials with regard to their viscosity. In particular feedstock, the rinsing time of which is particularly long, need to thus be processed as one of the first with regard to changing the material. As a result, time-intensive steps could be given priority by means of the automation options of a method according to the invention, so that an improved processing for changing the material is made possible, depending on the respective wish and prioritizing feature for the change strategy”. While [0014] does disclose the method wherein the change order prioritizes material changes involving feedstock associated with longer rinsing times over material changes involving feedstock associated with shorter rinsing times, [0014] does not disclose the change order prioritizing material changes involving subsequent materials associated with longer rinsing times over material changes involving subsequent materials associated with shorter rinsing times.
Claims not listed above are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102013100812 in
view of Satake et al. (US 4,955,550) and Mohammed et al. (US 2014/0261873).
DE 102013100812 (figs. 1-2; see whole document of English translation attached to the Office
Action mailed on April 1, 2024) discloses a method for changing material in an extrusion device
comprising at least two supply devices ([0011], a single feed material OR different feed materials at the
same time; two or more feedstocks; [0013], at least one feed tank 20 and one feed weigher 30 for each
feed material on the extrusion device; fig. 5, [0046]) for supplying feedstock for an extruder 60,
comprising the following steps:
identifying a change request for changing the material in the extrusion device ([0006], [0010],
[0039]; a material change request),
preparing the at least two supply devices for changing the material by lowering a filling level of
the at least two supply devices ([0013]-[0015], the level of the flow container 20 is lowered (emptied) to
a changing fill level wherein excess feed material is no longer required for the current recipe at which
point the flow container can be completely emptied into a separate container so that the material
change is as short as possible),
separating the at least two supply devices from a feed of feedstock to the extruder ([0028],
sealed against flow (to separate); [0039] closing flap 44 separates the flow container 20 from feed to the
extruder 60 as shown in figs. 1-2),
discharging feedstock from the separated at least two supply devices to empty the at least two
supply devices ([0015], [0016], [0028], [0039]-[0041]; flow container 20 is completely emptied),
filling subsequent material into the empty at least two supply devices [0015], [0028], [0039]-[0041],
wherein a separate container (a discharge container) is used for emptying/discharging the
feedstock from the flow tank (flow container), which emptied/discharged feedstock material can be
disposed of as waste or reused or recycled ([0015]-[0016], excess feed material in the flow container 20
is completely emptied/discharged into a separate container).
However, DE 102013100812 does not disclose the method wherein a return hose, which returns the discharged feedstock into a storage device, is fastened to a corresponding container interface, wherein a preparation of the return hose, is provided directly after a respective material change, so that the return hose is already present in a receptive position and embodiment for a coming material change, wherein the preparation of the return hose is performed automatically and wherein a presence of the return hose for the upcoming changing of material is verified.
Satake et al. (US 4,955,550) disclose a method of changing material in an extrusion device
(abstract; fig. 2), including a container 33 for emptying/discharging feedstock, wherein a return hose 62,
72, 74, 75, which returns the discharged feedstock into a storage device 22, 23, 24, is fastened to a
corresponding container interface (the return hose is connected to the container 33 at a container
interface as shown in fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the method of DE 102013100812 wherein a return hose, which returns the discharged
feedstock into a storage device, is fastened to a corresponding container interface, as disclosed by
Satake et al. (US 4,955,550), because such a modification is known in the art and would enable
discharged feedstock to be returned to a storage device and because DE 102013100812 discloses that
discharged material in the separate container can be reused or recycled, as mentioned above. DE
102013100812 further disclose that a return hose (suction line) is prepared by cleaning the return hose
directly after a respective change as the previous feed material may adhere to the return hose ([0019],
[0040]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention
was made, to further prepare the return hose by cleaning the return hose directly after a respective
material change, as disclosed by DE 102013100812, because such a modification is known in the art and
would enable the return hose to be prepared for a coming material change. Relative to the limitations of “wherein a preparation of the return hose, is provided directly after a respective material change, so that the return hose is already present in a receptive position and embodiment for a coming material change”, as shown in 2 of Satake et al. (US 4,955,550), if the return hose 62 is cleaned after a respective material change in view of the modification above, the return hose 62 would be already present in a receptive position and embodiment for a coming material change.
