DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected product made, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/15/2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 8-15 in the reply filed on 12/15/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is not a serious search burden. This is not found persuasive because the product made can be made without the method of making from the process claims, such as by molding with removable inserts.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rentsch EP 3097981 A1.
In regards to Independent Claim 1, Rentsch teaches a method for producing a multi-jet nozzle body (laser processing of nozzle body of figure 2, abstract) from a nozzle body blank (body of figure 2 prior to laser processing as described in abstract) produced by an injection molding or an additive manufacturing process (injection molding of polyethylene PE, paragraph [0025]), the nozzle body blank defining a fluid chamber (chamber in figure 2 below) and being provided with at least two nozzle geometries having respective axes arranged to extend in a discharge direction and to intersect at a point of intersection outside of the nozzle geometries (downstream end of channels 15a and 15b have axes that intersect at S in figure 2), the method comprising: processing, via laser processing, the nozzle body blank to form at least one of: an inflow arranged between one of the at least two nozzle geometries and the fluid chamber (upstream portion of 15a and 15b is formed with laser processing, abstract, and shown in figure 2 below); or a funnel arranged between one of the at least two nozzle geometries and the inflow (claimed optionally with the use of “or”), thereby producing the multi-jet nozzle body (nozzle with two jets extending from outlets of 15a and 15b in figure 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
372
518
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 of Rentsch
Regarding Dependent Claim 3, Rentsch teaches the nozzle geometries are produced with a diameter of less than or equal to 300 microns using the laser processing (5 and 50 microns, paragraph [0013], using laser processing, abstract).
Regarding Dependent Claim 4, Rentsch teaches the injection molding method uses a material having at least one main component from the group PMMA, POM, PP, PE (polyethylene PE, paragraph [0025]), ABS, COC, PA, PC, PBT, PEEK, PEI, PET, and PPE.
Regarding Dependent Claim 5, Rentsch teaches the laser processing is combined with a laser drilling method (the laser is used like a drill, such that laser drilling is the laser processing method, paragraph [0024]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 7, Rentsch teaches the at least two nozzle geometries comprise at least three nozzle geometries having respective axes arranged to extend in a discharge direction and to intersect at a point of intersection outside of the at least three nozzle geometries, and wherein each of the at least three nozzle geometries are in fluid communication with the fluid chamber via respective inflows and funnels (three or more outlet channels can be used instead of two for Rentsch, paragraph [0009]).
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 1, 2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selby 2017/0333922 in view of Liu 2004/0016095.
In regards to Independent Claim 1, Selby teaches a method for producing a multi-jet nozzle body (nozzle body of figure 11, produced with injection molding and laser drilling, paragraph [0044]) from a nozzle body blank (nozzle body prior to drilling of holes 114) produced by an injection molding or an additive manufacturing process (paragraph [0044]), the nozzle body blank defining a fluid chamber (112) and being provided with at least two nozzle geometries having respective axes arranged to extend in a discharge direction and to intersect at a point of intersection outside of the nozzle geometries (114, tilted towards each other in figure 11), the method comprising: processing the nozzle body blank to form at least an inflow arranged between one of the at least two nozzle geometries and the fluid chamber (upstream half of 113 receiving flow from 112) thereby producing the multi-jet nozzle body (nozzle body with outlets of 114 in figure 11). However, Selby does not teach that inflow is formed with laser processing. Liu teaches using laser processing (pattern shown in figure 6, and steps shown in figure 7) to form an inflow (in figure 2 below) and nozzle (nozzle with depth 290 in figure 2 below). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to use the laser processing method of Liu to form the inflow of Selby, in order to form both the inflow and channel of the nozzle with a spiral motion to eliminate burrs or notches from forming at the exit of the nozzle (paragraph [0058]).
PNG
media_image2.png
212
462
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 of Liu
Regarding Dependent Claim 2, Selby in view of Liu teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Selby further teaches the laser processing comprises at least one of laser ablation or 3D laser ablation (Selby teaches the laser processing involves ablation, paragraph [0048], additionally, the laser processing performed by Liu is also ablation, abstract of Liu).
Regarding Dependent Claim 4, Selby in view of Liu teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Selby further teaches the injection molding method uses a material having at least one main component from the group PMMA, POM, PP, PE, ABS, COC, PA, PC, PBT, PEEK, PEI, PET, and PPE (PC, PMMA, ABS, PET, paragraph [0052]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 5, Selby in view of Liu teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Selby further teaches the laser processing is combined with a laser drilling method (laser drilling of holes, paragraph [0044], where laser drilling is a form of laser processing).
Regarding Dependent Claim 6, Selby in view of Liu teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Selby further teaches each of the at least two nozzle geometries are in fluid communication with the fluid chamber via respective inflows and funnels (inflow includes upstream half of 113 that receives flow from 112, and funnel includes downstream half of 113 that communicates flow to 114, such that the nozzles 114 are in fluid communication with 112 through 113).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN M SUTHERLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-1902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270 - 1814. 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.
/STEVEN M SUTHERLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752