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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 15-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 11,760,042. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 15, claim 1 of the ‘042 patent claims a method for producing an extrudate, the method comprising: introducing a crude extrudate comprising matrix and fibers into a pultrusion unit; deforming the crude extrudate in the pultrusion unit wherein, during movement of the crude extrudate through a pultrusion channel of the pultrusion unit, an outer side of the crude extrudate rests on at least one shaping wall of the pultrusion unit; discharging the deformed crude extrudate from the pultrusion unit; introducing the crude extrudate discharged from the pultrusion unit into an extrusion unit; deforming the crude extrudate in the extrusion unit and discharging the crude extrudate that has been reshaped to form the extrudate from an opening of the extrusion unit; and cutting the extrudate by moving a slide including a cutting element; wherein the extrusion unit includes a component configured as a sleeve that is attached to a base body and carries out a rotational movement, and the cutting element is moved by a mechanical coupling between the rotating component and the cutting element to cut the extrudate; and wherein the slide rests on a first contact region of a circular recess of the component, the circular recess being aligned eccentrically to the axis of rotation of the component. Further, claim 2 of the ‘042 patent claims, wherein the rotational movement of the component is converted into a movement having a movement direction substantially perpendicular to an axis of rotation of the rotational movement of the component by the mechanical coupling. Claim 3 of the ‘042 patent claims, wherein the cutting element carries out a rotational movement or a translational movement. Claim 4 of the ‘042 patent claims, wherein the extrusion unit includes an extrusion channel and the rotating component is configured as a sleeve, which indirectly or directly encloses the extrusion channel. Claim 5 of the ‘042 patent claims, wherein a force is applied with the slide from the rotating component to the cutting element to move the cutting element. Taken together, wherein the cutting element set forth in claim 3 carries out a translational movement, the claims reasonably teach and render prima facie obvious each and every limitation of the claimed invention. As to claims 16-19, the claims are reasonably suggested or rendered prima facie obvious by the ‘042 claims as routine expedients in the art. As to claims 20 and 21, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention would have further found it prima facie obvious to have included a heating device as claimed to facilitate conveying of the material through the channel in order to, for example, control pressure in the channel and/or to promote good cutting of the material with the cutter.
Reasons for Allowance
Claims 1-14 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest a unit comprising a conveying device capable of conveying a hybrid yarn comprising a plurality of fibers and a matrix through a channel bounded by a base body; and a cutting unit including a component configured as a sleeve mounted about the base body, the sleeve controllable to carry out a rotational movement about the base body and including a circular recess at an axial end region which is eccentrically aligned with an axis of rotation of the sleeve; and a cutting element on a slide slidably mounted to the base body and disposed within the circular recess, wherein the slide rests on a support surface of the sleeve bounding the circular recess so that, due to the circular recess being eccentrically aligned with the axis of rotation, a rotational movement of the sleeve causes translational movement of the slide and the cutting element across the channel to cut the hybrid yarn in combination with the other features instantly claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art references disclose cutting units.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Wollschlager whose telephone number is (571)272-8937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:30.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742