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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/13/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed Nov. 13, 2025 has been entered. Claims 6-7, 9-14 remain pending in the application.
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 6-7, 9, 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schad et al. (US 2017/0182690), further in view of Clark (US 8,920,156) and Fukumoto et al. (US 2018/0056558).
Regarding claims 6, 7, 12, Schad discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1b, 2, 5, 6, 11a, an injection molding machine (as shown in Fig. 1b) comprising:
a mold clamping device (as shown in Fig. 1b) configured to clamp a mold (items 104a, 106a, Fig. 1b ([0082], lines 6-7)); and
an injection device (items 110a, 110b, Fig. 1b ([0083], lines 4-5)) configured to melt an injected material and to inject the melted material into the mold, wherein the mold clamping device comprises:
a fixed platen (item 106, Fig. 1b ([0082], lines 2-3)) fixed on a bed (item 102, Fig. 1b ([0082], lines 1-2));
a movable platen (item 104, Fig. 1b ([0082], line 2)) provided slidably with respect to the bed;
a rotary platen (item 130, Fig. 2 ([0088])) provided on the movable platen; and
a rotary platen support (item 120, Fig. 2 or 5 ([0084], lines 5-7)) configured to rotatably support the rotary platen,
wherein a rail (as shown in Fig. 1b) is laid on the bed, and
wherein the rotary platen support is provided with a rotary platen-side slider (items 122, 124, Fig. 2 or 5 ([0085], lines 1-4) (also see labels of two slider(s) in attached annotated Figure I)) that is slidable while being guided by the rail (as shown in Figs. 1, 2) (related to claim 7).
However, Schad does not explicitly disclose that, the movable platen having the rotary platen support is sitting on a set of first rotary platen-side slides and a set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders, wherein the set of first rotary platen-side slides are disposed below a center of gravity of the rotary platen, and the set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders are disposed closer to a fixed platen side, than the first rotary platen-side slides.
In the same field of endeavor, support member for a rotatable platen, Clark discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, the rotatable platen assembly 32 is coupled to the machine platen 28 and includes a base plate 56 and a turntable 60 (col. 3, lines 35-36). Also, in the illustrated exemplary embodiment, the turntable 60 includes a plurality of fastening aperture 68, which may be used to couple or fasten a mold 40 to the turntable 60 (col. 3, lines 44-46). As illustrated in Figs. 2, 5, 6, each bearing member 104 (i.e., at least, there are two bearing members (e.g., the left side just under the base plate 56 and the right side under the mold 40) disposed on the two separate positions along the guide member 24) includes a receptacle 108 having a complementary shape to the guide portion 48 within the receptacle 108. The bearing members 104 ride along the guide members 24 as the machine platen 28, rotatable platen assembly 32, and the mold 40 move forward and backward between molding positions (col. 4, lines 54-61) (related to claims 7, 12).
Thus, Clark discloses that, the movable platen having the rotary platen support is sitting on a set of first rotary platen-side slides (i.e., the left side bearing member) and a set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders (i.e., the right side bearing member), wherein the set of first rotary platen-side slides are disposed below a center of gravity of the rotary platen (i.e., under the base platen 56), and the set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders are disposed closer to a fixed platen side (i.e., the mold 40), than the first rotary platen-side slides.
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 Schad to incorporate the teachings of Clark to provide the movable platen having the rotary platen support is sitting on a set of first rotary platen-side slides and a set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders, wherein the set of first rotary platen-side slides are disposed below a center of gravity of the rotary platen, and the set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders are disposed closer to a fixed platen side, than the first rotary platen-side slides. Doing so would be possible to reduce sagging or inappropriate positioned molds and avoid misaligned with other components of the injection machine, as recognized by Clark (col. 1, lines 30-51).
However, Schad does not explicitly disclose that, the rotary platen support includes a plurality of rollers, and a lower outer-peripheral surface of the rotary platen is supported by the plurality of rollers.
In the same field of endeavor, rotary mold type injection machine, Fukumoto discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3 (also see labels of rollers in attached annotated Figure II), at least, there are two separate lower rollers (left and right) to support the rotary platen 31 on its lower outer-peripheral surface.
It would have been obvious to use the apparatus of Schad to have the injection molding machine having the rotary platen as Fukumoto teaches that it is known to have the lower rollers to support the rotary platen on its lower outer-peripheral surface. It has been held that the combination of known technique to improve similar device is likely to be obvious when it does not more than yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
PNG
media_image1.png
643
692
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure I (based on Fig. 2 in the teachings of Schad)
PNG
media_image2.png
711
723
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure II (based on Fog. 3 in the teachings of Fukumoto)
Regarding claims 9, 11, 13, Schad discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1b, 2, 3, 5, 11a, a part of a slider attachment portion of the rotary platen support is a protrusion portion (see label of a protrusion portion in attached annotated Figure I) that protrudes from a mold mounting surface of the rotary platen toward the fixed platen (as shown in Figs. 1b, 2), the rotary platen-side sliders being provided on the slider attachment portion (as shown in Fig, 2). Specifically, Schad discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 1b, the mold defined at least in part by a first mild half 104a mounted to the moving platen apparatus 104, and a second mold half 106a mounted to the stationary platen apparatus 106 ([0082], lines 1-5 from bottom) (related to claim 11).
However, Schad dies not explicitly disclose that, the movable platen having the rotary platen support is sitting on the set of first rotary platen-side slides and the set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders.
Clark discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, the rotatable platen assembly 32 is coupled to the machine platen 28 and includes a base plate 56 and a turntable 60 (col. 3, lines 35-36). Also, in the illustrated exemplary embodiment, the turntable 60 includes a plurality of fastening aperture 68, which may be used to couple or fasten a mold 40 to the turntable 60 (col. 3, lines 44-46). As illustrated in Figs. 2, 5, 6, each bearing member 104 (i.e., at least, there are two bearing members (e.g., the left side just under the base plate 56 and the right side under the mold 40) disposed on the two separate positions along the guide member 24) includes a receptacle 108 having a complementary shape to the guide portion 48 within the receptacle 108. The bearing members 104 ride along the guide members 24 as the machine platen 28, rotatable platen assembly 32, and the mold 40 move forward and backward between molding positions (col. 4, lines 54-61) (related to claim 13).
Thus, Clark discloses that, the movable platen having the rotary platen support is sitting on a set of first rotary platen-side slides (i.e., the left side bearing member) and a set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders (i.e., the right side bearing member), wherein the set of first rotary platen-side slides are disposed below a center of gravity of the rotary platen (i.e., under the base platen 56), and the set of secondary rotary platen-side sliders are disposed closer to a fixed platen side (i.e., the mold 40), than the first rotary platen-side slides.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Schad et al. (US 2017/0182690), Clark (US 8,920,156) and Fukumoto et al. (US 2018/0056558) as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of Glashagen et al. (US 2008/0026097).
Regarding claim 10, Schad in the combination discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 3, 5, the bearing 154 is applied to support the rotated platen 130 ([0091]). However, Schad does not explicitly disclose a cross roller bearing. In the same field of endeavor, injection molding machine, Glashagen discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 6, a cross roller bearing 22 is applied to support a turntable 21 on the base plate 18 ([0037], lines 1-8 from bottom).
It would have been obvious to use the apparatus of the combination to have the cross roller bearing as Glashagen teaches that it is known to have the cross roller bearing to support the rotated platen. It has been held that the combination of known technique to improve similar device is likely to be obvious when it does not more than yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Schad et al. (US 2017/0182690), Clark (US 8,920,156) and Fukumoto et al. (US 2018/0056558) as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of Glashagen et al. (US 2008/0026097) and Lu (CN 103807292, English translation provided).
Regarding claim 14, Schad in the combination discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 3, 5, the bearing 154 is applied to support the rotated platen 130 ([0091]). However, Schad does not explicitly disclose a cross roller bearing. In the same field of endeavor, injection molding machine, Glashagen discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 6, a cross roller bearing 22 is applied to support a turntable 21 on the base plate 18 ([0037], lines 1-8 from bottom).
It is noticed that, in the teachings of Glashagen, as illustrated in Fig. 6, the cross roller bearing includes an outer ring and an inner ring.
It would have been obvious to use the apparatus of the combination to have the cross roller bearing as Glashagen teaches that it is known to have the cross roller bearing to support the rotated platen. It has been held that the combination of known technique to improve similar device is likely to be obvious when it does not more than yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
However, Glashagen does not disclose a pair of inner rings disposed in an inner side of the cross roller bearing.
In the similar field of endeavor, roller bearing, Lu discloses that, as illustrated in Fig., the roller bearing includes two inner rings 2 (page 2, lines 75-76).
It would have been obvious to use the apparatus of the combination to have the cross roller bearing as Glashagen and Lu teach that it is known to have the cross roller bearing having two inner rings to support the rotated platen. It has been held that the combination of known technique to improve similar device is likely to be obvious when it does not more than yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/13/2025 have been fully considered. They are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 6, 13, 14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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.
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, 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHIBIN LIANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741