As to the limitations of "wherein the preparation of the return hose is performed automatically and wherein a presence of the return hose for the upcoming changing of material is verified ", Mohammed et al. (US 2014/0261873) discloses a method of discharging a material into discharge means (a discharge container 192), wherein the preparation of the discharge means (discharge container 192) is performed automatically and wherein a presence of the discharge means (discharge container 192) for the upcoming discharge of material is verified by response to presence sensors 205, 210, 215 to detect if the discharge means (discharge container 192) is in a fill position for discharging and to enable the start of the discharge into the discharge means (discharge container 192). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the method wherein the preparation of the discharge means (container 33 and return hose 62) is performed automatically and wherein a presence of the discharge means for the upcoming discharging (changing) of material is verified, as disclosed by Mohammed et al. (US 2014/0261873), because such a modification is known in the discharging art and would provide an alternative configuration enabling verification of the presence of discharge means prior to the start of discharging (changing) of the material. As mentioned above, discharge means, such as discharge containers and/or return hoses are known in the art for changing material in an extrusion device, as respectively disclosed by DE 102013100812 and Satake et al. (US 4,955,550). While Mohammed et al. (US 2014/0261873) does not disclose changing material in an extrusion device, it is relevant to discharging material into a discharge means, and particularly to verifying the presence of discharge means prior to discharge into the discharge means.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-12 and 14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest:
the method, as recited by claims 1 and 4-12, particularly wherein the extrusion device comprises filling level sensors which initiate a refilling in the form of a refilling of the previous feedstock so that the filling level of the at least two supply devices does not go below a changing filling level; OR
the method, as recited by claim 14, particularly wherein the change order comprises analysis of a viscosity of the material, and wherein a rinsing time is changed depending on the viscosity of the feedstock, wherein the change order prioritizes material changes involving at least feedstock or subsequent materials associated with longer rinsing times over material changes at least involving feedstock or subsequent materials associated with shorter rinsing times.
DE 102013100812 discloses refilling in the form of a refilling of the subsequent material, not the previous feedstock [0015].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that regarding claim 13, amended claim 13 recites "wherein the preparation of the return hose is performed automatically and wherein a presence of the return hose for the upcoming changing of material is verified." DE 102013100812 does not disclose a return hose which returns discharged feedstock into a storage device. Satake (US 4,955,550) discloses a return hose for returning discharged feedstock to storage devices, but does not teach automatic preparation of the return hose or verification that the return hose is present for the upcoming material change. Mohammed et al. (US 2014/0261873) is non-analogous art directed to an automatic frozen food product vending machine. See Mohammed, abstract, paragraph [0001]. Mohammed's sensors detect containers for dispensing frozen food products, not return hose presence for extrusion material changes. One skilled in the art of extrusion devices seeking to verify the presence of a return hose for an upcoming material change would not look to frozen food vending machines for guidance, as the technological context and problems being solved are entirely different. Accordingly, claim 13, as amended, is patentable over the cited references.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that Mohammed is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Mohammed is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem of automatically verifying the presence of discharge means prior to discharging material into the discharge means. As mentioned above, discharge means, such as discharge containers and/or return hoses are known in the art for changing material in an extrusion device, as respectively disclosed by DE 102013100812 and Satake et al. (US 4,955,550). While Mohammed et al. (US 2014/0261873) does not disclose changing material in an extrusion device, it is relevant to discharging material into a discharge means, and particularly to verifying the presence of discharge means prior to discharge into the discharge means.
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 JOSEPH S LEYSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at 5712705343. 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.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/John J DeRusso/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights