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
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-8, drawn to a spacer, classified in B29C 45/2606.
II. Claim 9-16, drawn to a mold assembly, classified in B29C 33/307.
III. Claims 17-20, drawn to a method of coupling, classified in F16B37/041.
Inventions I and II are related as mutually exclusive species in an intermediate-final product relationship. Distinctness is proven for claims in this relationship if the intermediate product is useful to make other than the final product, and the species are patentably distinct (MPEP § 806.05(j)). In the instant case, the intermediate product is deemed to be useful as a fastener outside of molding applications and the inventions are deemed patentably distinct because there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Inventions III and II are related as process of making and product made. The inventions are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)). In the instant case, the mold assembly could be coupled together without the aligning step.
Inventions I and III are related as product and process of use. The inventions can be shown to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product or (2) the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product. See MPEP § 806.05(h). In the instant case, the fastener could be used in any other apparatus that did not include a mold cavity.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
During a telephone conversation with Doug Pauley on 1/7/25 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of group II, claims 9-16. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 1-8, 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
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.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Behle (US 2004/0081533) in view of Nagano (US 2007/0218161).
As to claim 9, Behle teaches an assembly comprising: a spacer (6) disposed between 2 plates [Fig 4, 6], the spacer having an aperture (10) with an inner diameter sized to be press fitted on an unthreaded portion (see the portion corresponding to 19 in Fig 6) of an outer surface of a fastener [Fig 6], for positioning and/or aligning the fastener within the aperture of the plate and/or for aligning a threaded portion of the fastener with a corresponding threaded aperture of the opposite plate[Fig 6, 0028, 0037]. Behle does not explicitly state the use of this threaded bolt/spacer configuration within a cavity block and backing plate.
Nagano teaches a molding apparatus [Abstract] wherein threaded bolts (23) are utilized to fasten/retain cavity blocks (19a) to backing plates (21, 22c,22b) [Fig 1, 5-7] with unthreaded portion 23a and threaded portion 23b which allow for the cavity block to be retained and secured while allowing movement of the cavity block relative to the other mold [0026-0028, 0036]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Behle and utilized the spacer and threaded bolts of Behle within a mold assembly between the backing plate and cavity block, as suggested by Nagano, as these bolt configurations had proven successful at retaining the cavity block and secured while allowing movement of the cavity block relative to the other mold.
As to claim 10, Behle teaches the back-up plate or the cavity block has a recess for receiving the spacer (either the recess that receives 18 or the recess receives 19), and the recess has a dimension that creates a press-fit with an outer surface of the spacer [Fig 6, 0028, 0037].
As to claim 11, Behle teaches the recess in the back- up plate or the cavity block has an inner diameter that creates a press fit with an outer diameter of the spacer (either the recess that receives 18 or the recess receives 19)[Fig 6, 0028, 0037].
As to claim 12, Behle teaches the spacer has a top surface with an inner portion (19) and an outer portion (7) with a channel between the inner portion and the outer portion (occupied by 3) [Fig 4, 0028, 0037].
As to claim 13, Behle teaches the inner portion has an inner biasing force, and the outer portion has an outer biasing force that is different from the inner biasing force due to their different dimensions and shape [Fig 4, 0028, 0037].
As to claim 14, Behle teaches the in a vertical direction the inner portion (19) is raised above the outer portion (7) [Fig 4].
As to claim 15, Behle teaches the spacer is of a material that provides a spring-like or biasing force when the spacer is compressed and/or moved as the washer is capable of being compressed and is soft but resilient material [0013, 0011, Fig 6] and these washers are commonly made of rubber [0013, 0002].
As to claim 16, Behle teaches the spacer has a top surface with a chamfer (the sloped portion of 19 on the exterior surface) encircling the aperture. The examiner notes that he is cognizant that the chamfer depicted in applicant’s figures is on an interior surface, but this is not required by the claim as encircling would only require being within the circle created by the chamfer which the aperture of Behle certainly is [Fig 4, 6].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARMAND MELENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0342. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 6 PM Monday-Friday.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/ARMAND MELENDEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759