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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-11, 15, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien-Bernini (WO 2006/055398, of record).
As best depicted in Figure 1, O’Brien-Bernini teaches a system comprising a screw extruder 100 having at least one screw 34 (corresponds with claimed multi-shaft screw- twin screw extruder described on Page 8, Lines 15+ and depicted in Figure 3), a first feed device 105, and a second feed device 110. Lastly, regarding claim 1, the language “for processing a polymer-filler composition”, “for feeding the polymer and a first proportion of the mineral filler”, and “for feeding a second proportion of the mineral filler” fails to further define the structure of the claimed system (corresponds with an intended use of the claimed system).
Additionally, the system of O’Brien-Bernini can be viewed as including a first feed device and a second feed device as depicted below:
PNG
media_image1.png
530
975
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In terms of the first feed device, a metering mechanism (claimed first metering device) associated with resin hopper 105 can be included to meter the amount of polymeric material (Page 9, Lines 3+). It is evident from Figure 2 that an additional stream of material via 118 is present in the first feed device. In such an instance, though, O’Brien-Bernini fails to specifically describe the presence of a second metering device.
However, O’Brien-Bernini (Page 10, Lines 6-16) includes the following language:
By adding a portion of the blowing agent via inlet 118, the amount of the blowing agent can be accurately monitored and adjusted as necessary throughout the extrusion process.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include a second metering device as such appears to be consistent with the general disclosure of O’Brien-Bernini to control the amount of blowing agent.
Lastly, regarding claim 1, the system of O’Brien-Bernini includes a degassing opening 109 downstream of the second feed opening. Also, the combination of regions 106, 113, 107, 112, and 115 can be viewed as the claimed “first intake zone”. The claims as currently drafted fail to exclude viewing the combination of said regions as a “first intake zone”. Additionally, said degassing opening would degas the entire composition that is transferred long the length of extruder 100 and such would include any materials that are provided via a first feed device. It is emphasized that the claims as currently drafted are directed to a processing system or apparatus.
With respect to claim 2, feedthroat 101 and feedthroat 103 engage with openings of the screw extruder (first and second feed openings).
Regarding claim 3, zone 113 corresponds with the claimed “melting zone for melting the polymer between the first feed opening and the second feed opening”.
With respect to claim 4, Figure 4 depicts an alternative embodiment in which screw 134 can be viewed as the claimed first feed device (in which case the assembly associated with hopper 105 would correspond with the claimed second feed device).
Regarding claim 7, it is extremely well known and conventional to include metering devices in feed lines in general to accurately monitor the amounts of respective materials. This is consistent with the disclosure of a metering mechanism on Page 9, Lines 3+ and the disclosure to “accurately monitor” and “adjust” an amount of the blowing agent (Page 10, Lines 9+). Again, metering devices are conventionally included in feed lines for the benefits detailed above and such would be applicable to all the feed lines of O’Brien-Bernini.
As to claim 8 and 9, the system of O’Brien-Bernini includes a degassing opening 109 downstream of the first and second feed openings.
With respect to claim 10, zone 112 corresponds with the claimed “first homogenizing zone”.
Regarding claim 11, zone 116 can be viewed as the claimed “second homogenizing zone”.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, the composition of O’Brien-Bernini can include polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and fillers (Page 9, Lines 10-15 and Page 10, Lines 17+). It is further noted that the term “fillers” is well recognized as including conventional “mineral fillers”. O’Brien-Bernini further states that (a) additives, such as the fillers, can be pre-blended with the resin, (b) additives, such as the fillers, can be introduced via inlet 118, and (c) additives, such as the fillers, can be introduced via another inlet that is directly connected to barrel 104. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to pre-blend PVC and a partial amount of the reinforcing filler in a first line and further include the remainder of the filler in an additional line as such is generally suggested by the aforementioned disclosure (both pre-blending and an additional, downstream line are suggested for additives, such as fillers). It is also noted that O’Brien-Bernini expressly teaches the inclusion of an additional component (blowing agent) by using the combination of pre-blending and having an additional inlet line (Page 10, Lines 6+). As such, it reasons that the disclosure regarding filler addition encompasses a method in which the filler is both pre-blended and added in a separate inlet line.
4. Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien-Bernini as applied in claim 1 above and further in view of Dong (US 2005/0064129, newly cited) and/or Kinoshita (EP 0622398, newly cited).
As detailed above, O’Brien-Bernini is directed to a system comprising a first feed device and a second feed device. More particularly, said first and second feed devices are connected to a twin screw extruder. It is further evident that a compression zone 116 (generates high pressure) is located downstream of the feed devices. In such an instance, it appears that such a high pressure is generated by decreasing the pitch or depth of the flights within the single or twin screw extruder. It is similarly well known, though, to form compression or high pressure zones with a separate counter rotating screw machine, as shown for example by Dong (Paragraph 22) and/or Kinoshita (Page 4, lines 4+). One of ordinary skill I the art would have found it obvious to use a counter rotating screw to form the compression or high pressure zone of O’Brien-Bernini as it constitutes a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. It is emphasized that Kinoshita teaches the alternative use of a co rotating and a counter rotating screw device to provide a desired pressure in a zone or region adjacent a discharge orifice.
5. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien-Bernini, Dong, and Kinoshita as applied in claim 12 above and further in view of Kucsma (US 3,883,473, newly cited).
O’Brien-Bernini is directed to a system designed to the combine a thermoplastic resin and chopped strand glass via an extrusion process. O’Brien-Bernini further states that a mixture comprising said resin and said glass is conveyed from an extruder to a die 120 having any shape to form a desired product (Page 14, Lines 4+). While O’Brien-Bernini fails to specifically teach the inclusion of a pelletizing device, it is equally well known to pelletize compositions comprising thermoplastic resin and glass, as shown for example by Kucsma (Column 1, Lines 20-26). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the glass-filled composition of O’Brien-Bernini into pellets via a pelletizing device since O’Brien-Bernini broadly states that the die can form the composition into any shape and the art recognizes the common manufacture of pellets including thermoplastic resin and glass.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant's arguments filed July 7, 20-26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Conclusion
7. 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.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
Justin Fischer
/JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 September 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights